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. 32] नई दिल्ली, अगस्त 4—अगस्त 10, 2013, शनिवार/श्रावण 13—श्रावण 19, 1935
No. 32] NEW DELHI, AUGUST 4—AUGUST 10, 2013, SATURDAY/SRAVANA 13—SRAVANA 19, 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)
गृृह मंत्राालय
शहरी विकास मंत्राालय
;राजभाषा विभागद्ध
;संपदा निदेशालयद्ध
नई दिल्ली, 30 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1613.—राजभाषा ;संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोगद्ध नियम 1976 के नियम 10;4द्ध के अनुसरण में केन्द्र सरकार अल्पसंख्यक कार्य मंत्राालय को जिसके 80 प्रतिशत से अध्कि अध्किारियों एवं कर्मचारियों ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाध्क ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, अध्सिूचित करती है ।
[सं. 12022/2/2013-रा.्रभा./का-II] हरिन्द्र वुफमार, निदेशक ;कार्यान्वयनद्ध
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS (Department of Official Language) New Delhi, the 30th July, 2013
S.O. 1613.—In pursuance of Rule 10 (4) of the Official Language (Use for official purposes of the Union) Rule 1976, the Central Government here notifies Ministry of Minority Affairs where more than 80% staff has acquired the working knowledge of Hindi.
[ No. 12022/2/2013-OL /Impl.II] HARINDER KUMAR, Director (Implementation)
3303 GI/2013
नई दिल्ली, 22 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1614.—केन्द्रीय सरकार, सरकारी स्थान ;अप्राधिकृत
अध्भिोगियों की बेदखलीद्ध अध्निियम, 1971 ;1971 का 40द्ध की ध्
ारा 3 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए और भारत के राजपत्रा,
तारीख 12 मई, 1990 में प्रकाशित अध्सिूचना संख्यांक
का.आ. 1377, तारीख 3, मई, 1990 के अध्क्रिमण में, राज्य सभा के
सभापति से परामर्श करने के पश्चात्् नीचे सारणी के स्तंभ ;1द्ध में
उल्लिखित अध्किारियों को, जो सरकार के राजपत्रिात अध्किारी हैं,
उक्त अध्निियम के प्रयोजन के लिए संपदा अध्किारी नियुक्त करती
है जो उक्त सारणी के स्तंभ ;2द्ध में की तत्स्थानी प्रविष्टि में विनिदिष्ट
सरकारी स्थान के संबंध् में उक्त अध्निियम द्वारा या उसके अध्ीन
संपदा अध्किारियों केा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग और अध्रिोपित
कर्तव्यों का पालन करेंगे ।
(4207)4208 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) सारणी संपदा अध्किारी सरकारी स्थान का प्रवर्ग
;1द्ध ;2द्ध
राज्य सभा सचिवालय, नई सरकारी थान ;अप्राध्कृित
दिल्ली में सदस्य सुख सुविधएं अध्भिोगियों की बेदखलीद्ध
अनुभाग के भारसाध्क उप निदेशक अध्निियम, 1971 ;1971 का 40द्ध
या संयुक्त निदेशक/साधरण प्रशासन के प्रारंभ से पूर्व या उसके पश्चात््
अनुभाग के भारसाध्क उपनिदेशक सचिवालय के कर्मचारिंवृद के
या संयुक्त निदेशक । किसी सदस्य को निवास स्थान
प्रदान करने के लिए केन्द्रीय
सरकार द्वारा राज्य सभा सचिवालय
के नियंत्राणाध्ीन रखे गए सरकार Section in the Rajya of the staff of the Secretariat,
Sabha Secretariat, either before or after the
New Delhi commencement of the Public
Premises (Eviction of
Unauthorised Occupants)
Act, 1971 (Act 40 of 1971)
[No. 22012/2/2013-Pol.I] S.K. Jain, Dy. Director of Estates (Policy)
कृषि मंत्राालय
;कृषि एवं सहकारिता विभागद्ध
स्थान ।
;राजभाषा प्रभागद्ध
[पफा. सं. 22012/2/2013-नीति]
एस. के. जैन, संपदा निदेशक ;नीतिद्ध नई दिल्ली, 5 अगस्त, 2013
MINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT
(Directorate of Estates)
New Delhi, the 22nd July, 2013
S.O. 1614.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
Section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of unauthorised
Occupants) Act, 1971, (40 of 1971) and in supersession of
the notification number S.O. 1377, dated 3rd May, 1990,
published vide Gazette of India dated 12th May, 1990,
the Central Government, after consultation with the
Chairman, Rajya Sabha, hereby appoints the officers
mentioned in column (1) of the Table below, being Gazetted का.आ. 1615.—केन्द्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ;संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोगद्ध नियम, 1976 के नियम 10 के उप नियम ;4द्ध के अनुसरण में कृषि मंत्राालय, कृषि एवं सहकारिता विभाग के अंतर्गत निम्नलिखित प्रशासनिक नियंत्राणाध्ीन स्वायत्त निकाय को जिसके 80% कर्मचारीवृृन्द ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाध्क ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, अध्सिूचित करती है ।
राष्ट्रीय कृषि विस्तार प्रबंध् संस्थान,
राजेन्द्र नगर, हैदराबाद-500030
आँध््र प्रदेश
[सं. 3-3/2011-रा.भा. नीति]
आर. बी. सिन्हा, संयुक्त सचिव
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE
Officers of Government, to be the estate officers for the
(Department of Agriculture and Cooperation)
purpose of the said Act, who shall exercise the powers
conferred and perform the duties imposed on estate ( Official Language Division)
officers by or under the said Act in respect of the public
premises specified in the corresponding entry in column
(2) of the said Table.
New Delhi, the 5th August, 2013
TABLE
Estate officers Category of Public Premises
(1)
(2)
Deputy Director or Joint Public premises which have
Director in charge of been placed by the Central
Members' Amenities Government under the control
Section/Deputy Director of the Rajya Sabha Secretariat
or Joint Director in charge for providing residential
of General Administration accommodation to any member S.O. 1615.—In pursuance of Sub-Rule (4) of the Rule 10 of the Official Language (Use for Official Purposes of the Union) Rules, 1976 the Central Government hereby notifies the following Autonomous body which is under the administrative control of the Department of the Agriculture & Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, whereof 80% staff have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi—
National Institute of Agricultural Extension
Management, Rajendra Nagar, Hyderabad-500030.
[ No. 3-3/2011-Official Language Policy]
R. B. SINHA, Jt. Secy.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4209विद्युत मंत्राालय
नई दिल्ली, 29 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1616.—17-8-2006 को अध्सिूचित मुख्य वैद्युत निरीक्षक और वैद्युत निरीक्षक की अर्हता, शक्ति और कार्य नियमावली, 2006 के साथ पठित विद्युत अध्निियम, 2003 ;2003 का 36द्ध की धरा 162 की उप-धरा ;1द्ध के द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एतदद्वारा डीजीएमएस के निम्नलिखित अध्किारियों को इस अध्सिूचना की तारीख से डीजीएमएस में उनके कार्यकाल तक, उपर्युक्त नियम में उल्लिखित अर्हता और शर्त को पूरा करने के अध्ीन खान सुरक्षा महानिदेशालय के लिए वैद्युत निरीक्षक के रूप में नियुक्त करती हैः—
क्रम नाम अर्हता डीजीएमएस में के रूप में नियुक्त कार्यभार ग्रहण सं.
पदनाम किया जाना है करने की तिथि 1 आनन्द अग्रवाल वैद्युत अभियांत्रिाकी उप निदेशक वैद्युत निरीक्षक 26-03-2012 डिग्री खान सुरक्षा ;वैद्युतद्ध
2 पुत्ताराजु साहूकेह -वही- -वही- -वही- 27-03-2012
3 प्रकाश वुफमार -वही- -वही- -वही- 26-03-2012
4 राम वुफमार -वही- -वही- -वही- 23-04-2012
5 चक्रपाणि -वही- -वही- -वही- 21-02-2012 पालानीमलाई
6 बिश्वनाथ बेहरा -वही- -वही- -वही- 30-01-2012
उपर्युक्त उल्लिखित अध्किारी केन्द्रीय विद्युत प्राध्किरण ;सुरक्षा और विद्युत आपूत से संबंध्ति उपायद्ध विनियम, 2010 में दी गई प्रक्रिया के अनुसार, डीजीएमएस के अध्किार वाले क्षेत्राों में प्रचालनाध्ीन विद्युत कार्यों विद्युत संस्थापनाओं तथा विद्युत रोलग स्टॉक अथवा डीजीएमएस के नियंत्राणाध्ीन/डीजीएमएस से संबंध्ति कार्यों तथा विद्युत संस्थापनाओं के संबंध् में अध्किारों का प्रयोग करेंगे और अपना कार्य निष्पादित करेंगे और जम्मू एवं कश्मीर राज्य को छोड़कर, अपेन संबंध्ति कार्यक्षेत्रा की स्थानीय सीमाओं में खान से संबंध्ति विद्युत निरीक्षक के रूप में भी अपने अधिकारों का प्रयोग करेंगे और कार्य करेंगे ।
डीजीएमएस यह सुनिश्चित करेगा कि उक्त अध्किारी उन्हें, डीजीएमएस में उप निदेशक, खान सुरक्षा ;विद्युतद्ध के रूप में दिये गये कार्यों के संबंध् में वह विद्युत निरीक्षक नहीं होंगे ।
विद्युत निरीक्षक के रूप में नियुक्त अध्किारी वह प्रशिक्षण लेंगे जिसे केन्द्र सरकार इस उद्देश्य के लिए आवश्यक समझे तथा ऐसा प्रशिक्षण सरकार की संतुष्टि के स्तर तक पूरा किया जाएगा ।
[ पफा. सं. 42/3/2013-आर एण्ड आर]
ज्योति अरोड़ा, संयुक्ता सचिव
MINISTRY OF POWER
New Delhi, the 29th July, 2013
S.O. 1616.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 162 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003) read with Qualification, Power and Function of Chief Electrical Inspector and Electrical Inspectors Rules, 2006 notified on 17.8.2006, the Central Government hereby appoints the following officers of DGMS, as Electrical Inspector for Directorate General of Mine Safety, from the date of this Notification till his tenure in DGMS subject to fulfillment of the qualification and condition mentionedoin the above Rule:—
4210 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]S. No. Name Qualification Designation To be Date of
in DGMS Appointed as Joining
1. Anand Degree in Dy. Director Electrical 26.03.2012 Agarwal Electrical of Mine Inspector
Engineering Safety (Elect.)
2. Puttaraju -do-
-do- -do 27.01.2012 Sahukaiah
3. Prakash -do-
-do- -do- 26.03.2012 Kumar
4. Raj Kumar -do- 5. Chakkarapani -do-
-do- -do- 23.04.2012 -do- -do- 21.02.2012
Palanimalai
6. Bishwanath -do-
-do- -do- 30.01.2012 Behera
The above mentioned officer shall exercise the powers and perform his functions in respect of electrical works, electrical installations and electrical rolling stock in operation within the areas occupied by the DGMS or in respect of works and electrical installations under the control of DGMS/belonging to DGMS and shall also exercise the powers and perform function as electrical inspector in relation to a mine, within the local limits of their respective jurisdiction except the State of Jammu & Kashmir, as per the procedure provided in Central Electricity Authority (Measures relating to Safety and Electricity Supply) Regulations, 2010.
DGMS will ensure that above said official shall not be the Electirical Inspector in respect of the work assigned to him as Dy. Director of Mine Sefety (Elect.) in DGMS.
The Officials , appointed as Electrical Inspector shall undergo such training as the Central Govenrment may consider necessary for the purpose and such training shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Government.
[F. No. 42/3/2013-R &R ]
JYOTI ARORA, Jt. Secy.
MINISTRY OF TEXTILES
वस्त्रा मंत्राालय
नई दिल्ली, 2 अगस्त, 2013
का.आ. 1617.—केन्द्रीय सरकार, संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए राजभाषा नियम, 1976 के नियम 10 के उप नियम 4 के अनुसरण में, वस्त्रा मंत्राालय के अंतर्गत आने वाले निम्नलिखित कार्यालयों को जिसमें 80% से अध्कि कर्मचारियों ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाध्क ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, अध्सिूचित करती है :
1. अनुसंधन प्रसार केंद्र, केरेअवप्रसं, केंद्रीय रेशम बोर्ड, मार्पफत-उपनिदेशक, रेशम विकास विभाग, कम्युनिटी हेल्थ सेंटर, छुटमलपुर-247662 जिला सहारनपुर, उत्तर प्रदेश ।
2. अनुसंधन प्रसार केंद्र, - उप इकाई, केरेअवप्रसं, केंद्रीय रेशम बोर्ड, सेक्टर-21, पंचकूला-134112, हरियाणा ।
[सं. ई-11016/1/2011-हदी]
सुनयना तोमर, संयुक्त सचिव New Delhi, the 2nd August, 2013
S.O. 1617.—In pursuance of Sub-Rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Languages (use for official purpose of the Union) Rules, 1976 the Central Government hereby notifies the following offices of the Ministry of Textiles, more than 80% staff whereof have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi.
1. Research Extension Centre, CSRTI, Central Silk Board, C/o-Dy. Director, Resham Vikash Vibhag, Community Health Centre, Chutmalpur-247662 Dist. Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh.
2. Research Extension Centre -Sub Unit, CSRTI, Central Silk Board, Sector-21, Panchkula-134112, Haryana.
[ No. E-11016/1/2011-Hindi]
SUNAINA TOMAR, Jt. Secy.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4211उपभोक्ता मामले, खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्राालय
;उपभोक्ता मामले विभागद्ध
;भारतीय मानक ब्यूरोद्ध
नई दिल्ली, 30 जून, 2013
का.आ. 1618.—भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उप-नियम ;1द्ध के खंड ;खद्ध के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अध्सिूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए मानक ;कोद्ध मेें संशोध्न किया गया/किये गये हैं ।
अनुसूची
क्रम सं. संशोध्ति भारतीय मानक ;कोंद्ध की संशोध्न की संख्या स्थापित तिथि संख्या, वर्ष और शीर्षक और तिथि
;1द्ध ;2द्ध
;3द्ध ;4द्ध
1. आई एस 4955ः 2001 घरेलू ध्ुलाई के संशोध्न संख्या 3, 30 जून, 2013 लिए अपमार्जक पाउडर-विशिष्टि जून, 2013 ;चौथा पुनरीक्षणद्ध
इन भारतीय मानकों की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9, बहादुर शाह ज़पफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110002, क्षेत्राीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़, चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध् हैं । भारतीय मानकों को http://www.standardsbis.in द्वारा इंटरनेट पर खरीदा जा सकता है ।
[संदर्भ सीएचडी 25/आईएस 4955] डॉ. राजीव के. झा, वैज्ञानिक 'एपफ' एवं प्रमुख ;रसायनद्ध MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION
(Department of Consumer Affairs)
(BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS)
New Delhi, the 30th June, 2013
S.O. 1618.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendments to the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :
SCHEDULE
Sl.No. No. and Year of the No. and year of the Date from which Indian Standards
amendment
the amendment shall have effect
;1द्ध ;2द्ध
;3द्ध
;4द्ध
1. IS 4955 : 2001 Household Amendment No. 3 30th June, 2013
June, 2013
laundry detergent powder - specification ( Fourth Revision)
Copy of this Standards is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi- 110002 and 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 25 /IS 4955]
Dr. RAJIV K. JHA, Scientist 'F' & Head (CHD)4212 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
नई दिल्ली, 31 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1619.—भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उप-नियम ;1द्ध के खंड ;खद्ध के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अध्सिूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए मानक ;कोद्ध मेें संशोध्न किया गया/किये गये हैं ।
अनुसूची
क्रम सं. संशोध्ति भारतीय मानक ;कोंद्ध की संशोध्न की संख्या स्थापित तिथि संख्या, वर्ष और शीर्षक और तिथि
;1द्ध ;2द्ध
;3द्ध ;4द्ध
1. आई एस 133ः 2004 इनेमल, भीतरीः ;कद्ध संशोध्न संख्या नं. 1, 31 जुलाई, 2013 अध्लेपन ;खद्ध परिसज्जा विशिष्टि जुलाई, 2013 ;चौथा पुनरीक्षणद्ध
इन भारतीय मानकों की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9, बहादुर शाह ज़पफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110002, क्षेत्राीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़, चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध् हैं । भारतीय मानकों को http://www.standardsbis.in द्वारा इंटरनेट पर खरीदा जा सकता है ।
[संदर्भ सीएचडी 20/आईएस 133] डॉ. राजीव के. झा, वैज्ञानिक 'एपफ' एवं प्रमुख ;रसायनद्ध
New Delhi, the 31st July, 2013
S.O. 1619.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendments to the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :
SCHEDULE
Sl.No. No. and Year of the No. and year of the Date from which the amendment Indian Standards
amendment
shall have effect
;1द्ध ;2द्ध
;3द्ध
;4द्ध
1. IS 133 : 2004 Enamel, interior
Amendment No. 1 31 July, 2013 (a) Undercoating (b) Finishing July, 2013 specification ( Fourth Revision)
Copy of this Standards is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi- 110002 and 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 20/IS 133]
Dr. RAJIV K. JHA, Scientist 'F' & Head (CHD)[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4213
नई दिल्ली, 31 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1620.—भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उप-नियम ;1द्ध के खंड ;खद्ध के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अध्सिूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए मानक ;कोंद्ध मेें संशोध्न किया गया/किये गये हैं ।
अनुसूची
क्रम सं. संशोध्ति भारतीय मानक ;कोंद्ध की संशोध्न की संख्या स्थापित तिथि संख्या, वर्ष और शीर्षक और तिथि
;1द्ध ;2द्ध
;3द्ध ;4द्ध
1. आई एस 101 ;भाग 5/अनुभाग 2द्धः 1988 संशोध्न संख्या 4, 31 जुलाई, 2013 रंग रोगन, वार्निश और संबंध्ति उत्पादों के जुलाई, 2013 लिए नमूना और परीक्षण के तरीके भाग 5 यांत्रिाक परीक्षण अनुभाग 2 लचीलापन और आसंजन ;तीसरा पुनरीक्षणद्ध
इन भारतीय मानकों की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9, बहादुर शाह ज़पफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110002, क्षेत्राीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़, चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध् हैं । भारतीय मानकों को http://www.standardsbis.in द्वारा इंटरनेट पर खरीदा जा सकता है ।
[संदर्भ सीएचडी 20/आईएस 101;भाग 5/अनुभाग 2द्ध] डॉ. राजीव के. झा, वैज्ञानिक 'एपफ' एवं प्रमुख ;रसायनद्ध
New Delhi, the 31st July, 2013
S.O. 1620.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendments to the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :
SCHEDULE
Sl.No. No. and Year of the No. and year of the Date from which Indian Standards
amendment
the amendment shall have effect
;1द्ध ;2द्ध
;3द्ध
;4द्ध
1. IS 101(Part 5/Sec 2) : 1988 Amendment No. 4 31 July, 2013
July, 2013
Methods of sampling and test for paints, varnishes and related products Part 5 Mechanical Tests Section 2 Flexibility and Adhesion ( Third 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 20 /IS 101(Part 5/Sec 2)]
Dr. RAJIV K. JHA, Scientist 'F' & Head (CHD)4214 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
नई दिल्ली, 1 अगस्त, 2013
का.आ. 1621.—भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उप-नियम ;1द्ध के खंड ;खद्ध के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अध्सिूचित करता है कि जिस भारतीय मानकों का विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिया गया है वे स्थापित हो गये हैं ।
अनुसूची
क्रम सं. स्थापित भारतीय मानक ;कोंद्ध की नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा स्थापित तिथि संख्या, वर्ष और शीर्षक अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक
अथवा मानकों, यदि कोई हो, की संख्या और वर्ष
;1द्ध ;2द्ध
;3द्ध ;4द्ध
1. आई एस 15967 ;भाग 1द्धः 2013 - 01 अगस्त, 2013 नलिकाकार प्रतिदीप्ति लैम्पों के लिए संधरित्रा भाग 1 सुरक्षा अपेंक्षाएॅ
इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9, बहादुर शाह ज़पफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110002, क्षेत्राीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़, चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध् हैं ।
[संदर्भ ईटी 23/टी-90] आर. सी. मेथ्यू वैज्ञानिक 'एपफ' एवं प्रमुख ;विद्युत तकनीकीद्ध
New Delhi, the 1st August, 2013
S.O. 1621.—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 issued :
SCHEDULE
Sl. No. No. and Year of the No. and year of the Date of Established Indian Standards
Indian Standards, if any, Superseded by
the New Indian Standard
;1द्ध ;2द्ध
;3द्ध
;4द्ध
1. IS 15967 (Part 1) : 2013 -
01 August, 2013 Capacitors for use in tubular fluorescent and other discharge lamp circuits part 1 safety reqirements
Copies of this Standard are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi- 110002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi, Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch Offices : Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune,Thiruvananthapuram.
[Ref. ET 23/T-90]
R. C. MATHEW, Scientist 'F' & Head (Electro tenchnical)[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4215 isVªksfy;e vkSj izkÑfrd xSl ea=ky;
नई दिल्ली, 5 अगस्त, 2013
dk-vk- 1622-—केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसा प्रतीत होता है कि लोक हित में यह आवश्यक है कि सिवान से बैतालपुर तक पेट्रोलियम पदार्थो के परिवहन हेतु तहसीलः दवरिय्ाा, जिलाः दवरिय्ाा, राज्यः उार प्रदश में इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ।
और केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में जिसके भीतर उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित है, उपयोग का अर्जन किया जाए;
अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, पैट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन्स (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उप-धारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उक्त भूमि में उपयोग के अध्ािंकार 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, भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के अन्दर, भूमि के भीतर पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने हेतु उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के लिए, श्री उमाकांत त्र्ािपाठी, व सक्षम प्राधिकारी इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, (पाइपलाइन डिवीजन), सुबेदारगंज, पो.ओः पीपलगॉंव, जिलाः इलाहाबाद, पिनः 211012, राज्यः उार प्रदेश को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा।
vuqlwph
तहसील : देवरिया
राज्य : उत्तर प्रदेश मौजा/ग्राम सर्वे/ब्लाक/सं. /प्लोट (सं.) सब-डीव-सं. क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेयर आरे वर्ग मीटर (1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6) कुसमौनी
203
00 00 36 तप्पा : कछुवार
187
00 15 95
186
00 12 71
185
00 08 87
184(चकरोड)
00 00 63
182
00 14 70 बरूआडीह
450(चकरोड)
00 00 62 तप्पा ः कछुवार
443
00 09 45
444
00 00 36
440
00 00 36
445 ब
00 14 95
445 अ 00 08 17
432(चकरोड)
00 02 05
433 ब
00 05 31
433 अ 00 00 36
431
00 06 49
430
00 05 69
376(चकरोड)
00 00 614216 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
308 00 09 48
306 ब 00 00 54
306 अ 00 13 38
305 00 15 03
304 00 07 94
319 00 00 36
299 00 01 12
301 00 02 04
300 00 08 85
291 00 00 36
290(नहर) 00 00 64
289 00 14 87
288 अ 00 00 36
288 ब 00 00 36
286 00 02 36
285 00 00 70
284 00 00 36
287 00 00 04
कतौरा खजूरी 640 00 00 34
तप्पा ः साथीयाव 639 00 01 58
636 00 02 21
637 00 00 36
635 00 00 36
634 00 00 36
608 00 13 74
607 00 07 13
602 00 01 19
632 00 00 36
631 00 00 36
610 00 00 42
609 00 03 41
606 00 01 19
605 00 05 95
596 00 00 28
593 00 00 36
604 00 01 86
603 00 00 36
597 00 02 72
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4217
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
598 00 00 36
590 00 02 20
589 00 00 36
591 00 03 44
592 00 00 24
583 00 00 36
588 00 03 33
584 00 01 49
587 00 01 22
585 00 05 39
586 00 14 61
572 00 03 39
571(चकरोड) 00 00 61
569 00 00 36
568 00 05 65
567 00 20 69
566(चकरोड) 00 00 65
561 00 16 37
559 00 05 11
557(चकरोड) 00 01 82
558 00 00 36
राउतपुर 552 00 00 36
तप्पा ः कछुवार 551ब 00 02 42
550 00 04 59
549 00 04 55
548 00 08 57
547ब 00 03 15
547अ 00 10 94
544(चकरोड) 00 00 90
539 00 19 36
538 00 06 71
526 00 13 28
525 00 05 76
536 00 00 36
534 00 00 36
522 00 02 55
527(चकरोड) 00 00 91
521 00 00 36
4218 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
529 00 07 26
528अ 00 13 00
528ब 00 03 85
516(चकरोड) 00 00 63
510 00 09 18
509(चकरोड) 00 01 11
508 00 16 25
504अ 00 13 14
502(चकरोड) 00 00 83
457 00 19 30
456 00 21 06
455 00 00 36
459(चकरोड) 00 01 53
460 00 14 85
431 00 20 88
426(चकरोड) 00 00 72
425 00 12 55
422 00 02 48
423 00 04 32
421 00 02 47
424 00 00 36
420 00 23 04
419(चकरोड) 00 00 63
418(नहर) 00 04 86
415 00 19 44
बराडीह 45 00 22 00
तप्पा ः कछुवार 46 00 04 25
48 00 00 38
47 00 05 40
21(चकरोड) 00 01 89
18 00 00 63
15 00 18 63
16 00 20 07
14 00 00 44
चक बन्दी उर्फ मठीआ
तप्पा ः कछुवार 79 00 00 62
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4219
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
78 00 07 38
77 00 09 23
76 00 13 18
75 00 04 46
26 00 00 36
35(चकरोड) 00 01 08
31ब 00 06 72
31अ 00 01 20
32 00 07 29
33 00 16 61
34(चकरोड) 00 00 36
11ब 00 00 36
12ब 00 00 43
12अ 00 14 58
10 00 00 40
9 00 06 37
8 00 05 98
7 00 00 60
1(चकरोड) 00 00 90
मरीपार बुझुर्ग 129(रास्ता) 00 01 22
तप्पा : कछुवार 132 00 08 51
131 00 04 72
134 00 10 19
130 00 00 36
135 00 00 36
136 00 07 51
137 00 18 90
140 00 06 23
141(चकरोड) 00 00 90
142 00 05 61
144 00 09 00
145 00 05 58
146 00 02 70
110 00 16 65
111(चकरोड) 00 00 36
109 00 05 94
105(रास्ता) 00 00 63
35 00 07 56
4220 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
34 00 09 00
33 00 06 84
32 00 06 39
38(चकरोड) 00 00 63
18 00 01 84
20 00 00 36
17 00 27 03
दुबौली 160(चकरोड) 00 00 72
तप्पा ः कछुवार 159 00 00 38
158 00 09 52
157अ 00 07 92
155 00 02 34
153 00 05 46
154 00 01 97
151(चकरोड) 00 00 63
150 00 06 37
123ब 00 11 66
123अ 00 05 31
125 00 00 40
124 00 15 57
122(चकरोड) 00 00 63
106ब 00 26 73
107 00 00 36
110 00 00 36
66(चकरोड) 00 01 62
65 00 10 13
64 00 06 93
63 00 07 16
1(रास्ता) 00 01 17
सरैया 218(रास्ता) 00 01 50
तप्पा ः कछुवार 224ब 00 00 51
224अ 00 03 31
222 00 12 78
221 00 04 98
223ब 00 06 08
220 00 10 69
212
00 01 83[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4221 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
213 00 10 71
139(रास्ता) 00 00 71
128 00 22 64
130 00 05 00
131 00 00 36
95(रास्ता) 00 00 57
98 00 04 13
96(चकरोड) 00 01 13
88 00 18 21
83ब 00 05 21
81(चकरोड) 00 01 53
75 00 01 62
76ब 00 04 30
76अ 00 04 41
78ब 00 09 48
78अ 00 09 48
74 00 02 50
79 00 07 82
69 00 05 93
67अ 00 02 89
66अ 00 02 17
देवरिया मीर 158ब 00 00 36
तप्पा ः कछुवार 158अ 00 07 38
1 नाला 00 01 08
11 00 07 02
12 00 03 10
9 00 07 92
7 00 01 26
6 00 05 94
4 00 03 42
5 00 00 36
3 00 02 88
2अ 00 00 36
चकरवा घूस 367 00 17 86
तप्पा ः कछुवार 360 00 05 04
361 00 04 25
362 00 00 36
353 00 08 40
4222 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
352अ 00 13 50
351 00 00 36
349 (चक रोड) 00 00 72
348 00 09 36
347ब 00 04 77
347अ 00 05 13
344 00 10 44
342 (चक रोड) 00 00 68
341 00 13 50
340 00 00 36
338 (चक रोड) 00 00 63
336अ 00 08 10
337अ 00 00 36
330 00 14 94
328ब 00 01 08
328अ 00 03 96
327 00 01 26
326ब 00 04 86
325 00 08 10
266 (रोड) 00 01 26
319 00 00 36
265 00 03 24
260 00 05 76
259 (चक रोड) 00 00 63
258 00 00 54
256 00 12 96
255 00 14 94
नाला 00 01 53
पडरी 73 00 00 36
तप्पा ः कछुवार 72 00 01 35
60 00 00 81
धटेला गॉजी 442(नाला) 00 02 34
तप्पा ः कछुवार 509 00 01 36
508 00 01 84
507 00 05 22
506 00 02 61
505 00 05 76
481 00 02 18
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4223
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
480 00 00 36 504 00 00 72 467 00 00 63 502 00 08 28 482 00 00 36 503 00 00 36 477 00 13 14 474 00 01 80 476 00 01 54 475 00 07 02 458(चकरोड) 00 00 90 459 00 06 68 460 00 06 70 461 00 03 78 455 00 13 32 462 00 00 33 453(चकरोड) 00 01 98 454 00 00 36 452 00 07 13 402(रास्ता) 00 02 63 280 00 14 22 277 00 05 71 285 00 09 54 283 00 00 54 284 00 00 36 288 00 14 02 287 00 00 55 290(चकरोड) 00 00 90 300 00 09 50 309 00 00 36 291 00 00 36 293 00 09 72 295 00 00 39 294 00 05 22 386 00 00 36 313(चकरोड) 00 00 54 314 00 01 00 327(रास्ता) 00 01 264224 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
385(चकरोड) 00 00 36
384 00 08 46
383 00 07 56
382 00 11 88
380 00 00 36
379 00 11 52
378 00 04 05
355(चकरोड) 00 01 62
343 00 15 16
345 00 05 00
344 00 05 58
140 00 00 72
बडहरा 572 00 27 59
तप्पा ः कछुवार 549 00 02 34
548 00 00 72
547 00 02 16
546 00 09 54
545 00 00 72
540 00 13 59
541 00 00 36
542 00 00 36
539 00 07 56
538 00 00 36
166 00 09 00
164 00 07 47
156 00 00 36
157 00 05 04
155 00 00 74
158 00 10 67
160 00 05 76
159 00 05 22
161 00 00 36
रास्ता 00 04 14
143 00 15 84
142 00 03 32
141 00 05 40
140 00 09 51
135 (चकरोड) 00 00 54
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4225
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
128 00 06 55
127 00 10 26
123 00 00 63
108 00 01 34
107 (चकरोड) 00 00 72
106 00 19 26
105 00 00 81
102 (चकरोड) 00 00 54
108 00 03 25
101 00 06 48
पगरा उर्फ परसिया 256 00 11 16
तप्पा ः कछुवार 255(चकरोड) 00 00 72
235 00 10 44
234 00 02 09
236 00 09 18
237 00 08 46
232 00 00 30
238(रास्ता) 00 02 05
242 00 04 86
240 00 11 43
241 00 13 68
212(चकरोड) 00 00 72
166 00 06 03
167 00 00 36
165 00 10 80
164 00 01 56
163 00 13 22
155 00 00 54
रामपूर 207 00 01 45
तप्पा ः कछुवार 206 ब 00 03 65
206 अ 00 14 84
205(चकरोड) 00 00 66
200ब 00 02 25
199 00 36 48
183 00 00 36
202(चकरोड) 00 00 65
203 00 03 91
192(चकरोड) 00 01 24
4226 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
182अ 00 07 90
182ब 00 00 36
180(चकरोड) 00 00 71
178अ 00 02 50
178ब 00 00 36
85 00 00 36
84 00 24 09
83 00 01 52
119ब 00 00 77
82 00 00 20
81 00 00 36
77 00 00 56
कूसमहा उर्फ बेलवा 180ब 00 04 54
तप्पा ः कछुवार 180अ 00 10 21
179 00 03 93
182अ 00 24 93
182ब 00 00 20
178 (नहर) 00 01 25
177(रास्ता) 00 00 46
176 00 09 74
169(चकरोड) 00 00 72
167 00 13 39
166(चकरोड) 00 01 08
146 00 06 00
147 00 10 93
148 00 12 83
150 00 06 88
149 00 00 36
143(चकरोड) 00 00 87
142 00 14 06
138 00 01 83
131(चकरोड) 00 00 19
133 00 00 36
137अ 00 06 62
139 00 00 50
137ब 00 12 81
136(चकरोड) 00 00 70
23 00 08 84
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4227
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
22 00 13 28
20 00 02 40
19 00 02 05
1 (नाला) 00 02 22
धनौती खुर्द 177(नाला) 00 01 29
तप्पा ः गौवराय 176(नाला) 00 01 75
174 00 03 82
169 00 06 34
168 00 08 41
167 00 07 06
165(चकरोड) 00 00 97
164 00 06 78
163(चकरोड) 00 01 13
162 00 08 85
161(चकरोड) 00 00 64
160 00 08 74
155 00 02 31
126(चकरोड) 00 00 74
91 00 01 71
90 00 00 36
92 00 16 94
86 00 04 81
93(चकरोड) 00 02 58
125 00 01 72
82 00 32 47
81 00 22 17
34(चकरोड) 00 02 12
7 00 18 75
12 00 00 18
11 00 19 11
8 00 00 36
9 00 01 26
10 00 08 85
25(चकरोड) 00 01 05
मुन्देरा 25 00 05 63
तप्पा ः गौवराय 23 00 04 42
22 00 10 78
4228 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
21ब 00 02 08
21अ 00 10 01
20(चकरोड) 00 00 74
19ब 00 00 91
19अ 00 07 91
18अ 00 03 26
18ब 00 03 18
17 (रोड) 00 01 29
16ब 00 12 56
16अ 00 02 80
15अ 00 09 21
10 00 05 33
9(चकरोड) 00 00 61
8ब 00 07 82
8अ 00 00 66
7 00 05 88
पो खर भींडा 173 00 00 36
तप्पा : गौवराय 73 00 00 36
72 00 10 62
71 00 00 36
68 00 00 36
50.ब 00 02 55
49 00 02 95
48 00 06 28
45 00 00 48
46 00 05 85
47 00 05 85
भगौत ीपुर 72अ 00 01 13
तप्पा : गौवराय 72ब 00 07 87
71ब 00 05 22
77 00 02 52
78 00 11 34
79 00 06 43
81 00 00 36
80 00 07 47
83ब 00 05 83
97(चकरोड) 00 01 08
111 00 00 36
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4229
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
110 00 00 69
99 00 12 07
100 00 00 76
109ब 00 00 46
101 00 04 32
106अ 00 04 14
107 00 04 68
108(चकरोड) 00 00 90
बरारी 99 00 13 90
तप्पा ः गौवराय 102 00 04 32
103(चकरोड) 00 00 63
104 00 26 82
106 00 00 36
105 00 00 36
108 00 10 57
91(रास्ता) 00 04 75
51 00 13 23
49 00 00 36
52 00 01 75
68 00 04 83
53 00 04 23
60 00 00 36
62 00 18 54
67 00 00 36
42 00 01 05
63 00 05 22
64 00 00 51
17(केनाल) 00 05 22
16 00 00 51
15 00 00 36
13 00 04 10
भीमपुर 580(नहर) 00 01 08
तप्पा ः गौवराय 452 00 06 88
451 00 02 34
450 00 01 01
449 00 17 06
448(रास्ता) 00 01 80
4230 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
गौरा खास 1084 00 33 21
तप्पा : गोरा 1076(चकरोड) 00 00 63
1075(चकरोड) 00 00 76
1055 00 19 01
1058 00 00 36
1057 00 00 40
1056 00 06 41
1043 00 16 83
1042 00 00 63
1038 00 04 86
1061 00 00 36
1037 00 03 83
1029 00 00 36
1059 00 01 58
1060 00 06 03
1032(चकरोड) 00 00 63
1061 00 00 36
1031(चकरोड) 00 00 63
1017 00 00 36
1016 00 07 47
1026 00 00 36
1014-1102(चकरोड) 00 00 63
1015 00 30 96
1013 00 22 50
1018(चकरोड) 00 00 63
320(चकरोड) 00 00 63
315 00 33 12
314(नहर) 00 01 35
313 00 10 08
226(चकरोड) 00 01 44
311 00 00 36
310 00 00 36
225(चकरोड) 00 01 44
210 00 12 78
212 00 20 38
211 00 00 36
213 00 07 79
214 00 10 04
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4231
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
216(चकरोड) 00 00 63
224 00 05 31
223 00 04 90
222 00 00 70
221 00 00 80
220 00 01 50
218 00 09 90
145(चकरोड) 00 00 63
144(चकरोड) 00 00 63
136 00 00 54
133 00 15 66
132(चकरोड) 00 02 10
123 00 00 45
125 00 00 39
126 00 00 57
128 00 02 35
129 00 04 80
130 00 00 36
131 00 04 68
104(चकरोड) 00 00 63
103 00 16 92
97(नाला) 00 00 99
पो खर भींडा 224 00 15 41
तप्पा : गोरा 193 (नहर) 00 00 72
190ब 00 00 81
190अ 00 00 36
परसा बरवा 496 00 00 71
तप्पा : गोरा 495 00 00 45
421 00 00 58
422 00 04 35
423 00 04 91
424 00 04 37
420 00 19 98
419 00 02 96
416 00 22 93
412 00 04 41
402 00 01 76
406 00 00 89
4232 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
408 00 00 90
407 00 04 59
395 00 15 08
389 00 00 90
154 00 01 41
155 00 02 82
157 00 00 72
156 00 16 38
152 00 01 44
151 00 00 54
150 00 12 78
149 00 04 90
148 00 04 46
147 00 04 23
145 00 07 45
146 00 05 78
143 00 00 67
129 00 26 75
110 00 01 80
5 00 23 12
6 00 05 67
4 00 03 43
3 00 12 42
7 00 00 36
1 00 00 81
जैतपुरा 153अ 00 06 62
तप्पा : पनइ 153ब 00 03 06
147 00 03 15
152 00 02 12
148 00 02 34
149 00 03 35
150 00 04 60
144(चकरोड) 00 00 36
142 00 02 14
141 00 00 40
134 00 08 85
135 00 00 24
132 00 05 98
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4233
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
62(नाला) 00 00 36
1(नाला) 00 03 29
मुन्डेरा 1(नाला) 00 03 60
तप्पा : घतुरा 13 00 11 02
2 00 00 74
11 00 04 19
10 00 03 46
6 00 03 65
9 00 01 11
7 00 06 72
8 00 02 16
4 00 06 19
3 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 17
बसंसपार बुझुर्ग 69(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 98
तप्पा : घतुरा 54 00 00 36
55 00 00 36
56 00 00 36
57 00 00 36
58 00 00 36
59 00 00 37
61 00 19 35
60 00 00 53
48(चकरोड) 00 00 63
46 00 11 34
45(चकरोड) 00 00 63
39 00 12 37
38 00 04 95
36(चकरोड) 00 01 20
31 00 09 72
30 00 14 81
25 00 13 86
23(चकरोड) 00 00 54
9 00 17 32
5 00 05 58
10 00 00 36
4(चकरोड) 00 00 63
3 00 16 06
बरारी 435 00 10 40
तप्पा : घतुरा 433 00 25 02
4234 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
432(चकरोड) 00 00 32
431 00 00 95
413(चकरोड) 00 01 03
398 00 00 61
402(चकरोड) 00 00 28
412 00 25 07
407 00 00 36
411 00 10 67
410(चकरोड) 00 00 38
409 00 00 54
464(चकरोड) 00 00 63
465 00 09 85
466 00 02 45
467 00 09 76
468(चकरोड) 00 00 63
469 00 05 94
381(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 22
380(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 66
347 00 02 79
328(रास्ता) 00 02 70
245 00 23 08
246 00 05 69
317 00 00 36
316 00 09 41
334(नहर) 00 04 25
362 00 00 36
373 00 11 90
374 00 00 36
375(रास्ता) 00 01 66
195 00 21 08
199(चकरोड) 00 00 63
200 00 15 48
236(चकरोड) 00 00 63
227 00 00 64
222 00 03 50
219 00 14 22
228 00 04 05
218 00 04 03
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4235
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
205 (चकरोड) 00 00 63
35 00 26 46
24 (चकरोड) 00 00 36
36 00 34 17
54 (चकरोड) 00 00 63
41 00 10 39
40 00 05 08
गुडरी 287 00 21 58
तप्पा ः सिरजाम 288 00 38 03
331 00 00 36
305 00 29 75
304 00 06 03
302 00 00 63
145 00 06 89
144 00 05 04
142 00 01 08
141 00 04 37
140 00 11 93
138 00 08 01
137 00 08 01
153 00 00 36
156 00 00 63
160 00 19 58
159 00 01 88
158 00 02 08
247(चकरोड) 00 00 63
248 00 03 60
249 00 04 41
250 00 08 87
251 00 09 72
253 00 05 85
252 00 03 80
254 00 00 76
256(रास्ता) 00 00 81
255 00 00 36
60 00 08 64
61 00 09 95
62 00 08 71
4236 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
63(चकरोड) 00 00 65
64 00 13 54
65 00 06 48
67 00 03 96
66 00 06 16
72(चकरोड) 00 00 63
90 00 05 75
89 00 04 18
88 00 08 19
94(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 65
112 00 01 44
111 00 07 97
110 00 00 36
114 00 24 52
109 00 00 36
115(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 90
बैतलपुर 290 00 10 84
तप्पा ः सिरजाम 291 00 00 36
318 00 00 36
292(चकरोड) 00 00 63
293 00 02 56
298 00 20 81
300(चकरोड) 00 00 63
305 00 13 32
307 00 13 37
306 00 00 36
308 00 05 94
315 00 01 26
161 00 06 53
164 00 00 36
162 00 16 20
163 00 00 36
135 00 02 16
27 00 02 25
41 00 02 12
42 00 10 30
87 00 00 63
86 00 02 92
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4237
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
89 00 00 36 88 00 00 36
[पफा. सं. आर-25011/23/2013-ओआर-I]
पवन वुफमार, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS
New Delhi, the 5th August, 2013
S.O. 1622.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited in Tehsil: Bhatpar Rani, District: Deoria in the State of Uttar Pradesh for 'Siwan to Baitalpur Pipeline' for the transportation of Petroleum Product;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land, to Shri Umakant Tripathi Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited. (Pipelines Division), Subedargunj, P.O: Pipalgaon, District: Allahabad, Pin - 211012, State: Uttar Pradesh.
SCHEDULE
Tehsil : Deoria Dist : Deoria State : Uttar Pradesh
Mouja / Village Survey/Block. No. Sub-Div-No. Area
Hectare Are Sq.mtr.
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
KUSMAUNI
203
00 00 36 Tappa :-
187
00 15 95 Kachuvar
186
00 12 71
185
00 08 87
184 (Chak Road) 00 00 63
182
00 14 70 Baruadih
450 (Chak Road) 00 00 62 Tappa :-
443
00 09 45 Kachuvar
444
00 00 36
440
00 00 36
445B 00 14 95
445A 00 08 17
432 (Chak Road) 00 02 05
433B 00 05 31
433A 00 00 36
431
00 06 49
430
00 05 69
376 (Chak Road) 00 00 614238 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 308 00 09 48
306B 00 00 54
306A 00 13 38
305 00 15 03
304 00 07 94
319 00 00 36
299 00 01 12
301 00 02 04
300 00 08 85
291 00 00 36
290 (Canal) 00 00 64
289 00 14 87
288A 00 00 36
288B 00 00 36
286 00 02 36
285 00 00 70
284 00 00 36
287 00 00 04
KATOURA KHAJURI 640 00 00 34
Tappa :— 639 00 01 58
Sathiyav 636 00 02 21
637 00 00 36
635 00 00 36
634 00 00 36
608 00 13 74
607 00 07 13
602 00 01 19
632 00 00 36
631 00 00 36
610 00 00 42
609 00 03 41
606 00 01 19
605 00 05 95
596 00 00 28
593 00 00 36
604 00 01 86
603 00 00 36
597 00 02 72
598 00 00 36
590 00 02 20
589 00 00 36
591 00 03 44
592 00 00 24
583 00 00 36
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4239
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
588 00 03 33
584 00 01 49
587 00 01 22
585 00 05 39
586 00 14 61
572 00 03 39
571(Chak Road) 00 00 61
569 00 00 36
568 00 05 65
567 00 20 69
566(Chak Road) 00 00 65
561 00 16 37
559 00 05 11
557(Chak Road) 00 01 82
558 00 00 36
RAUTPUR 552 00 00 36
Tappa :- 551-B 00 02 42
Kachuvar 550 00 04 59
549 00 04 55
548 00 08 57
547-B 00 03 15
547-A 00 10 94
544(Chak Road) 00 00 90
539 00 19 36
538 00 06 71
526 00 13 28
525 00 05 76
536 00 00 36
534 00 00 36
522 00 02 55
527(Chak Road) 00 00 91
521 00 00 36
529 00 07 26
528-A 00 13 00
528-B 00 03 85
516(Chak Road) 00 00 63
510 00 09 18
509(Chak Road) 00 01 11
508 00 16 25
504-A 00 13 14
502(Chak Road) 00 00 83
457 00 19 30
456 00 21 06
455 00 00 36
4240 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
459(Chak Road) 00 01 53
460 00 14 85
431 00 20 88
426(Chak Road) 00 00 72
425 00 12 55
422 00 02 48
423 00 04 32
421 00 02 47
424 00 00 36
420 00 23 04
419(Chak Road) 00 00 63
418(Canal) 00 04 86
415 00 19 44
BARADIH 45 00 22 00
Tappa :- 46 00 04 25
Kachuvar 48 00 00 38
47 00 05 40
21(Chak Road) 00 01 89
18 00 00 63
15 00 18 63
16 00 20 07
14 00 00 44
CHAK BANDI URF 79 00 00 62
MATHIA 78 00 07 38
77 00 09 23
76 00 13 18
Tappa :- 75 00 04 46
Kachuvar 26 00 00 36
35(Chak Road) 00 01 08
31-B 00 06 72
31-A 00 01 20
32 00 07 29
33 00 16 61
34(Chak Road) 00 00 36
11-B 00 00 36
12-B 00 00 43
12-A 00 14 58
10 00 00 40
9 00 06 37
8 00 05 98
7 00 00 60
1(Chak Road) 00 00 90
MARIPAR BUZURG 129(BRICK Road) 00 01 22
Tappa :- 132 00 08 51
Kachuvar 131 00 04 72
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4241
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
134 00 10 19
130 00 00 36
135 00 00 36
136 00 07 51
137 00 18 90
140 00 06 23
141(Chak Road) 00 00 90
142 00 05 61
144 00 09 00
145 00 05 58
146 00 02 70
110 00 16 65
111(Chak Road) 00 00 36
109 00 05 94
105(Road) 00 00 63
35 00 07 56
34 00 09 00
33 00 06 84
32 00 06 39
38(Chak Road) 00 00 63
18 00 01 84
20 00 00 36
17 00 27 03
DUBAULI 160(Chak Road) 00 00 72
Tappa :- 159 00 00 38
Kachuvar 158 00 09 52
157-A 00 07 92
155 00 02 34
153 00 05 46
154 00 01 97
151(Chak Road) 00 00 63
150 00 06 37
123-B 00 11 66
123-A 00 05 31
125 00 00 40
124 00 15 57
122(Chak Road) 00 00 63
106-B 00 26 73
107 00 00 36
110 00 00 36
66(Chak Road) 00 01 62
65 00 10 13
64 00 06 93
4242 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
63 00 07 16
1(Road) 00 01 17
SARIA 218(Road) 00 01 50
Tappa :- 224B 00 00 51
Kachuvar 224A 00 03 31
222 00 12 78
221 00 04 98
223-B 00 06 08
220 00 10 69
209-A 00 00 36
212 00 01 83
213 00 10 71
139(Road) 00 00 71
128 00 22 64
130 00 05 00
131 00 00 36
95(Road) 00 00 57
98 00 04 13
96(Chak Road) 00 01 13
88 00 18 21
83B 00 05 21
81(Chak Road) 00 01 53
75 00 01 62
76-B 00 04 30
76-A 00 04 41
78 B 00 09 48
78 A 00 09 48
74 00 02 50
79 00 07 82
69 00 05 93
67-A 00 02 89
66-A 00 02 17
Deoria Mir 158B 00 00 36
Tappa :- 158A 00 07 38
Kachuvar 1(Nala) 00 01 08
11 00 07 02
12 00 03 10
9 00 07 92
7 00 01 26
6 00 05 94
4 00 03 42
5 00 00 36
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4243
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
Chakrawa 367 00 17 86
Dhus 360 00 05 04
Tappa :- 361 00 04 25
Kachuvar 362 00 00 36
353 00 08 40
352A 00 13 50
351 00 00 36
349(Chak Road) 00 00 72
348 00 09 36
347B 00 04 77
347A 00 05 13
344 00 10 44
342(Chak Road) 00 00 68
341 00 13 50
340 00 00 36
338(Chak Road) 00 00 63
336A 00 08 10
337A 00 00 36
330 00 14 94
328B 00 01 08
328A 00 03 96
327 00 01 26
326B 00 04 86
325 00 08 10
266(Road) 00 01 26
319 00 00 36
265 00 03 24
260 00 05 76
259(Chak Road) 00 00 63
258 00 00 54
256 00 12 96
255 00 14 94
Nala 00 01 53
Padari 73 00 00 36
Tappa :- 72 00 01 35
Kachuvar 60 00 00 81
GHATAILA GAZI 442(Nala) 00 02 34
Tappa :- 509 00 01 36
Kachuvar 508 00 01 84
507 00 05 22
506 00 02 61
505 00 05 76
481 00 02 18
480 00 00 36
4244 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
504 00 00 72
467 00 00 63
502 00 08 28
482 00 00 36
503 00 00 36
477 00 13 14
474 00 01 80
476 00 01 54
475 00 07 02
458(Chak Road) 00 00 90
459 00 06 68
460 00 06 70
461 00 03 78
455 00 13 32
462 00 00 33
453(Chak Road) 00 01 98
454 00 00 36
452 00 07 13
402(Road) 00 02 63
280 00 14 22
277 00 05 71
285 00 09 54
283 00 00 54
284 00 00 36
288 00 14 02
287 00 00 55
290(Chak Road) 00 00 90
300 00 09 50
309 00 00 36
291 00 00 36
293 00 09 72
295 00 00 39
294 00 05 22
386 00 00 36
313(Chak Road) 00 00 54
314 00 01 00
327( Road) 00 01 26
385(Chak Road) 00 00 36
384 00 08 46
383 00 07 56
382 00 11 88
380 00 00 36
379 00 11 52
378 00 04 05
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4245
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
355(Chak Road) 00 01 62
343 00 15 16
345 00 05 00
344 00 05 58
140 00 00 72
BADAHARA 572 00 27 59
Tappa :— 549 00 02 34
Kachuvar 548 00 00 72
547 00 02 16
546 00 09 54
545 00 00 72
540 00 13 59
541 00 00 36
542 00 00 36
539 00 07 56
538 00 00 36
166 00 09 00
164 00 07 47
156 00 00 36
157 00 05 04
155 00 00 74
158 00 10 67
160 00 05 76
159 00 05 22
161 00 00 36
Road 00 04 14
143 00 15 84
142 00 03 32
141 00 05 40
140 00 09 51
135(Chak Road) 00 00 54
128 00 06 55
127 00 10 26
123 00 00 63
108 00 01 34
107(Chak Road) 00 00 72
106 00 19 26
105 00 00 81
102(Chak Road) 00 00 54
108 00 03 25
101 00 06 48
PAGARA Urf PARASIA 256 00 11 16
Tappa :— 255(Chak Road) 00 00 72
Kachuvar 235 00 10 44
4246 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
234
00 02 09
236 00 09 18
237 00 08 46
232 00 00 30
238(Cart Track) 00 02 05
242 00 04 86
240 00 11 43
241 00 13 68
212(Chak Road) 00 00 72
166 00 06 03
167 00 00 36
165 00 10 80
164 00 01 56
163 00 13 22
155 00 00 54
RAMPUR 207 00 01 45
Tappa :- 206B 00 03 65
Kachuvar 206A 00 14 84
205(Chak Road) 00 00 66
200B 00 02 25
199 00 36 48
183 00 00 36
202(Chak Road) 00 00 65
203 00 03 91
192(Chak Road) 00 01 24
182A 00 07 90
182B 00 00 36
180(Chak Road) 00 00 71
178A 00 02 50
178B 00 00 36
85 00 00 36
84 00 24 09
83 00 01 52
119B 00 00 77
82 00 00 20
81 00 00 36
77 00 00 56
KUSMAHA URF BELWA 180B 00 04 54
Tappa :- 180A 00 10 21
Kachuvar 179 00 03 93
177(Road)
00 00 46[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4247 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
176 00 09 74
169(Chak Road) 00 00 72
167 00 13 39
166(Chak Road) 00 01 08
146 00 06 00
147 00 10 93
148 00 12 83
150 00 06 88
149 00 00 36
143(Chak Road) 00 00 87
142 00 14 06
138 00 01 83
131(Road) 00 00 19
133 00 00 36
137A 00 06 62
139 00 00 50
137B 00 12 81
136(Chak Road) 00 00 70
23 00 08 84
22 00 13 28
20 00 02 40
19 00 02 05
1(Nala) 00 02 22
DHANAUTI KHURD 177(Nala) 00 01 29
Tappa :— 176(Nala) 00 01 75
Govrai 174 00 03 82
169 00 06 34
168 00 08 41
167 00 07 06
165(Chak Road) 00 00 97
164 00 06 78
163(Chak Road) 00 01 13
162 00 08 85
161(Chak Road) 00 00 64
160 00 08 74
155 00 02 31
126(Chak Road) 00 00 74
91 00 01 71
90 00 00 36
92 00 16 94
86 00 04 81
93(Chak Road) 00 02 58
125 00 01 72
82 00 32 47
4248 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
81
00 22 17
34(Road) 00 02 12
7 00 18 75
12 00 00 18
11 00 19 11
8 00 00 36
9 00 01 26
10 00 08 85
25(Chak Road) 00 01 05
MUNDERA 25 00 05 63
Tappa :- 23 00 04 42
Govrai 22 00 10 78
21B 00 02 08
21A 00 10 01
20(Chak Road) 00 00 74
19B 00 00 91
19A 00 07 91
18A 00 03 26
18B 00 03 18
17(Road) 00 01 29
16B 00 12 56
16A 00 02 80
15A 00 09 21
10 00 05 33
9(Chak Road) 00 00 61
8B 00 07 82
8A 00 00 66
7 00 05 88
POKHAR BHINDA 173 00 00 36
Tappa :— 73 00 00 36
Govrai 72 00 10 62
71 00 00 36
68 00 00 36
50/3 00 02 55
49 00 02 95
48 00 06 28
45 00 00 48
46 00 05 85
47 00 05 85
BHAGAUTIPUR 72-A 00 01 13
Tappa :— 72-B 00 07 87
Govrai 71-B 00 05 22
77 00 02 52
78 00 11 34
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4249
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
79 00 06 43
81 00 00 36
80 00 07 47
83-B 00 05 83
97(Chak Road) 00 01 08
111 00 00 36
110 00 00 69
99 00 12 07
100 00 00 76
109-B 00 00 46
101 00 04 32
106-A 00 04 14
107 00 04 68
108(Chak Road) 00 00 90
BARARI 99 00 13 90
Tappa :- 102 00 04 32
Govrai 103(Chak Road) 00 00 63
104 00 26 82
106 00 00 36
105 00 00 36
108 00 10 57
91(Road) 00 04 75
51 00 13 23
49 00 00 36
52 00 01 75
68 00 04 83
53 00 04 23
60 00 00 36
62 00 18 54
67 00 00 36
42 00 01 05
63 00 05 22
64 00 00 51
17(Canal) 00 05 22
16 00 00 51
15 00 00 36
13 00 04 10
BHEEMPUR 580(Canal) 00 01 08
Tappa :- 452 00 06 88
Govrai 451 00 02 34
450 00 01 01
449 00 17 06
448(Road) 00 01 80
4250 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
GAURA KHAS 1084
00 33 21
Tappa :- 1076(Chak Road) 00 00 63
Gora 1075(Chak Road) 00 00 76
1055 00 19 01
1058 00 00 36
1057 00 00 40
1056 00 06 41
1043 00 16 83
1042 00 00 63
1038 00 04 86
1061 00 00 36
1037 00 03 83
1029 00 00 36
1059 00 01 58
1060 00 06 03
1032(Chak Road) 00 00 63
1061 00 00 36
1031(Chak Road) 00 00 63
1017 00 00 36
1016 00 07 47
1026 00 00 36
1014-1102(Chak Road) 00 00 63
1015 00 30 96
1013 00 22 50
1018(Chak Road) 00 00 63
320(Chak Road) 00 00 63
315 00 33 12
314(Canal) 00 01 35
313 00 10 08
226(Chak Road) 00 01 44
311 00 00 36
310 00 00 36
225(Chak Road) 00 01 44
210 00 12 78
212 00 20 38
211 00 00 36
213 00 07 79
214 00 10 04
216(Chak Road) 00 00 63
224 00 05 31
223 00 04 90
222 00 00 70
221 00 00 80
220 00 01 50
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4251
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
218 00 09 90
145(Chak Road) 00 00 63
144(Chak Road) 00 00 63
136 00 00 54
133 00 15 66
132(Chak Road) 00 02 10
123 00 00 45
125 00 00 39
126 00 00 57
128 00 02 35
129 00 04 80
130 00 00 36
131 00 04 68
104(Chak Road) 00 00 63
103 00 16 92
97(Nala) 00 00 99
POKHAR BHINDA 224 00 15 41
Tappa :- 193 (Field Channel) 00 00 72
Gora 190/B 00 00 81
190/A 00 00 36
PARSA BARWA 496 00 00 71
Tappa :-Gora 495 00 00 45
421 00 00 58
422 00 04 35
423 00 04 91
424 00 04 37
420 00 19 98
419 00 02 96
416 00 22 93
412 00 04 41
402 00 01 76
406 00 00 89
408 00 00 90
407 00 04 59
395 00 15 08
389 00 00 90
154 00 01 41
155 00 02 82
157 00 00 72
156 00 16 38
152 00 01 44
151 00 00 54
150 00 12 78
149 00 04 90
4252 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
148 00 04 46
147 00 04 23
145 00 07 45
146 00 05 78
143 00 00 67
129 00 26 75
110 00 01 80
5 00 23 12
6 00 05 67
4 00 03 43
3 00 12 42
7 00 00 36
1 00 00 81
JAITPURA 153 A 00 06 62
Tappa :-Panai 153 B 00 03 06
147 00 03 15
152 00 02 12
148 00 02 34
149 00 03 35
150 00 04 60
144(Chak Road) 00 00 36
142 00 02 14
141 00 00 40
134 00 08 85
135 00 00 24
132 00 05 98
62(Nala) 00 00 36
1(Nala) 00 03 29
MUNDERA 1(Nala) 00 03 60
Tappa :- 13 00 11 02
Dhatura 2 00 00 74
11 00 04 19
10 00 03 46
6 00 03 65
9 00 01 11
7 00 06 72
8 00 02 16
4 00 06 19
3 (Cart Track) 00 01 17
BASNSPAR 69(Cart Track) 00 01 98
BUZURG 54 00 00 36
Tappa :- 55 00 00 36
Dhatura 56 00 00 36
57 00 00 36
58 00 00 36
59 00 00 37
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4253
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
61 00 19 35
60 00 00 53
48(Chak Road) 00 00 63
46 00 11 34
45(Chak Road) 00 00 63
39 00 12 37
38 00 04 95
36(Chak Road) 00 01 20
31 00 09 72
30 00 14 81
25 00 13 86
23(Chak Road) 00 00 54
9 00 17 32
5 00 05 58
10 00 00 36
4(Chak Road) 00 00 63
3 00 16 06
BARARI 435 00 10 40
Tappa :- 433 00 25 02
Dhatura 432(Chak Road) 00 00 32
431 00 00 95
413(Chak Road) 00 01 03
398 00 00 61
402(Chak Road) 00 00 28
412 00 25 07
407 00 00 36
411 00 10 67
410(Chak Road) 00 00 38
409 00 00 54
464(Chak Road) 00 00 63
465 00 09 85
466 00 02 45
467 00 09 76
468(Chak Road) 00 00 63
469 00 05 94
381(Cart Track) 00 01 22
380(Cart Track) 00 01 66
347 00 02 79
328 (Road) 00 02 70
245 00 23 08
246 00 05 69
247 (Chak Road) 00 00 63
248 00 03 60
249 00 04 41
250 00 08 87
251 00 09 72
4254 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
253
00 05 85
252 00 03 80
254 00 00 76
256(Road) 00 00 81
255 00 00 36
60 00 08 64
61 00 09 95
62 00 08 71
63(Chak Road) 00 00 65
64 00 13 54
65 00 06 48
67 00 03 96
66 00 06 16
72(Chak Road) 00 00 63
90 00 05 75
89 00 04 18
88 00 08 19
94(Cart Track) 00 00 65
112 00 01 44
111 00 07 97
110 00 00 36
114 00 24 52
109 00 00 36
115(Cart Track) 00 00 90
BAITALPUR 290 00 10 84
Tappa :- 291 00 00 36
Sirjam 318 00 00 36
292(Chak Road) 00 00 63
293 00 02 56
298 00 20 81
300(Chak Road) 00 00 63
305 00 13 32
307 00 13 37
306 00 00 36
308 00 05 94
315 00 01 26
317 00 00 36
316 00 09 41
334(Canal) 00 04 25
362 00 00 36
373 00 11 90
374 00 00 36
375(Road) 00 01 66
195 00 21 08
199(Chak Road) 00 00 63
200 00 15 48
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4255
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
236(Chak Road) 00 00 63
227 00 00 64
222 00 03 50
219 00 14 22
228 00 04 05
218 00 04 03
205(Chak Road) 00 00 63
35 00 26 46
24(Chak Road) 00 00 36
36 00 34 17
54(Chak Road) 00 00 63
41 00 10 39
40 00 05 08
GUDRI 287 00 21 58
Tappa :- 288 00 38 03
Sirjam 331 00 00 36
305 00 29 75
304 00 06 03
302 00 00 63
145 00 06 89
144 00 05 04
142 00 01 08
141 00 04 37
140 00 11 93
138 00 08 01
137 00 08 01
153 00 00 36
156 00 00 63
160 00 19 58
159 00 01 88
158 00 02 08
161 00 06 53
164 00 00 36
162 00 16 20
163 00 00 36
135 00 02 16
27 00 02 25
41 00 02 12
42 00 10 30
87 00 00 63
86 00 02 92
89 00 00 36
88 00 00 36
[F. No. R-25011/23/2013-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
4256 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]नई दिल्ली, 5 अगस्त, 2013
dk-vk- 1623-—केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसा प्रतीत होता है कि लोक हित में यह आवश्यक है कि सिवान से बैतालपुर तक पेट्रोलियम पदार्थाें के परिवहन हेतु तहसील : भाटपर रानी, जिला : दवरिय्ाा, राज्यः उार प्रदश में इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ।
और केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में जिसके भीतर उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित है, उपयोग का अर्जन किया जाए;
अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, पैट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन्स (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उप-धारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उक्त भूमि में उपयोग के अध्ािंकार 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, भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं, इक्कीस दिन के अन्दर, भूमि के भीतर पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने हेतु उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के लिए, श्री उमाकांत त्र्ािपाठी, सक्षम प्राधिकारी इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, (पाइपलाइन डिवीजन), सुबेदारगंज, पो.ओ : पीपलगॉंव, जिला : इलाहाबाद, पिन : 211012, राज्यः उार प्रदेश को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा।
अनुसूची
तहसील : भाटपर रानी
जिला देवरिया
राज्य : उत्तर प्रदेश मौजा/ग्राम सर्वे/ब्लाक/सं. ;प्लोट सं.द्ध सब-डीव-सं. क्षेत्रापफल
हेक्टेयर आरे वर्ग मीटर 1
2 3 4 5 6 बनकटा तिरसेन
43
00 04 14 (बनकटा छितरसेन)
42
00 00 36 तप्पा ः बलीवान
41
00 00 36
44
00 01 44
52 (कच्चा रास्ता)
00 00 90
36
00 10 26
35
00 00 36
37
00 05 58
38
00 12 60
39
00 06 30 बनकटा जगदीश
395
00 01 31 तप्पा ः बलीवान
391
00 10 44
392
00 00 36
390(चक मार्ग)
00 01 08
389
00 09 72
387
00 00 36
386
00 00 57
327(रास्ता)
00 04 14
308
00 00 36[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4257 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
309 00 01 80
310 00 07 56
311 00 04 32
313 00 04 14
312(चक मार्ग) 00 01 08
297 00 15 66
296 00 12 96
279 00 03 24
280 00 14 04
281 00 05 76
282 00 00 36
283 00 00 36
215(चक मार्ग) 00 01 08
240 00 11 34
237(चक मार्ग) 00 00 20
236 00 07 02
235 00 05 04
233 00 02 52
231 00 02 34
230 00 03 78
229(चक मार्ग) 00 00 72
227 00 00 66
228 00 06 12
225 00 05 58
224 00 00 36
223(चक मार्ग) 00 00 72
220 00 08 82
218 00 00 36
219 00 08 46
121(चक मार्ग) 00 00 54
120(रास्ता) 00 00 72
24 00 05 22
23 00 00 36
25 00 00 70
26 00 00 36
27 00 00 36
4258 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
22 00 05 40
19 00 05 04
17 00 05 22
18 00 05 58
115 00 00 36
39 00 00 36
29(नाला) 00 02 34
16 00 00 36
15 00 00 36
37 00 00 69
36 00 01 80
35 00 04 68
34 00 06 48
33 00 06 30
32 00 04 14
30 00 04 50
10 00 05 94
11(रास्ता) 00 01 98
भथही सेवक चक 415(रास्ता) 00 01 58
तप्पा ः बलीवान 399 00 04 16
398 00 08 60
396 00 01 70
397 00 18 18
386 00 08 95
387 00 00 81
385 00 10 85
383(रास्ता) 00 02 83
277 00 02 20
276 00 07 31
275 00 10 84
274 00 02 20
272 00 06 16
273 00 01 19
271 00 02 37
278(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 39
284 00 01 19
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4259
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
283 00 02 39
282 00 01 19
281 00 08 77
279 00 08 73
269 00 01 19
267 00 05 08
265 00 01 19
266(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 02 21
225(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 19
30 00 13 16
24(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 55
22 00 04 32
29 00 01 19
21 00 00 81
20 00 10 93
19 00 06 39
18 00 08 42
17 00 10 85
16(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 04 37
भाथरही जमीन 43 00 00 36
तप्पा ः बलीवान 42 00 00 36
38 00 04 40
37 00 08 59
34 00 00 36
36 00 01 01
35 00 03 20
33 00 00 36
14 00 08 28
12 00 14 35
11 00 00 36
9 00 01 40
इन्दरवा 47(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 03 28
तप्पा ः बलीवान 45 00 16 02
46 00 04 05
किशोरी छापर 328 00 13 13
तप्पा ः बलीवान 325 00 03 15
4260 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
320 00 01 22
321(चक मार्ग) 00 03 20
324 00 02 70
322 00 08 34
319 00 05 13
318(चक मार्ग) 00 00 65
313 00 00 36
314 00 17 54
315 00 01 20
308(चक मार्ग) 00 01 01
303 00 22 34
302 00 10 47
301 00 01 17
300 00 03 14
299 00 06 98
रतसिया 942 00 00 36
तप्पा ः बलीवान 941 00 02 77
940 00 04 32
939 00 00 36
936(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 98
935 00 08 82
934 00 10 48
932(चक मार्ग) 00 01 08
916 00 24 14
915 00 01 82
914 00 00 55
910 00 01 26
879(नाला) 00 02 47
911 00 01 36
856 00 00 36
857 00 03 51
871 00 01 26
867(चक मार्ग) 00 00 61
863 00 05 28
864 00 05 83
865 00 07 04
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4261
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
866 00 00 68
862(चक मार्ग) 00 01 12
861 00 17 51
860 00 00 63
821(रास्ता) 00 03 06
820 00 20 59
809 00 00 36
814(चक मार्ग) 00 02 34
713 00 11 47
726(चक मार्ग) 00 01 08
727 00 04 43
728 00 05 40
729 00 10 53
730 00 06 66
731 00 04 88
732 00 05 83
733 00 05 85
735 00 07 54
736 00 03 33
753(चक मार्ग) 00 00 90
754(चक मार्ग) 00 00 90
777 00 00 36
776 00 00 56
775 00 06 32
773 00 04 97
772(चक मार्ग) 00 00 63
771 00 10 98
770 00 04 21
769 00 05 26
768(चक मार्ग) 00 01 19
767 00 05 76
764 00 04 82
763 00 02 76
पकडिया कुंड 243 00 06 59
तप्पा ः बलीवान 220 00 02 16
151 00 00 14
4262 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
150 00 00 36
152 00 01 66
153 00 03 31
154 00 02 74
168(चक मार्ग) 00 00 90
169 00 04 55
170 00 03 24
171 00 03 38
172 00 03 53
173 00 03 46
176(चक मार्ग) 00 00 90
177 00 02 81
178 00 04 05
186 00 12 64
188 00 04 81
189 00 06 05
194 00 00 36
195 00 02 15
196 00 04 97
197 00 02 60
199 00 00 36
204(चक मार्ग) 00 00 44
201 00 02 35
206 00 00 36
200 00 23 62
100(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 90
25 00 05 63
22 00 04 59
21 00 06 80
20 00 03 08
18 00 03 49
17 00 02 16
16 00 01 50
15 00 00 36
सिकटिया नायक 1029(रास्ता) 00 02 79
तप्पा ः बलीवान 1088 00 03 87
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4263
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1087 00 06 03
1086 00 07 33
1084 00 06 52
1083 00 06 62
1082 00 00 36
1081 00 00 36
1032(रास्ता) 00 00 90
1025 00 17 56
1024 00 13 12
1020 00 01 91
1005(रास्ता) 00 02 83
159 00 00 36
160 00 02 25
161 00 09 03
162 00 04 13
163 00 00 36
164 00 13 86
165 00 00 36
199(चक मार्ग) 00 01 73
203 00 02 32
201 00 00 77
184 00 01 67
186 00 02 20
185 00 00 37
200 00 00 36
187 00 09 86
198 00 00 58
194(चक मार्ग) 00 00 72
197 00 21 06
196 00 00 54
195 00 04 72
214 00 03 51
62 00 05 31
गज तडवा 681(नदी) 00 12 89
तप्पा : गेातमा 700 00 00 36
699 00 05 69
4264 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
698 00 00 36
697 00 00 36
701 00 09 42
696 00 12 70
695 00 00 99
693 00 00 36
692 00 07 94
691 00 03 79
690 00 00 44
689 00 04 57
688 00 01 19
687 00 10 41
685 00 01 34
684 00 00 36
665(चक मार्ग) 00 00 67
646 00 01 56
645 00 04 03
634 00 00 94
633 00 05 10
631 00 05 37
630(चक मार्ग) 00 01 11
629 00 07 07
601(चक मार्ग) 00 00 81
581 00 04 02
580 00 00 52
582 00 11 38
584 00 07 90
585(चक मार्ग) 00 01 13
586 00 12 76
589 00 00 36
579(रास्ता) 00 02 58
573 00 00 36
574 00 11 56
575 00 03 92
576 00 00 36
572 00 03 43
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4265
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
571 00 01 94
577 00 00 36
565 00 04 11
564 00 04 03
563 00 03 54
562 00 02 56
559 00 01 93
558 00 05 97
556 00 12 33
551 00 00 36
550 00 04 68
548 00 05 15
549(रास्ता) 00 00 36
578 00 00 48
आलीआ चक 95 00 04 18
तप्पा ः गेातमा 92 00 01 64
91 00 00 36
1(रास्ता) 00 05 90
बत्रौली 375(रास्ता) 00 01 71
तप्पा ः गेातमा 393 00 08 07
392(चक मार्ग) 00 00 67
391 00 09 43
388 00 08 78
387 00 07 75
386 00 06 72
385 00 07 80
383(चक मार्ग) 00 00 54
377 00 10 86
378 00 04 04
379 00 05 00
380 00 01 27
374(चक मार्ग) 00 00 82
373 00 04 72
372 00 07 80
369 00 07 02
368 00 00 36
4266 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
340(डे्रइन) 00 02 16
444 00 00 36
445 00 07 32
446 00 12 26
449(चक मार्ग) 00 00 65
339 00 17 69
338 00 00 36
336 00 22 71
327 00 00 36
334 00 05 79
328 00 00 42
333 00 03 53
332 00 05 88
306 00 03 17
304 00 11 74
236(रास्ता) 00 01 08
235 00 01 16
पांडेपुर 17 00 15 23
तप्पा : गेातमा 16(चक मार्ग) 00 01 70
15 00 01 67
12 00 04 92
11 00 04 11
10 00 17 73
तांडवा 479(रास्ता) 00 00 92
तप्पा : गेातमा 477 00 01 04
476 00 12 24
468(चक मार्ग) 00 00 81
377 00 11 70
375 00 11 52
374 00 02 46
373 00 05 33
372 00 00 36
371(चक मार्ग) 00 00 90
370 00 12 60
365 00 05 69
364 00 08 21
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4267
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
363(चक मार्ग) 00 00 72
356 00 01 44
355 00 09 70
357 00 03 20
358 00 03 52
353 00 08 96
352 00 02 70
351 00 05 26
345 00 02 72
344 00 01 89
छितौनी 574(रास्ता) 00 04 86
तप्पा : गेातमा 576 00 01 41
572 00 08 25
573 00 00 27
554(चक मार्ग) 00 00 54
539 00 07 18
538 00 16 81
526 00 14 00
525(चक मार्ग) 00 00 54
523 00 06 05
524 00 04 50
521 00 00 68
520 00 07 92
469(रास्ता) 00 02 32
बालभद्र चक 160(रास्ता) 00 00 81
तप्पा : गेातमा 103 00 00 45
104 00 05 70
102 00 00 65
101 00 00 69
100 00 00 69
99 00 00 31
98 00 04 22
97 00 03 97
96 00 03 33
94(चक मार्ग) 00 00 54
92 00 18 34
4268 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
91 00 05 25
90 00 04 53
89 00 04 37
86 00 10 29
78(चक मार्ग) 00 00 59
87 00 00 36
75 00 19 85
76(चक मार्ग) 00 00 56
70 00 07 15
71 00 00 79
68 00 07 93
62 00 03 72
63(चक मार्ग) 00 00 63
58 00 03 14
59 00 00 36
57 00 03 18
56 00 03 34
55 00 03 42
54 00 08 53
53(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 81
74(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 06
बलदीहा 35(रास्ता) 00 01 84
तप्पा : गेातमा 32 00 34 17
33 00 01 45
31 00 03 77
30 00 01 09
29(चक मार्ग) 00 00 65
25 00 16 10
बरायपर पांडेे 911(रास्ता) 00 00 84
तप्पा : गेातमा 910 00 01 80
909 00 09 31
907 00 08 96
900 00 07 61
901 00 08 86
899 00 04 23
896 00 00 64
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4269
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
890 00 05 76
891 00 09 87
893(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 72
463 00 05 23
465 00 15 05
464 00 00 36
466 00 10 18
453(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 69
442 00 06 04
441 00 03 52
443 00 04 17
444 00 04 72
446 00 05 46
436(रास्ता) 00 00 55
431 00 03 29
430 00 08 52
429 00 08 68
427 00 00 84
418 00 02 59
425 00 08 80
419 00 01 75
424 00 03 88
423 00 02 53
421(नाला) 00 02 65
420 (नाला) 00 00 35
पुरैना 114 00 13 00
तप्पा : गेातमा 113 00 03 47
116 (नाला) 00 00 36
117 00 00 36
110 00 09 79
115 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 36
119 00 00 36
109 00 10 24
75 (रास्ता) 00 01 16
33 00 18 60
35 00 00 18
4270 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
34 00 00 18
320 (चक मार्ग) 00 07 75
319 00 00 36
321 00 00 36
32 00 04 92
29 00 08 06
28 00 00 59
322 00 00 54
324 00 00 36
328 00 00 36
329 00 00 36
330 00 00 36
334 00 00 36
27 00 07 24
25 00 09 93
24 00 10 51
23 00 03 00
22 00 07 45
324 (चक मार्ग) 00 04 78
335 00 00 58
बाहलोवा 244(नाला) 00 00 85
तप्पा ः हवेली 220 00 37 01
221 00 00 36
200(रास्ता) 00 01 83
164 00 20 51
172 00 00 36
171 00 00 36
165(चक मार्ग) 00 04 70
170 00 00 23
169 00 00 18
168 00 00 84
155 00 07 36
154 00 03 69
153 00 10 46
166 00 01 19
92(चक मार्ग) 00 00 59
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4271
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
26 00 17 22
25 00 00 36
27 00 27 46
33 00 02 64
32 00 12 63
भाली छापरा 519 00 00 38
तप्पा ः हवेली 525 00 00 36
511 00 05 85
512 00 06 21
513 00 05 31
514 00 05 58
515 00 11 16
516 00 09 45
517 00 02 48
518 00 00 36
509 00 12 21
508 00 23 76
490 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 63
468 00 07 02
469 00 15 12
462 00 07 92
460 00 00 63
470 (रास्ता) 00 01 26
458 00 03 56
457 00 00 72
486 00 00 49
471 00 15 30
473 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 63
302 00 09 36
304 00 11 16
305 00 07 47
353 00 11 62
354 00 03 74
358 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 72
399 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 36
457 00 00 36
4272 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
359 00 04 96
361 00 27 36
409 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 63
398 00 00 36
397 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 81
394 00 04 05
395 00 08 46
396 00 08 46
जो गौर 116 (रास्ता) 00 00 72
तप्पा ः हवेली 113 00 10 53
112 00 09 45
119 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 63
109 00 11 16
126 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 63
82 00 21 69
76 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 63
75 00 03 33
74 00 10 53
73 00 05 13
72 00 11 05
60 00 00 36
69 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 36
54 00 00 36
53 00 00 36
62 00 00 36
71 00 16 69
70 00 05 67
50 (चक मार्ग) 00 01 22
52 00 00 15
51 00 00 17
43 00 00 04
49 00 00 30
माधोपुर (मधौर) 350 00 07 01
तप्पा ः हवेली 349 00 06 21
348 00 12 33
347 00 06 03
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4273
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
346 00 00 63
298 (रास्ता) 00 01 55
344 00 03 69
341 00 07 45
340 00 06 30
328 00 06 30
326 00 01 84
325 00 03 17
324 00 08 06
323 00 07 81
308 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 59
312 00 08 53
313 00 00 36
311 00 18 50
92 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 59
87 00 08 59
86 00 07 04
85 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 59
81 00 12 19
82 00 07 76
80 00 08 09
78 00 00 36
79 00 03 69
99 (चक मार्ग) 00 02 44
97 00 00 28
98 00 01 71
96 00 00 36
100 00 03 11
70 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 61
35 00 18 18
39 00 00 36
38 00 14 04
37 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 68
जसुइ 285 00 15 21
तप्पा ः हवेली 286 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 59
339 00 00 36
4274 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
338 00 00 36
287 00 07 02
289 00 13 86
290 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 54
291 00 04 28
296 00 36 22
300 00 06 80
297 00 00 36
298 00 05 76
299 00 00 70
161 (रास्ता) 00 03 69
120 00 00 36
117 00 00 36
110 00 01 43
111 00 06 00
112 00 01 43
108 00 23 58
107 00 10 20
106 (चक मार्ग) 00 01 82
96 00 04 41
37 (रास्ता) 00 01 44
36 00 15 08
35 00 02 48
बिशुनपुरा 341 00 05 76
तप्पा ः हवेली 340 00 06 48
339 00 03 76
202 (रास्ता) 00 00 53
104 00 00 27
103 00 00 36
टेंगरी 215 00 00 61
तप्पा ः हवेली 214 00 08 30
213 00 02 16
212 00 02 83
211 00 03 45
210 00 03 78
207 00 08 64
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4275
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
206 00 07 13
205 00 04 09
204 00 03 96
203 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 21
201 00 00 10
145 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 54
139 00 00 72
138 00 04 95
137 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 15
136 00 00 66
140 00 00 76
121 00 06 19
120 00 09 09
122 00 05 55
119 00 03 30
118 00 02 25
123 00 00 54
129/216 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 36
107 00 00 36
105 00 00 36
106 00 00 36
117 00 05 94
116 00 01 89
115 00 01 58
114 00 01 62
113 00 01 53
112 00 03 19
108 00 04 68
109 00 00 36
97 (चक मार्ग) 00 00 54
96 00 04 68
95 00 05 20
94 00 02 43
93 00 02 70
89 00 03 97
90 00 17 03
88 00 00 36
4276 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
बरका गांव 555(चक मार्ग) 00 00 59
तप्पा ः हवेली 556 00 09 68
557 00 11 07
558 00 03 80
560 00 14 51
562 00 02 30
561 00 19 64
569 00 23 52
570(चक मार्ग) 00 03 36
581 00 03 13
582 00 05 96
568 00 01 35
594(रास्ता) 00 00 63
623 00 13 86
622 00 00 36
624 00 11 76
621 00 00 36
620 00 02 88
625 00 05 22
619 00 03 41
618 00 10 88
627 00 00 66
628 00 00 36
629(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 17
637 00 07 38
638 00 08 28
636 00 00 36
639 00 04 90
640 00 04 18
641 00 06 57
642 00 04 14
643 00 13 77
56(चक मार्ग) 00 00 63
669 00 15 12
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4277
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
674 00 07 88
673 00 00 56
672(रास्ता) 00 02 25
691 00 00 36
682 00 13 45
683 00 00 36
692 00 03 29
681(चक मार्ग) 00 01 50
680 00 03 86
712 00 07 92
711(चक मार्ग) 00 00 63
710 00 09 72
709 00 00 36
727 00 05 58
728 00 01 83
729 00 01 33
706 00 12 89
705 00 00 36
755 00 15 16
756 00 04 32
757 00 05 18
758 00 04 81
759 00 01 09
871 00 00 36
873(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 07 74
936 00 00 93
938 00 05 55
941 00 00 50
942 00 00 36
939 00 00 63
940 00 04 01
944 00 04 64
945 00 04 16
947 00 02 81
4278 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
955(चक मार्ग) 00 00 60
954 00 01 08
949 00 00 72
951 00 04 98
962 00 02 56
पिपरा बिठल 914 00 01 43
तप्पा : घाटी 913 00 00 36
912 00 00 36
911 00 00 36
लाल चक 334 00 08 46
तप्पा : घाटी 333 00 01 47
332 00 00 36
329 00 09 59
328 00 06 48
326 00 03 72
327 00 13 05
322 00 00 36
324 00 03 44
323 00 04 11
280 00 13 23
308 00 08 00
307 00 00 36
294 00 02 76
303 00 02 88
304 00 00 36
302 00 03 82
301 00 03 78
149-339(चकरोड) 00 00 67
147 00 00 36
149 00 16 56
152 00 16 20
154(चकरोड) 00 01 04
159 00 00 26
160 00 04 07
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4279
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
153(चकरोड) 00 00 90
110 00 07 74
106(चकरोड) 00 00 63
105 00 13 73
104(चकरोड) 00 00 63
68 00 00 36
94 00 06 48
93-337 00 00 56
69(चकरोड) 00 01 23
93 00 00 67
50 00 02 02
49 00 06 90
45 00 03 96
44 00 04 18
43 00 05 35
38 00 11 02
[पफा. सं. आर.-25011/23/2013-ओआर-I]
पवन वुफमार, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 5th August, 2013
S.O. 1623.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited in Tehsil Bhatpar Rani, District Deoria in the State of Uttar Pradesh for 'Siwan to Baitalpur Pipeline' for the transportation of Petroleum Product;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty-one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land, to Shri Umakant Tripathi Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited. (Pipelines Division) Subedargunj, P.O. Pipalgaon, District : Allahabad, Pin-211012, State Uttar Pradesh.
SCHEDULE
Tehsil : Bhatpar Rani District : Deoria State : Uttar Pradesh Mouja / Village Survey/BlockNo. Sub-Div-No. Area
Hectare Are Sq.mtr. (1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6) Bankata Tirsen 43 00 04 14 (Bankata Chitrasen) 42 00 00 36 Tappa : Balivan 41 00 00 36
44 00 01 444280 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
52 (Cart track) 00 00 90
36 00 10 26
35 00 00 36
37 00 05 58
38 00 12 60
39 00 06 30
BANKATA JAGDISH 395 00 01 31
Tappa : Balivan 391 00 10 44
392 00 00 36
390(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 08
389 00 09 72
387 00 00 36
386 00 00 57
327(ROAD) 00 04 14
308 00 00 36
309 00 01 80
310 00 07 56
311 00 04 32
313 00 04 14
312(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 08
297 00 15 66
296 00 12 96
279 00 03 24
280 00 14 04
281 00 05 76
282 00 00 36
283 00 00 36
215(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 08
240 00 11 34
237(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 20
236 00 07 02
235 00 05 04
233 00 02 52
231 00 02 34
230 00 03 78
229(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 72
227 00 00 66
228 00 06 12
225 00 05 58
224 00 00 36
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4281
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
219 00 08 46
121(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 54
120(ROAD) 00 00 72
24 00 05 22
23 00 00 36
25 00 00 70
26 00 00 36
27 00 00 36
22 00 05 40
19 00 05 04
17 00 05 22
18 00 05 58
115 00 00 36
39 00 00 36
29(NALA) 00 02 34
16 00 00 36
15 00 00 36
37 00 00 69
36 00 01 80
35 00 04 68
34 00 06 48
33 00 06 30
32 00 04 14
30 00 04 50
10 00 05 94
11(ROAD) 00 01 98
BHATHAHI SEVAK CHAK 415(ROAD) 00 01 58
399 00 04 16
Tappa : Balivan 398 00 08 60
396 00 01 70
397 00 18 18
386 00 08 95
387 00 00 81
385 00 10 85
383(ROAD) 00 02 83
277 00 02 20
276 00 07 31
275 00 10 84
274 00 02 20
272 00 06 16
4282 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
284 00 01 19
283 00 02 39
282 00 01 19
281 00 08 77
279 00 08 73
269 00 01 19
267 00 05 08
265 00 01 19
266(CART TRACK) 00 02 21
225(CART TRACK) 00 01 19
30 00 13 16
24(CART TRACK) 00 01 55
22 00 04 32
29 00 01 19
21 00 00 81
20 00 10 93
19 00 06 39
18 00 08 42
17 00 10 85
16(CART TRACK) 00 04 37
BHATHRHI JAMIN 43 00 00 36
Tappa : Balivan 42 00 00 36
38 00 04 40
37 00 08 59
34 00 00 36
36 00 01 01
35 00 03 20
33 00 00 36
14 00 08 28
12 00 14 35
11 00 00 36
9 00 01 40
INDARWA 47(CART TRACK) 00 03 28
Tappa : Balivan 45 00 16 02
46 00 04 05
KISHORI CHHAPAR 328 00 13 13
Tappa : Balivan 325 00 03 15
320 00 01 22
321(CHAK ROAD) 00 03 20
324 00 02 70
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4283
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
313 00 00 36
314 00 17 54
315 00 01 20
308(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 01
303 00 22 34
302 00 10 47
301 00 01 17
300 00 03 14
299 00 06 98
RATSIYA 942 00 00 36
Tappa : Balivan 941 00 02 77
940 00 04 32
939 00 00 36
936(CART TRACK) 00 01 98
935 00 08 82
934 00 10 48
932(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 08
916 00 24 14
915 00 01 82
914 00 00 55
910 00 01 26
879(NALA) 00 02 47
911 00 01 36
856 00 00 36
857 00 03 51
871 00 01 26
867(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 61
863 00 05 28
864 00 05 83
865 00 07 04
866 00 00 68
862(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 12
861 00 17 51
860 00 00 63
821(ROAD) 00 03 06
820 00 20 59
809 00 00 36
814(CHAK ROAD) 00 02 34
713 00 11 47
726(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 08
4284 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
731 00 04 88
732 00 05 83
733 00 05 85
735 00 07 54
736 00 03 33
753(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 90
754(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 90
777 00 00 36
776 00 00 56
775 00 06 32
773 00 04 97
772(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
771 00 10 98
770 00 04 21
769 00 05 26
768(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 19
767 00 05 76
764 00 04 82
763 00 02 76
PAKADIA KUND 243 00 06 59
Tappa : Balivan 220 00 02 16
151 00 00 14
150 00 00 36
152 00 01 66
153 00 03 31
154 00 02 74
168(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 90
169 00 04 55
170 00 03 24
171 00 03 38
172 00 03 53
173 00 03 46
176(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 90
177 00 02 81
178 00 04 05
186 00 12 64
188 00 04 81
189 00 06 05
194 00 00 36
195 00 02 15
196 00 04 97
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4285
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
204(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 44
201 00 02 35
206 00 00 36
200 00 23 62
100(BRICK ROAD) 00 00 90
25 00 05 63
22 00 04 59
21 00 06 80
20 00 03 08
18 00 03 49
17 00 02 16
16 00 01 50
15 00 00 36
SIKTIA NAYAK 1029(ROAD) 00 02 79
Tappa : Balivan 1088 00 03 87
1087 00 06 03
1086 00 07 33
1084 00 06 52
1083 00 06 62
1082 00 00 36
1081 00 00 36
1032(ROAD) 00 00 90
1025 00 17 56
1024 00 13 12
1020 00 01 91
1005(ROAD) 00 02 83
159 00 00 36
160 00 02 25
161 00 09 03
162 00 04 13
163 00 00 36
164 00 13 86
165 00 00 36
199(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 73
203 00 02 32
201 00 00 77
184 00 01 67
186 00 02 20
185 00 00 37
200 00 00 36
4286 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
197 00 21 06
196 00 00 54
195 00 04 72
214 00 03 51
62 00 05 31
GAJ TADWA 681(RIVER) 00 12 89
Tappa : Gotma 700 00 00 36
699 00 05 69
698 00 00 36
697 00 00 36
701 00 09 42
696 00 12 70
695 00 00 99
693 00 00 36
692 00 07 94
691 00 03 79
690 00 00 44
689 00 04 57
688 00 01 19
687 00 10 41
685 00 01 34
684 00 00 36
665(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 67
646 00 01 56
645 00 04 03
634 00 00 94
633 00 05 10
631 00 05 37
630(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 11
629 00 07 07
601(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 81
581 00 04 02
580 00 00 52
582 00 11 38
584 00 07 90
585(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 13
586 00 12 76
589 00 00 36
579(ROAD) 00 02 58
573 00 00 36
574 00 11 56
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4287
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
572 00 03 43
571 00 01 94
577 00 00 36
565 00 04 11
564 00 04 03
563 00 03 54
562 00 02 56
559 00 01 93
558 00 05 97
556 00 12 33
551 00 00 36
550 00 04 68
548 00 05 15
549(ROAD) 00 00 36
578 00 00 48
ALIA CHAK 95 00 04 18
Tappa : Gotma 92 00 01 64
91 00 00 36
1(ROAD) 00 05 90
BATROULI 375(ROAD) 00 01 71
Tappa : Gotma 393 00 08 07
392(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 67
391 00 09 43
388 00 08 78
387 00 07 75
386 00 06 72
385 00 07 80
383(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 54
377 00 10 86
378 00 04 04
379 00 05 00
380 00 01 27
374(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 82
373 00 04 72
372 00 07 80
369 00 07 02
368 00 00 36
340(DRAIN) 00 02 16
444 00 00 36
445 00 07 32
446 00 12 26
4288 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
336 00 22 71
327 00 00 36
334 00 05 79
328 00 00 42
333 00 03 53
332 00 05 88
306 00 03 17
304 00 11 74
236(ROAD) 00 01 08
235 00 01 16
PANDEPUR 17 00 15 23
Tappa : Gotma 16(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 70
15 00 01 67
12 00 04 92
11 00 04 11
10 00 17 73
TANDWA 479(ROAD) 00 00 92
Tappa : Gotma 477 00 01 04
476 00 12 24
468(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 81
377 00 11 70
375 00 11 52
374 00 02 46
373 00 05 33
372 00 00 36
371(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 90
370 00 12 60
365 00 05 69
364 00 08 21
363(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 72
356 00 01 44
355 00 09 70
357 00 03 20
358 00 03 52
353 00 08 96
352 00 02 70
351 00 05 26
345 00 02 72
344 00 01 89
CHHITOUNI 574(ROAD) 00 04 86
Tappa : Gotma 576 00 01 41
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4289
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
539 00 07 18
538 00 16 81
526 00 14 00
525(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 54
523 00 06 05
524 00 04 50
521 00 00 68
520 00 07 92
469(ROAD) 00 02 32
BALBHADRA CHAK 160(road) 00 00 81
Tappa : Gotma 103 00 00 45
104 00 05 70
102 00 00 65
101 00 00 69
100 00 00 69
99 00 00 31
98 00 04 22
97 00 03 97
96 00 03 33
94(chak road) 00 00 54
92 00 18 34
91 00 05 25
90 00 04 53
89 00 04 37
86 00 10 29
78(chak road) 00 00 59
87 00 00 36
75 00 19 85
76(chak road) 00 00 56
70 00 07 15
71 00 00 79
68 00 07 93
62 00 03 72
63(chak road) 00 00 63
58 00 03 14
59 00 00 36
57 00 03 18
56 00 03 34
55 00 03 42
54 00 08 53
53(cart track) 00 00 81
74(cart track) 00 01 06
BELDIHA 35(road) 00 01 84
Tappa : Gotma 32 00 34 17
4290 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
33 00 01 45
31 00 03 77
30 00 01 09
29(chak road) 00 00 65
25 00 16 10
BARAIPAR PANDEY 911(road) 00 00 84
Tappa : Gotma 910 00 01 80
909 00 09 31
907 00 08 96
900 00 07 61
901 00 08 86
899 00 04 23
896 00 00 64
890 00 05 76
891 00 09 87
893(cart track) 00 00 72
463 00 05 23
465 00 15 05
464 00 00 36
466 00 10 18
453(cart track) 00 00 69
442 00 06 04
441 00 03 52
443 00 04 17
444 00 04 72
446 00 05 46
436(road) 00 00 55
431 00 03 29
430 00 08 52
429 00 08 68
427 00 00 84
418 00 02 59
425 00 08 80
419 00 01 75
424 00 03 88
423 00 02 53
421(nala) 00 02 65
420 (Nala) 00 00 35
PURAINA 114 00 13 00
Tappa : Gotma 113 00 03 47
116 (Nala) 00 00 36
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4291
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
119 00 00 36
109 00 10 24
75 (Road) 00 01 16
33 00 18 60
35 00 00 18
34 00 00 18
320 (Chak Road) 00 07 75
319 00 00 36
321 00 00 36
32 00 04 92
29 00 08 06
28 00 00 59
322 00 00 54
324 00 00 36
328 00 00 36
329 00 00 36
330 00 00 36
334 00 00 36
27 00 07 24
25 00 09 93
24 00 10 51
23 00 03 00
22 00 07 45
324 (Chak Road) 00 04 78
335 00 00 58
BAHLOLWA 244(NALA) 00 00 85
Tappa : Haweli 220 00 37 01
221 00 00 36
200(ROAD) 00 01 83
164 00 20 51
172 00 00 36
171 00 00 36
165(CHAK ROAD) 00 04 70
170 00 00 23
169 00 00 18
168 00 00 84
155 00 07 36
154 00 03 69
153 00 10 46
166 00 01 19
92(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 59
4292 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
33 00 02 64
32 00 12 63
BHALI CHHAPARA 519 00 00 38
Tappa : Haweli 525 00 00 36
511 00 05 85
512 00 06 21
513 00 05 31
514 00 05 58
515 00 11 16
516 00 09 45
517 00 02 48
518 00 00 36
509 00 12 21
508 00 23 76
490(Chak Road) 00 00 63
468 00 07 02
469 00 15 12
462 00 07 92
460 00 00 63
470 (ROAD) 00 01 26
458 00 03 56
457 00 00 72
486 00 00 49
471 00 15 30
473 (CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
302 00 09 36
304 00 11 16
305 00 07 47
353 00 11 62
354 00 03 74
358 (CHAK ROAD) 00 00 72
399(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 36
457 00 00 36
359 00 04 96
361 00 27 36
409(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
398 00 00 36
397(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 81
394 00 04 05
395 00 08 46
396 00 08 46
JOGAUR 116 (ROAD) 00 00 72
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4293
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
119 (CART TRACK) 00 00 63
109 00 11 16
126(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
82 00 21 69
76 (CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
75 00 03 33
74 00 10 53
73 00 05 13
72 00 11 05
60 00 00 36
69 (CHAK ROAD) 00 00 36
54 00 00 36
53 00 00 36
62 00 00 36
71 00 16 69
70 00 05 67
50 (CHAK ROAD) 00 01 22
52 00 00 15
51 00 00 17
43 00 00 04
49 00 00 30
MADHOPUR(MADHOUR) 350 00 07 01
Tappa : Haweli 349 00 06 21
348 00 12 33
347 00 06 03
346 00 00 63
298 (Road) 00 01 55
344 00 03 69
341 00 07 45
340 00 06 30
328 00 06 30
326 00 01 84
325 00 03 17
324 00 08 06
323 00 07 81
308 (Chak Road) 00 00 59
312 00 08 53
313 00 00 36
311 00 18 50
92 (Chak Road) 00 00 59
87 00 08 59
86 00 07 04
85 (Chak Road) 00 00 59
4294 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
81 00 12 19
82 00 07 76
80 00 08 09
78 00 00 36
79 00 03 69
99 (Chak Road) 00 02 44
97 00 00 28
98 00 01 71
96 00 00 36
100 00 03 11
70 (Chak Road) 00 00 61
35 00 18 18
39 00 00 36
38 00 14 04
37 (Chak Road) 00 00 68
JASUI 285 00 15 21
Tappa : Haweli 286 (Chak Road) 00 00 59
339 00 00 36
338 00 00 36
287 00 07 02
289 00 13 86
290 (Chak Road) 00 00 54
291 00 04 28
296 00 36 22
300 00 06 80
297 00 00 36
298 00 05 76
299 00 00 70
161 (Road) 00 03 69
120 00 00 36
117 00 00 36
110 00 01 43
111 00 06 00
112 00 01 43
108 00 23 58
107 00 10 20
106 (Chak Road) 00 01 82
96 00 04 41
37 (Road) 00 01 44
36 00 15 08
35 00 02 48
BISHUNPURA 341 00 05 76
Tappa : Haweli 340 00 06 48
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4295
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
339 00 03 76
202 (Road) 00 00 53
104 00 00 27
103 00 00 36
TENGRI 215 00 00 61
Tappa : Haweli 214 00 08 30
213 00 02 16
212 00 02 83
211 00 03 45
210 00 03 78
207 00 08 64
206 00 07 13
205 00 04 09
204 00 03 96
203 (Cart Track) 00 00 21
201 00 00 10
145 (Cart Track) 00 00 54
139 00 00 72
138 00 04 95
137 (Cart Track) 00 01 15
136 00 00 66
140 00 00 76
121 00 06 19
120 00 09 09
122 00 05 55
119 00 03 30
118 00 02 25
123 00 00 54
129/216 (Chak Road) 00 00 36
107 00 00 36
105 00 00 36
106 00 00 36
117 00 05 94
116 00 01 89
115 00 01 58
114 00 01 62
113 00 01 53
112 00 03 19
108 00 04 68
109 00 00 36
4296 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
94 00 02 43
93 00 02 70
89 00 03 97
90 00 17 03
88 00 00 36
BARKA GAON 555 (CHAK ROAD) 00 00 59
Tappa : Haweli 556 00 09 68
557 00 11 07
558 00 03 80
560 00 14 51
562 00 02 30
561 00 19 64
569 00 23 52
570 (CHAK ROAD) 00 03 36
581 00 03 13
582 00 05 96
568 00 01 35
594 (ROAD) 00 00 63
623 00 13 86
622 00 00 36
624 00 11 76
621 00 00 36
620 00 02 88
625 00 05 22
619 00 03 41
618 00 10 88
627 00 00 66
628 00 00 36
629 (CART TRACK) 00 01 17
637 00 07 38
638 00 08 28
636 00 00 36
639 00 04 90
640 00 04 18
641 00 06 57
642 00 04 14
643 00 13 77
56 (CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
669 00 15 12
670 00 00 36
668 00 02 36
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4297
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
691 00 00 36
682 00 13 45
683 00 00 36
692 00 03 29
681 (CHAK ROAD) 00 01 50
680 00 03 86
712 00 07 92
711 (CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
710 00 09 72
709 00 00 36
727 00 05 58
728 00 01 83
729 00 01 33
706 00 12 89
705 00 00 36
755 00 15 16
756 00 04 32
757 00 05 18
758 00 04 81
759 00 01 09
871 00 00 36
873 (CART TRACK) 00 07 74
936 00 00 93
938 00 05 55
941 00 00 50
942 00 00 36
939 00 00 63
940 00 04 01
944 00 04 64
945 00 04 16
947 00 02 81
950 00 04 03
955 (CHAK ROAD) 00 00 60
954 00 01 08
949 00 00 72
951 00 04 98
962 00 02 56
PIPRA BITHAL 914 00 01 43
Tappa : Ghati 913 00 00 36
912 00 00 36
911 00 00 36
LAL CHAK 334 00 08 46
Tappa : Ghati 333 00 01 47
4298 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
332 00 00 36
329 00 09 59
328 00 06 48
326 00 03 72
327 00 13 05
322 00 00 36
324 00 03 44
323 00 04 11
280 00 13 23
308 00 08 00
307 00 00 36
294 00 02 76
303 00 02 88
304 00 00 36
302 00 03 82
301 00 03 78
149-339 (CHAK ROAD) 00 00 67
147 00 00 36
149 00 16 56
152 00 16 20
154 (CHAK ROAD) 00 01 04
159 00 00 26
160 00 04 07
161 00 01 13
153 (CHAK ROAD) 00 00 90
110 00 07 74
106 (CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
105 00 13 73
104 (CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
68 00 00 36
94 00 06 48
93/337 00 00 56
69 (CHAK ROAD) 00 01 23
93 00 00 67
50 00 02 02
49 00 06 90
45 00 03 96
44 00 04 18
43 00 05 35
38 00 11 02
[F. No. R-25011/23/2013-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4299नई दिल्ली, 5 अगस्त, 2013
का.आ. 1624.—केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसा प्रतीत होता है कि लोक हित में यह आवश्यक है कि सिवान से बैेतालपुर तक पेट्रोलियम पदार्थों के परिवहन हेतु तहसील : सालेमपुर, जिला : देवरिया, राज्य उत्तर प्रदेश में इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिएऋ
और केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में जिसके भीतर उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अध्सिूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में वणत है, उपयोग का अर्जन किया जाए ।
अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन्स ;भूमि में उपयोग के अध्किार का अर्जनद्ध अध्निियम, 1962 ;1962 का 50द्ध की धरा 3 की उप-धरा ;1द्ध द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उक्त भूमि में उपयोग के अध्किार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती हैऋ
कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितब( है, उस तारीख से जिसको, भारत के राजपत्रा में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधरण जनता को उपलब्ध् करा दी जाती हैं, इक्कीस दिन के अन्दर, भूमि के भीतर पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने हेतु उपयोग के अध्किार के अर्जन के लिए, श्री उमाकांत त्रिापाठी, सक्षम प्राध्किारी, इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, ;पाइपलाइन डिवीजनद्ध, सुबेदारगंज, पो.ओ. : पीपलगाँव, जिला : इलाहाबाद, पिन-211012, राज्य : उत्तर प्रदेश को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा।
अनुसूची
तहसील : सालेमपुर जिला देवरिया राज्य : उत्तर प्रदेश
मौजा/ग्राम सर्वे/ब्लाक/सं. ;प्लॉट सं.द्ध सब-डीव-सं. क्षेत्रापफल
हेक्टेयर आरे वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6
दानौर 1066 00 16 56
तप्पा : भाटनी 1065 00 00 54
1067 00 04 23
1076 00 00 36
1075 00 04 23
1074 00 00 36
1073 00 00 36
1084 00 00 36
1080 00 00 36
1087 00 00 36
1078 00 16 74
1079 00 08 37
964 00 07 38
1077 00 00 36
965 00 13 31
963 00 00 69
962 00 06 66
961 00 02 66
960 00 00 36
966 00 00 36
885 (चकरोड) 00 00 76
4300 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
876 00 06 48
875 00 05 76
874 00 18 54
870(चकरोड) 00 00 77
864(चकरोड) 00 00 36
861 00 00 36
866 00 09 27
865 00 11 70
855 00 03 28
854 00 04 52
852 00 06 25
851 00 00 36
848(चकरोड) 00 00 63
846 00 06 57
845 00 07 18
844 00 13 32
843 00 05 02
842 00 04 68
835 00 08 46
836 00 07 20
834 00 00 36
833(चकरोड) 00 00 63
832 00 14 58
829 00 00 37
828 00 00 36
सवरेजी 1245 00 00 36
तप्पा : भाटनी 1242 00 00 38
1241 00 03 71
1238 00 18 03
1237(चकरोड) 00 00 68
1234 00 09 25
1232 00 00 36
1226 00 01 54
1225 00 00 59
1224 00 04 95
1227 00 00 52
1223 00 02 02
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4301
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1222 00 08 39
1163 00 09 41
1162 00 00 62
1161 00 17 22
1159 00 03 95
1157 00 00 87
1153 00 00 36
1158 00 02 41
1149 00 02 58
1152 00 02 95
1151 00 00 36
1150 00 06 58
1146 00 02 11
1145 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 52
1143 00 05 48
1142 00 03 27
1139 00 07 19
1140 00 02 60
1102 00 08 92
1103 00 17 04
1101 00 00 88
919 (रास्ता) 00 01 50
542 00 00 36
528 00 10 45
530 00 04 58
581 00 18 74
537 00 00 36
531 00 00 36
536 00 02 78
532 00 07 05
535 00 01 17
533 00 14 10
521 00 01 61
520 00 10 24
519 00 00 67
496 (चकरोड) 00 01 254302 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
467 00 00 27
462 (चकरोड) 00 00 17
460 00 06 85
461 00 00 91
459 00 10 51
458 00 02 67
453 00 04 71
454 00 08 08
451 00 03 79
450 00 00 90
446 00 00 36
445 (रास्ता) 00 00 74
414 00 21 89
412 00 06 04
411 00 03 25
410 00 02 87
302 (चकरोड) 00 01 21
106 00 01 72
105 00 00 36
107 00 00 36
77 00 11 55
75 00 00 36
781606 00 02 71
76 00 04 92
78 00 18 72
73 (चकरोड) 00 00 69
781623 00 00 36
60 00 01 60
61 00 00 36
62 00 06 57
63 00 00 36
65 00 01 40
64 00 00 36
66 00 08 06
48 00 00 36
47 00 10 59
44 (चकरोड) 00 00 60
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4303
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
30 00 05 01
29 00 02 27
28 00 03 62
भरहे चौरा 1309 (चकरोड) 00 01 03
तप्पा : घाटी 1305 00 00 90
1303 00 15 50
1300 00 07 39
1299 00 00 11
1301 00 02 17
1288 00 00 36
1290 00 05 89
1289 00 09 34
1285 00 00 36
1284 00 08 26
1283 00 06 68
1282 (चकरोड) 00 00 99
1278 00 03 15
1279 (चकरोड) 00 00 72
1281 00 02 67
1280 00 05 55
1274 (चकरोड) 00 00 68
350 00 00 28
351 00 07 24
353 00 14 07
352 00 03 97
354 (चकरोड) 00 00 90
359 00 02 95
355 00 11 03
356 00 03 35
345 (चकरोड) 00 00 75
344 00 06 11
341 (चकरोड) 00 00 74
340 00 06 49
333 00 05 21
316 (चकरोड) 00 00 53
204 00 00 36
4304 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
202 00 00 55
चन्दौली 87 (चकरोड) 00 00 59
तप्पा : घाटी 83 00 14 96
59 00 03 44
82 v 00 09 02
81 00 00 36
80 00 03 65
79 00 00 69
98 (चकरोड) 00 00 44
77 00 04 04
78 00 14 72
71 c 00 01 47
71 v 00 00 36
69 c 00 12 50
69 v 00 00 36
43 (रास्ता) 00 00 77
6 00 19 79
3 00 12 10
4 00 00 99
1 c 00 04 98
1 v 00 12 64
उसका 1021 00 01 98
तप्पा : घाटी 1020 00 10 08
1019 00 02 35
1018 00 12 60
1017 00 00 36
996 (चकरोड) 00 00 90
993 00 07 02
997 00 01 44
985 (चकरोड) 00 00 42
983 00 17 64
984 00 37 31
979 (चकरोड) 00 00 72
894 00 00 36
902 00 03 51
909 00 00 36
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4305
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
910 00 00 36
872 00 04 86
870 00 12 60
871 00 00 54
868 00 08 59
867 00 10 24
866 00 10 80
864 00 10 08
बहेरा डाबेर 615 00 07 25
तप्पा : घाटी 613 00 10 93
610 00 01 54
609 00 00 36
611 00 08 89
607 (चकरोड) 00 00 72
546 00 20 34
557 00 02 31
556 00 01 93
555 00 09 77
560 00 00 64
554 00 13 18
553 00 02 68
542 (चकरोड) 00 00 54
521 00 02 28
522 00 00 36
520 00 06 97
519 00 00 19
518 00 01 84
517 00 02 50
515 00 10 98
516 00 03 16
514 00 06 48
512 00 13 36
508 00 13 70
507 00 00 36
तेनुआ 305 00 01 19
तप्पा : घाटी 304 00 06 96
4306 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
302 00 07 83
301 00 03 96
300 00 02 10
284 (रोेड) 00 00 71
283 00 00 36
282 00 06 70
281 00 04 95
280 00 09 83
279 00 02 58
267 (चकरोड) 00 00 58
258 00 06 21
256 00 00 36
259 00 04 10
261 00 01 20
262 00 05 64
263 00 19 80
228 00 05 72
227 00 07 08
226 00 07 02
225 00 03 50
218 00 01 30
224 00 01 74
223 00 04 88
222 00 00 41
220 00 03 29
221 00 03 24
3 00 02 88
जीज्ञा दीक्षीत 599 (रोेड) 00 00 67
तप्पा : घाटी 600 00 06 15
598 (चकरोड) 00 01 15
597 00 19 01
596 00 18 45
595 00 02 38
568 (चकरोड) 00 00 67
560 00 01 15
559 00 09 04
553 (चकरोड) 00 00 65
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4307
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
551 00 07 31
550 00 04 81
548 (चकरोड) 00 00 63
482 00 04 59
483 00 09 99
479 00 05 49
478 (चकरोड) 00 00 63
476 00 00 36
475 00 15 39
472 (चकरोड) 00 00 63
466 00 18 95
463 (चकरोड) 00 00 72
462 00 11 65
455 00 19 35
454 00 04 88
453 00 00 36
339 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 55
328 00 00 36
327 00 13 82
326 00 19 35
325 00 00 36
मीश्रौली दीक्षीत 1055 00 13 59
तप्पा : घाटी 1058 00 08 89
1061 00 05 96
1062 00 05 54
1064 00 07 31
1065 00 02 25
1066 00 00 81
1025 (रोेड) 00 05 76
1010&1239 00 01 16
1010&1238 00 00 99
1010&1240 00 04 65
1007 (चकरोड) 00 00 53
1005 00 02 85
1006 00 06 49
1004 00 03 78
985 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 02 70
4308 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
903 00 07 74
904 00 00 36
908 00 06 88
909 00 00 36
913 00 07 06
910 00 03 23
912 00 06 56
918 00 00 36
919 00 04 38
911 00 03 96
595 00 03 82
920 00 00 36
420-1232 (चकरोड) 00 00 63
420 00 23 29
419 00 01 43
421 00 05 72
422 (चकरोड) 00 00 70
423 00 06 00
424 00 12 35
427 (चकरोड) 00 00 63
431 00 15 48
430 00 00 41
435 00 17 64
437 (चकरोड) 00 00 54
441 00 06 45
442 00 07 89
446 00 07 38
447 (चकरोड) 00 00 63
457 00 17 28
459 00 05 72
460 00 00 44
461 00 00 36
मीश्रौली बैद 67 00 01 08
तप्पा : घाटी 73 00 00 27
69 00 10 21
68 00 14 85
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4309
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
67 (चकरोड) 00 00 72
64 00 11 75
65 00 00 43
63 00 05 89
छोटी गंदक नदी 00 02 75
बीरसींगपूर 67 (नदी) 00 13 23
तप्पा : बरसीपार 68 00 04 50
87 00 02 16
91 00 01 23
90 00 02 95
89 00 05 31
88 00 01 87
85 00 00 18
83 00 00 54
92 00 00 36
82 00 31 14
80 (चकरोड) 00 00 36
79 00 00 36
81 00 14 09
47 (रोेड) 00 00 67
42 00 15 93
44 (चकरोड) 00 00 90
24 00 13 77
27 00 14 87
28 00 05 47
14 00 22 32
11 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 63
10 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 63
5 00 22 32
3 00 04 41
2 00 22 32
परसौनी 96 00 00 41
तप्पा : बरसीपार 95 00 12 42
जीरासो 395 00 01 26
तप्पा : बरसीपार 396 00 07 00
397 00 00 36
4310 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
393 00 12 24
388 (चकरोड) 00 00 54
377 00 18 81
378 (चकरोड) 00 00 54
366 00 10 30
369 00 02 00
367 00 00 36
368 00 11 29
358 (चकरोड) 00 00 72
350 00 07 58
343 (चकरोड) 00 01 03
334 00 00 82
339 00 14 58
340 (चकरोड) 00 00 63
342 00 00 58
341 00 14 58
103 (रोेड) 00 00 72
69 00 07 02
63 00 13 86
62 00 22 68
49 00 17 82
44 00 07 06
43 00 05 40
42 00 03 12
पीपरा देवराज 142 00 00 68
तप्पा : बरसीपार 141 00 06 12
136 00 07 56
135 00 08 64
134 00 07 83
133 00 07 92
132 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 54
102 00 13 59
103 00 05 76
115 00 00 36
104 00 04 80
106 (चकरोड) 00 01 30
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4311
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
107 00 09 02
108 00 00 36
चकरोड 00 00 54
94 00 16 20
91 00 00 86
90 00 19 98
चकरोड 00 00 54
चकरोड 00 00 54
69 00 05 49
68 00 02 52
67 00 00 36
62 00 09 57
63 00 05 83
60 (चकरोड) 00 00 82
59 00 09 00
68 (चकरोड) 00 00 81
बसदेव चक 128 (रोेड) 00 01 13
तप्पा : साथीयाव 126 00 00 36
109 00 08 82
108 00 00 96
110 00 06 57
111 00 00 84
112 00 00 36
113 00 05 94
114 00 03 06
115 00 02 22
116 00 00 36
107 (चकरोड) 00 00 98
105 00 01 53
106 00 01 54
97 (चकरोड) 00 00 45
91 00 06 15
90 00 00 36
92 00 02 55
93 00 03 70
94 00 03 33
4312 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
12 (चकरोड) 00 00 63
11 (चकरोड) 00 00 63
55 00 04 05
54 (चकरोड) 00 01 19
56 00 00 36
53 00 07 97
52 00 02 04
49 00 01 53
50 00 06 56
47 00 03 28
46 00 03 15
45 00 06 30
44 (चकरोड) 00 00 36
43 (चकरोड) 00 00 36
अमवा 463 (चकरोड) 00 00 62
तप्पा : साथीयाव 464 00 01 83
462 00 08 37
461 00 12 60
458 (चकरोड) 00 01 26
455 00 02 70
452 00 03 42
453 00 02 01
451 00 09 00
449 00 25 11
448 00 08 19
447 00 09 36
446 (चकरोड) 00 00 54
445 00 04 27
443 00 05 31
442 00 00 36
440 00 14 72
441 00 01 72
439 00 01 53
433 (केनाल) 00 06 48
259 00 03 87
258 00 16 02
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4313
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
255 00 00 36
248 00 00 36
109 (चकरोड) 00 01 08
510 (चकरोड) 00 00 36
110 00 14 58
108 00 14 18
107 (चकरोड) 00 00 54
87 00 05 94
89 00 02 72
90 00 00 36
88 00 04 14
92 00 00 36
86 00 11 70
85 00 01 02
84 00 00 36
83 (चकरोड) 00 00 54
82 00 15 03
80 00 07 92
79 00 12 24
76 00 16 20
47 (चकरोड) 00 00 45
75 00 00 36
39 00 00 36
25 (चकरोड) 00 00 54
24 00 05 04
23 00 04 50
22 00 02 70
38 00 00 36
20 00 21 96
21 00 02 16
19 (चकरोड) 00 00 54
2 00 00 36
1 00 14 31
पीपरा सुकला 293 00 01 11
तप्पा : साथीयाव 292 (चकरोड) 00 01 89
290 00 16 92
4314 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
287 00 08 03
288 00 00 36
286 00 09 81
257 (चकरोड) 00 00 81
248 00 41 40
247 (चकरोड) 00 00 34
244 00 00 36
207 (रोेड) 00 01 66
122 (चकरोड) 00 00 59
121 00 19 44
113 (चकरोड) 00 00 63
83 00 03 36
82 00 24 32
81 00 00 36
78 00 00 36
79 (चकरोड) 00 02 43
74 00 06 50
72 00 32 85
88 (नाला) 00 01 98
अचौला 292 00 05 63
तप्पा : साथीयाव 293 00 05 02
302 (चकरोड) 00 00 42
303 00 03 15
291 (चकरोड) 00 01 10
266 00 00 36
267 00 01 24
268 (चकरोड) 00 00 34
273 00 13 77
271 00 04 25
272 00 05 39
270 00 05 28
276 00 09 00
250 (चकरोड) 00 00 72
233 00 00 36
231 00 05 55
232 00 00 36
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4315
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
229 00 00 83
228 00 02 52
227 00 02 10
226 00 00 36
परासीया करकाथी 477 (चकरोड) 00 00 72
तप्पा : साथीयाव 490 00 03 51
489 00 09 00
488 (चकरोड) 00 00 81
487 00 01 24
486 00 10 62
485 (चकरोड) 00 00 81
481 00 00 49
483 (चकरोड) 00 00 36
484 00 11 70
499 (केनाल) 00 14 58
838 00 04 72
833 00 10 71
834 00 00 36
830 00 00 36
832 00 18 18
835 00 11 88
826 00 00 60
825 (रोेड) 00 00 90
629 00 06 30
511 (चकरोड) 00 00 72
510 00 01 19
508 00 02 32
509 00 07 02
507 00 10 26
506&909 00 08 64
825 (चकरोड) 00 00 66
506 00 06 02
505 00 01 36
504 00 01 28
444 00 00 39
4316 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
441 00 06 30
440 00 12 06
439 00 01 71
438 00 00 36
437 (रोेड) 00 01 17
436 (रोेड) 00 02 43
46 00 00 36
45 00 06 48
44 (रोेड) 00 01 03
43 00 13 05
42 00 00 88
40 (चकरोड) 00 00 91
41 00 04 52
37 00 04 50
36 00 09 96
34 (चकरोड) 00 00 49
33 00 02 87
[पफा. सं. आर-25011/23/2013-ओआर-I]
पवन वुफमार, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 5th August, 2013
S.O. 1624.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited in Tehsil Salempur, Dist. Deoria in the State of Uttar Pradesh for 'Siwan to Baitalpur Pipeline' for the transportation of Petroleum Product;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land, to Shri Umakant Tripathi B.A.S. & Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited. (Pipelines Division), Subedargunj, P.O: Pipalgaon, District: Allahabad, Pin – 211012, State: Uttar Pradesh.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4317SCHEDULE
Tehsil : Salempur Dist. : Deoria State : Uttar Pradesh
Mouja / Village Survey/BlockNo. Sub-Div-No. Area
Hectare Are Sq.mtr.
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
DANAUR 1066 00 16 56
Tappa : Bhatni 1065 00 00 54
1067 00 04 23
1076 00 00 36
1075 00 04 23
1074 00 00 36
1073 00 00 36
1084 00 00 36
1080 00 00 36
1087 00 00 36
1078 00 16 74
1079 00 08 37
964 00 07 38
1077 00 00 36
965 00 13 31
963 00 00 69
962 00 06 66
961 00 02 66
960 00 00 36
966 00 00 36
885(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 76
878 00 00 74 876 00 06 48 875 00 05 76 874 00 18 54
870(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 77
864(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 36
861 00 00 36 866 00 09 27 865 00 11 70 855 00 03 28 854 00 04 52 852 00 06 25 851 00 00 36
848(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
846 00 06 57 845 00 07 18 844 00 13 324318 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
836 00 07 20 834 00 00 36
833(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
832 00 14 58 829 00 00 37 828 00 00 36 1245 00 00 36
SAVREJI
Tappa : Bhatni 1242 00 00 38
1241 00 03 71
1238 00 18 03
1237(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 68
1234 00 09 25 1232 00 00 36 1226 00 01 54 1225 00 00 59 1224 00 04 95 1227 00 00 52 1223 00 02 02 1221 00 03 36 1222 00 08 39 1163 00 09 41 1162 00 00 62 1161 00 17 22 1159 00 03 95 1157 00 00 87 1153 00 00 36 1158 00 02 41 1149 00 02 58 1152 00 02 95 1151 00 00 36 1150 00 06 58 1146 00 02 11
1145(CART TRACK) 00 00 52
1143 00 05 48 1142 00 03 27 1139 00 07 19 1140 00 02 60 1102 00 08 92 1103 00 17 04 1101 00 00 88
919(ROAD) 00 01 50
542 00 00 36 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4319 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
531 00 00 36 536 00 02 78 532 00 07 05 535 00 01 17 533 00 14 10 521 00 01 61 520 00 10 24 519 00 00 67 500 00 02 69
496(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 25
467 00 00 27
462(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 17
460 00 06 85 461 00 00 91 459 00 10 51 458 00 02 67 453 00 04 71 454 00 08 08 451 00 03 79 450 00 00 90 446 00 00 36
445(ROAD) 00 00 74
414 00 21 89 412 00 06 04 411 00 03 25 410 00 02 87
302(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 21
106 00 01 72 105 00 00 36 107 00 00 36 77 00 11 55 75 00 00 36 78/1606 00 02 71 76 00 04 92 78 00 18 72
73(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 69
78/1623 00 00 36 60 00 01 60 61 00 00 36 62 00 06 57 63 00 00 36 65 00 01 404320 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
44(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 60
30 00 05 01 29 00 02 27 28 00 03 62
BHARHE 1309 (CHAK ROAD) 00 01 03
CHOURA 1305 00 00 90
Tappa : Ghati 1303 00 15 50
1300 00 07 39
1299 00 00 11
1301 00 02 17
1288 00 00 36
1290 00 05 89
1289 00 09 34
1285 00 00 36
1284 00 08 26
1283 00 06 68
1282(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 99
1278 00 03 15
1279(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 72
1281 00 02 67 1280 00 05 55
1274(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 68
350 00 00 28 351 00 07 24 353 00 14 07 352 00 03 97
354(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 90
359 00 02 95 355 00 11 03 356 00 03 35
345(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 75
344 00 06 11
341(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 74
340 00 06 49 333 00 05 21
316(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 53
204 00 00 36 203 00 11 74 202 00 00 55
CHANDOULI 87(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 59
Tappa : Ghati 83 00 14 96
59 00 03 44
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4321
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
98(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 44
77 00 04 04
78 00 14 72
71B 00 01 47
71A 00 00 36
69B 00 12 50
69A 00 00 36
43(ROAD) 00 00 77
6 00 19 79
3 00 12 10
4 00 00 99
1B 00 04 98
1A 00 12 64
USKA 1021 00 01 98
Tappa : Ghati 1020 00 10 08
1019 00 02 35
1018 00 12 60
1017 00 00 36
996(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 90
993 00 07 02 997 00 01 44
985(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 42
983 00 17 64 984 00 37 31
979(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 72
894 00 00 36
902 00 03 51
909 00 00 36
901 00 10 26
910 00 00 36
872 00 04 86
870 00 12 60
871 00 00 54
868 00 08 59
867 00 10 24
866 00 10 80
864 00 10 08
BEHRA DABER 615 00 07 25
Tappa : Ghati 613 00 10 93
610 00 01 54
609 00 00 36
611 00 08 89
4322 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
555 00 09 77 560 00 00 64 554 00 13 18 553 00 02 68
542(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 54
521 00 02 28
522 00 00 36
520 00 06 97
519 00 00 19
518 00 01 84
517 00 02 50
515 00 10 98
516 00 03 16
514 00 06 48
512 00 13 36
508 00 13 70
507 00 00 36
TENUA 305 00 01 19
Tappa : Ghati 304 00 06 96
303 00 02 95
302 00 07 83
301 00 03 96
300 00 02 10
284(ROAD) 00 00 71
283 00 00 36 282 00 06 70 281 00 04 95 280 00 09 83 279 00 02 58
267(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 58
258 00 06 21 256 00 00 36 259 00 04 10 261 00 01 20 262 00 05 64 263 00 19 80 228 00 05 72 227 00 07 08 226 00 07 02 225 00 03 50 218 00 01 30 224 00 01 74[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4323 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
3 00 02 88 JIGNA DIKSIT 599(ROAD) 00 00 67 Tappa : Ghati 600 00 06 15
598(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 15
597 00 19 01 596 00 18 45 595 00 02 38
568(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 67
560 00 01 15 559 00 09 04
553(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 65
551 00 07 31 550 00 04 81
548(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
482 00 04 59 483 00 09 99 479 00 05 49
478(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
476 00 00 36 475 00 15 39
472(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
466 00 18 95
463(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 72
462 00 11 65 455 00 19 35 454 00 04 88 453 00 00 36
339(CART TRAK) 00 01 55
328 00 00 36
327 00 13 82
326 00 19 35
325 00 00 36
MISHROULI DIKSIT Tappa : Ghati 1055 00 13 59
1058 00 08 89
1061 00 05 96
1062 00 05 54
1064 00 07 31
1065 00 02 25
1066 00 00 81
1025(ROAD) 00 05 76
1010-1239 00 01 16 1010-1238 00 00 99 1010-1240 00 04 65
1007(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 53
1005 00 02 85 1006 00 06 494324 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1004 00 03 78
985(CART TRACK) 00 02 70
903 00 07 74 904 00 00 36 908 00 06 88 909 00 00 36 913 00 07 06 910 00 03 23 912 00 06 56 918 00 00 36 919 00 04 38 911 00 03 96 595 00 03 82 920 00 00 36
420-1232(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
420 00 23 29 419 00 01 43 421 00 05 72
422(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 70
423 00 06 00 424 00 12 35
427(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
431 00 15 48 430 00 00 41 435 00 17 64
437(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 54
441 00 06 45 442 00 07 89 446 00 07 38
447(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
457 00 17 28
459 00 05 72
460 00 00 44
461 00 00 36
MISHROULI BAID Tappa : Ghati 67 00 01 08
73 00 00 27
69 00 10 21
68 00 14 85
70 00 00 30
67(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 72
64 00 11 75 65 00 00 43 63 00 05 89
CHHOTI GANDAK RIVER 00 02 75
BIRSINGHPUR 67(RIVER) 00 13 23
Tappa:Barsipar 68 00 04 50[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4325 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
87 00 02 16 91 00 01 23 90 00 02 95 89 00 05 31 88 00 01 87 85 00 00 18 83 00 00 54 92 00 00 36 82 00 31 14
80(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 36
79 00 00 36 81 00 14 09 47(ROAD) 00 00 67 42 00 15 93
44(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 90
24 00 13 77 27 00 14 87 28 00 05 47 14 00 22 32
11(CART TRACK) 00 00 63
10(CART TRACK) 00 00 63
5 00 22 32 3 00 04 41 2 00 22 32 96 00 00 41
PARSOUNI
Tappa:Barsipar 95 00 12 42
JIRASO 395 00 01 26
Tappa:Barsipar 396 00 07 00
397 00 00 36
394 00 06 27
393 00 12 24
388(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 54
377 00 18 81
378(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 54
366 00 10 30 369 00 02 00 367 00 00 36 368 00 11 29
358(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 72
350 00 07 58
343(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 03
334 00 00 82 339 00 14 584326 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
103(ROAD) 00 00 72
69 00 07 02
63 00 13 86
62 00 22 68
49 00 17 82
44 00 07 06
43 00 05 40
42 00 03 12
PIPARA DEVRAJ 142 00 00 68
141 00 06 12
Tappa:Barsipar 136 00 07 56
135 00 08 64
134 00 07 83
133 00 07 92
132(CART TRACK) 00 00 54
102 00 13 59 103 00 05 76 115 00 00 36 104 00 04 80
106(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 30
105 00 00 96
107 00 09 02
108 00 00 36
CHAK ROAD 00 00 54
94 00 16 20
91 00 00 86
90 00 19 98
CHAK ROAD 00 00 54
CHAK ROAD 00 00 54
69 00 05 49
68 00 02 52
67 00 00 36
62 00 09 57
63 00 05 83
60(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 82
59 00 09 00
68(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 81
BASDEV CHAK 128(ROAD) 00 01 13
126 00 00 36 Tappa:
109 00 08 82 Sathiyav
108 00 00 96 110 00 06 57[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4327 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
115 00 02 22 116 00 00 36
107(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 98
105 00 01 53 106 00 01 54
97(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 45
91 00 06 15 90 00 00 36 92 00 02 55 93 00 03 70 94 00 03 33 95 00 00 36
12(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
11(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
55 00 04 05
54(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 19
56 00 00 36 53 00 07 97 52 00 02 04 49 00 01 53 50 00 06 56 47 00 03 28 46 00 03 15 45 00 06 30
44(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 36
43(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 36
AMUVA 463(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 62
464 00 01 83 Tappa:
462 00 08 37 Sathiyav
461 00 12 60
458(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 26
455 00 02 70 452 00 03 42 453 00 02 01 451 00 09 00 449 00 25 11 448 00 08 19 447 00 09 36
446(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 54
445 00 04 27 443 00 05 31 442 00 00 36 440 00 14 724328 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
259 00 03 87 258 00 16 02 256 00 01 45 255 00 00 36 248 00 00 36
109(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 08
510(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 36
110 00 14 58 108 00 14 18
107(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 54
87 00 05 94 89 00 02 72 90 00 00 36 88 00 04 14 92 00 00 36 86 00 11 70 85 00 01 02 84 00 00 36
83(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 54
82 00 15 03 80 00 07 92 79 00 12 24 76 00 16 20
47(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 45
75 00 00 36 39 00 00 36
25(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 54
24 00 05 04 23 00 04 50 22 00 02 70 38 00 00 36 20 00 21 96 21 00 02 16
19(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 54
2 00 00 36
1 00 14 31 PIPRA 293 00 01 11 SHUKLA 292(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 89
290 00 16 92 Tappa:
291 00 00 36 Sathiyav
287 00 08 03 288 00 00 36 286 00 09 81
257(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 81
248 00 41 40
247(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 34
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4329 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)244 00 00 36
207(ROAD) 00 01 66
122(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 59
121 00 19 44
113(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 63
83 00 03 36 82 00 24 32 81 00 00 36 78 00 00 36
79(CHAK ROAD) 00 02 43
74 00 06 50
72 00 32 85
88(NALA) 00 01 98
ACHAULA 292 00 05 63
293 00 05 02
Tappa:
Sathiyav 302(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 42
303 00 03 15
291(CHAK ROAD) 00 01 10
266 00 00 36 267 00 01 24
268(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 34
273 00 13 77 271 00 04 25 272 00 05 39 270 00 05 28 276 00 09 00
250(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 72
233 00 00 36 231 00 05 55 232 00 00 36 230 00 04 68 229 00 00 83 228 00 02 52 227 00 02 10 226 00 00 36
PARASIA 477(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 72
490 00 03 51 KARAKATHI
489 00 09 00 Tappa:
Sathiyav 488(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 81
487 00 01 24 486 00 10 62
485(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 81
481 00 00 49
483(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 36
484 00 11 704330 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
499(CANAL) 00 14 58
838 00 04 72 833 00 10 71 834 00 00 36 830 00 00 36 832 00 18 18 835 00 11 88 826 00 00 60
825(ROAD) 00 00 90
629 00 06 30
511(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 72
510 00 01 19 508 00 02 32 509 00 07 02 507 00 10 26 506-909 00 08 64
825(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 66
506 00 06 02 505 00 01 36 504 00 01 28 444 00 00 39 443 00 00 36 442 00 09 35 441 00 06 30 440 00 12 06 439 00 01 71 438 00 00 36
437(ROAD) 00 01 17
436(ROAD) 00 02 43
46 00 00 36 45 00 06 48 44(ROAD) 00 01 03 43 00 13 05 42 00 00 88
40(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 91
41 00 04 52 37 00 04 50 36 00 09 96
34(CHAK ROAD) 00 00 49
33 00 02 87
[F. No. R-25011/23/2013-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4331ubZ fnYyh] 5 vxLr] 2013
का.आ. 1625.—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksd fgr esa ;g vko";d gS fd iVuk ls eksfrgkjh vkSj csrkyiqj rd isVksfy;e inkFkks ds ifjogu gsrq ftyk floku] jkT; fcgkj esa bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg, A
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko";d izrhr gksrk gS fd ml Hkwfe esa ftlds Hkhrj mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS vkSj tks bl vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa of.kZr gS] mi;ksx dk vtZu fd;k tk,(
vr%] vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] isVksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbUl Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu vf/kfu;e] 1962 1962 dk 50 dh /kkjk 3 dh mi&/kkjk 1 kjk iznk "kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] mDr Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu djus ds vius vk"k; dh ?kks'k.kk djrh gS(
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwph esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks] Hkkjr ds jkti= esa ;Fkk izdkf"kr bl vf/klwpuk dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gaS] bDdhl fnu ds vUnj] Hkwfe ds Hkhrj ikbiykbu fcNk, tkus gsrq mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds vtZu ds fy,] Jh v:.k dqekj k] fc-iz-ls- o lke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs"ku fyfeVsM] ikbiykbu fMohtu iVuk] iks-vks- syok] flikjk] ftyk iVuk] fiu % 800020] fcgkj dks fyf[kr :i eas vkksi Hkst ldsxkA
अनुसूची
जिला : सिवान
राज्य : बिहार
मौजा/ग्राम सर्वे/ब्लाक/सं. ;प्लोट सं.द्ध सब-डीव-सं. क्षेत्रापफल
हेक्टेयर आरे वर्ग मीटर
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Nhrksyh dyka 2674 00 38 11
Fkkuk uacj&114 2621 00 00 20
2622 00 00 20
2623 00 00 20
2624 00 00 20
2625 00 00 20
2672 00 05 08
2626 00 04 64
2662 00 19 43
2671 00 21 70
2670 00 02 66
2669 00 01 47
2681 00 02 61
2668 00 06 16
2666 00 07 65
2665 00 02 19
2664 00 02 28
2663 00 12 15
2463 jkLrk 00 01 12
2685 00 02 71
4332 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2748 00 02 10 2747 00 01 79 2749 00 06 89 2746 00 00 20 2755 00 01 97 2754 00 16 20 2753 00 00 94 2759 00 06 72 3467 00 08 14 2933 00 02 24 2932 00 02 30 2931 00 07 34 2930 00 16 00 2774 00 00 20 2773 00 00 20 2929 00 00 88 2927 00 02 62 2925 00 00 57 2924 00 00 20 2926 00 02 00 2779 00 09 51 2783 00 05 82 2784 00 05 38 2785 00 01 83 2786 00 00 20 2823 00 06 14 2822 00 03 62 2817 00 16 99 2815 00 18 86 2813 00 05 68 2807 00 00 20 2805 00 05 35 2806 00 04 79 2798 00 02 53 2803 00 06 16 2804 00 00 20 2802 00 09 88 2272 00 09 36[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4333 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
2270 00 13 41
2267 00 08 16
2266 00 00 20
2256 00 06 22
2265 00 04 18
2382 00 14 56
2383&jkLrk 00 01 29
2385 00 12 49
2201 00 11 85
2200 00 24 85
2199 00 01 87
2211 00 04 92
2210 00 07 00
2208 00 00 20
2213 00 00 20
2209 00 03 73
2214 00 04 76
2215 00 02 84
2216 00 00 20
2219 00 00 87
2220 00 01 90
2107 00 00 20
2109 00 00 20
2110 00 00 20
2111 00 00 71
2218 00 01 45
2221 00 08 45
2108 00 01 18
2222 00 05 17
2223 00 00 77
2226 00 06 55
2224 00 06 87
2095&jkLrk 00 01 13
iqjUnziwj 55&jkLrk 00 02 45
Fkkuk uacj&115 6 00 09 10
7 00 00 20
8 00 02 43
10 00 03 06
4334 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
9 00 00 20
1 00 27 88
lFkokj 1385 00 06 14
Fkkuk uacj&89 1387 00 17 66
1388 00 03 74
1432 00 00 20
1431 00 01 36
1389 00 08 89
1430 00 02 96
1429 00 01 79
1165 00 00 20
1428 00 10 11
1426 00 03 81
1427 00 00 20
1425 00 00 33
1189 00 07 38
1188 00 00 20
1190 00 00 34
1191 00 02 90
1187 00 00 20
1195 00 04 33
1193 00 01 36
1194 00 04 60
1201 00 00 57
1196 00 00 20
1197 00 00 35
1198 00 03 12
1200 00 02 50
1202 00 00 20
1203 00 00 20
1199 00 02 87
1206 00 06 11
1207 00 01 27
1211 00 01 59
1210 00 00 74
1213 00 01 40
1212 00 00 67
1217 00 00 20
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4335
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1216 00 00 93
1214 00 01 43
1215 00 00 20
1209 00 05 30
1226 00 04 22
1229 00 00 81
1230 00 00 20
1235 00 00 20
1227 00 01 52
1228 00 04 40
1249 00 02 08
1248 00 07 11
1245 00 00 20
1246 00 00 20
1247 00 09 55
1255 00 00 20
168 00 00 20
169 00 00 20
165 00 02 18
147 00 03 52
146 00 00 20
151 00 01 31
150 00 02 82
149 00 02 65
148 00 01 57
152 00 03 73
1461619 jkLrk 00 02 37
153 00 00 20
chjrh Vksyk 61&jkLrk 00 02 62
Fkkuk uacj&88 210 00 00 20
209 00 00 20
211 00 01 90
214 00 16 96
213 00 01 13
212 00 00 20
215 00 00 20
234 00 00 20
235 00 05 54
4336 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
236 00 03 24
237 00 02 31
238 00 01 67
239 00 01 73
240 00 02 71
233 00 00 96
339 00 03 02
338 00 00 20
331 00 00 20
330 00 00 20
329 00 00 20
328 00 00 20
327 00 00 20
326 00 00 20
340 00 02 03
341 00 01 61
342 00 03 55
343 00 06 60
318440 00 00 59
317 00 02 19
316 00 00 20
307&ukyk 00 00 59
306&ukyk 00 04 13
305&ukyk 00 00 53
HkhFkh 217 00 04 30
Fkkuk uacj&86 216 00 00 20
214 00 06 76
207&jkLrk 00 01 23
198 00 03 73
199 00 00 20
200 00 00 40
197 00 05 12
201 00 00 96
192 00 10 10
191 00 04 34
189 00 02 54
188 00 02 32
182 00 03 78
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4337
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
179 00 04 43
178 00 05 86
177 00 00 20
170 00 00 65
184 00 07 16
183 00 00 20
185 00 09 47
156 dPpk jkLrk 00 02 52
279 00 14 21
286 00 01 41
285 00 01 92
287 00 02 00
292 00 18 95
350&dPpk jkLrk 00 00 59
351 00 43 44
349 00 03 21
348 00 01 64
346 00 00 25
345 00 00 20
352 00 00 20
356 00 00 56
359 00 00 85
360 00 00 20
357 00 01 80
358 00 00 52
71 00 01 58
70 00 01 93
67 00 01 25
68 00 01 39
69 00 00 39
66 dPpk jkLrk 00 01 21
64 00 02 15
65 00 02 62
78 00 01 58
63 00 00 84
62 00 01 19
61 00 01 14
60&fQYM psuy 00 00 97
4338 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
52 00 00 20
59 00 05 06
58 00 00 61
57 00 06 17
56 00 00 76
48 dPpk jkLrk 00 09 13
604 00 07 86
483111 00 20 12
605 00 00 20
606 00 00 20
608 00 00 20
609 00 04 43
610 00 00 20
617 00 00 20
483110 00 06 92
626 00 05 16
625 00 09 62
624 00 00 20
627 00 22 80
687 00 01 97
649 00 00 20
650 00 00 20
651 00 00 99
652 00 01 90
653 00 00 20
654 00 05 16
686 00 00 20
685 00 13 71
684 00 02 31
679 00 00 25
681 00 04 39
680 00 00 20
683 00 00 20
682 00 08 44
2160 00 00 20
2161 00 03 02
2162 00 00 20
2164 00 01 25
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4339
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2163 00 10 18
2165 00 05 14
2171 00 00 20
2210 00 00 69
2211 00 00 20
2147 00 00 20
2209 00 05 59
2213 00 07 99
2214 00 00 32
2208 00 01 54
2215 00 01 51
2216 00 02 51
2217 00 02 44
2219 00 00 20
2206 00 00 46
2205 00 02 97
2218 00 01 84
2204 00 03 82
2203 00 04 64
2202 00 00 38
2201 00 08 28
2200 00 04 57
2199 00 04 99
2198 00 00 61
2197 00 00 20
2237 00 00 34
2236 00 00 20
2196 00 08 30
2195 00 07 89
2240 00 00 20
2241 00 01 06
2194 fQYM psuy 00 01 70
2193 00 02 93
2280fQYM psuy 00 00 86
nw/kjk 4090 00 00 43
Fkkuk uacj&73 4089 00 00 20
4092 00 02 68
4093 00 09 73
4340 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
4094 00 11 09 4095 00 08 32 4099 00 00 28 4098 00 06 85 3137 00 00 97 3133 00 06 49 3132 00 00 61 3134 00 00 20 3131 00 02 50 3130 00 00 20 3124 00 09 33 3122 00 03 42 3121 00 01 15 3120 00 00 20 3119 00 05 93 3116 00 02 03 3117 00 04 80 3118 00 05 60 3106 00 00 37 3159 00 09 30 3160 00 07 99 2391 00 01 28 3098 00 00 20 2390 00 04 75 3161 00 00 73 2392 00 00 30 2389 00 10 84 2394 00 00 20 2388 00 03 44 2406 00 01 44 2407 00 07 67 2408 00 09 68 2410 00 07 36 2377 00 00 20 2376 00 06 13 2375 00 00 79 2374 00 07 18 2372 00 04 89[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4341 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
2371 00 00 20 2373 00 00 75 2468 00 00 20 24884986 00 05 63 2488 00 06 70 2485 00 00 20 2489 00 00 50 2491 00 07 01 2484 00 01 44 2492 00 00 50 2493 00 13 70 2483 00 02 67 2240 Msbu 00 00 83 2503&jkLrk 00 00 84 2227 Msbu 00 01 26 2510 00 06 03 2522 00 00 20 2520 00 00 20 2509 00 02 51 2511 00 07 11 2508 00 00 20 2512 00 04 04 2152 00 01 21 2151 00 04 54 2147 00 04 89 2148 00 03 77 2146 00 04 33 2119 00 00 48 2118 00 03 97 2120 00 05 08 2116 00 00 90 2117 00 00 20 2114 00 00 20 2115 00 06 23 2124 00 01 15 2145 00 01 81 2121 00 00 20 2125 00 04 124342 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
2126 00 00 20 2028 00 00 20 2029 00 00 20 2026 00 00 20 2023 00 02 91 2024 00 01 95 2025 00 00 84 2022 00 01 09 2021 00 07 19 2020 00 04 21 2031 00 06 17 2019 00 00 26 2018 00 05 82 2017 00 11 13 1970 00 00 64 1971 00 02 64 1972 00 07 10 2016 00 02 66 2014 00 00 20 1975 00 02 61 1976 00 08 03 1984 00 03 94 1985 00 07 99 1986 00 01 92 1987 00 00 92 1988 00 00 20 1981 00 00 20 1989 00 07 73 1990 00 03 32 1992 00 00 20 1991 00 02 18 1825 00 00 20 18244982 00 03 37 1824 00 06 28 1823 00 02 76 1775 00 01 02 1822 00 01 76 1819 00 01 07[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4343 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1821 00 00 97
1820 00 04 92
1779 00 00 20
1780 00 00 20
1777 00 00 32
1816 00 00 96
1784 00 04 10
1785 00 04 25
1786 00 00 95
1801 00 00 63
1802 00 00 20
1800 00 10 40
1799 00 01 65
1798 00 00 20
17994991 00 04 93
1650&/keM 00 06 29
[koliqj 399 00 04 62
Fkkuk uacj&74 400 00 04 96
401 00 00 20
406 00 04 55
397 00 06 75
409 00 00 20
396 00 04 46
395 00 00 20
410 00 00 27
394 00 01 35
393 00 00 20
376 00 06 39
377 00 09 43
378 00 07 64
379 00 01 89
383 00 01 80
382 00 05 62
381 00 01 23
388 00 00 20
384 00 06 75
46 00 00 88
47 00 12 08
4344 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
49 00 01 44
48 00 11 15
57 00 00 20
78jkLrk 00 03 15
109 00 09 96
99 00 06 60
106 00 01 31
100 00 00 38
105 00 06 91
103 00 02 20
104 00 03 88
93 00 04 09
123 00 03 13
122 00 00 20
92 00 00 20
124 00 04 97
125 00 02 22
91 00 08 92
90 00 03 83
89 00 00 20
85 00 00 20
86 00 05 75
87 00 06 66
88 00 11 45
4003 00 00 61
4 00 03 87
fldkfV;k 1257 00 03 12
Fkkuk uacj&63 1258 00 05 60
1259 00 13 36
1301 00 01 03
1300 00 00 20
1267 00 00 29
1268 00 02 74
1270 00 04 64
1271 00 01 81
1272 00 01 56
1274 00 03 98
1297 00 00 20
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4345
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1275 00 07 85
1276 00 07 18
1281 00 03 29
1282 00 00 20
1283 00 00 20
1278 00 01 17
1280 00 00 61
1279 00 03 36
2025 00 07 11
2022 00 03 45
2024 00 02 13
2021 00 00 32
2023 00 03 13
2018 00 04 44
2004 00 03 55
2006 00 00 20
2003 00 00 20
tykyiqj 197 00 01 69
Fkkuk uacj&62 196 00 04 83
195 00 12 22
194 00 03 74
218 00 00 76
193 jkLrk 00 03 85
182 00 07 20
192 00 00 20
184 00 03 75
183 00 02 66
185 00 02 06
176 00 00 27
179 00 00 56
177 00 03 42
178 00 04 20
161 00 16 41
170 00 00 20
162 00 04 85
164 00 01 67
163 00 01 09
149 00 00 20
4346 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
145 00 06 08
144 00 00 20
140 00 00 20
147 00 00 62
146 00 08 24
82 00 00 20
139 00 00 35
83 00 08 28
84 00 02 73
81 00 06 78
85 00 00 20
89 00 02 83
88 00 00 20
80 00 01 93
93 00 01 82
92 00 00 59
90 00 00 20
79 00 00 20
94 00 02 96
95 00 00 20
96 00 03 53
36 00 08 62
35 00 11 03
34 00 00 20
33 00 01 58
32 00 07 84
2 00 01 51
30 00 08 06
5 00 01 37
4 00 00 20
6 00 04 87
7 00 00 03
8 00 04 59
9 00 02 13
11 00 02 12
Mqejk 2877 00 05 59
Fkkuk uacj&58 2873 00 00 20
2883 00 11 79
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4347
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2884 00 00 20
2882 00 08 71
2881 00 00 20
2891 00 03 70
2890 00 05 14
2889 00 00 20
2896 00 00 20
2892 00 00 66
2893 00 03 10
2894 00 02 05
2895 00 02 75
2842 00 07 35
2942 00 14 63
2941 00 00 20
2943 00 13 21
2945jkLrk 00 01 60
2958 00 16 43
2957 00 00 20
2970 00 07 39
2971 00 00 20
2969 00 10 15
2972 00 00 70
2968 00 00 31
2974 00 05 30
2975 00 02 88
2976 00 08 46
2978 00 00 20
2977 00 01 75
2985 dPpk jkLrk 00 01 94
3003 00 00 20
3002 00 12 06
3001 00 00 38
2994 00 07 89
2993 00 00 20
2991 00 00 20
2990 00 03 98
2989 00 01 80
2995 00 00 61
4348 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2996 00 00 20 2988 00 02 47 2987 00 00 20 2997 00 06 56 3068 00 07 59 2998 00 00 32 3062 00 00 20 3067 00 05 62 3065 00 00 20 3070 00 03 01 3069 00 00 20 3071 00 03 41 3076 00 02 53 3077 00 00 20 3072 00 00 20 3075 00 19 21 3074 00 00 41 3082 00 01 23 3084 00 00 61 3083 00 06 15 3086 00 00 20 3092jkLrk 00 01 68 3111jkLrk 00 00 95 3112jkLrk 00 01 45 4594 00 01 58 4501 00 07 04 4502 00 00 20 3377 00 08 34 4499 00 00 20 3378 00 09 82 4498 00 00 20 4495 00 00 20 3375 00 00 20 3382 00 00 20 3379 00 06 68 3380 00 05 70 3381 00 06 47 3383 00 00 20[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4349 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
3384 00 00 20 3385 00 00 20 3387 00 00 64 3386 00 07 05 3385 00 00 20 3346 00 03 26 3388 00 03 13 3345 00 03 14 3222 00 02 36 3321 00 16 44 3320 00 00 20 3323 00 00 20 3325 00 01 15 3326 00 03 34 3318 00 04 35 3317 00 16 01 3333 00 00 71 3334 00 01 18 3335 00 01 49 3521 00 03 74 3519 00 04 77 3518 00 03 87 3524 00 03 03 3523 00 02 22 3530 00 03 65 3526 00 00 42 3527 00 00 30 3528 00 00 34 3529 00 02 72 3602 00 06 66 3603 00 02 55 3606 00 02 57 3611 00 02 65 3620 00 03 01 3616 00 03 38 3613 00 00 20 3614 00 00 20 3615 00 00 204350 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
3618 00 00 20 3617 00 03 46 3625 00 00 20 3627 00 00 20 3626 00 12 23 3680 00 05 80 3647 00 00 20 3679 00 08 08 3648 00 00 20 3678 00 01 75 3677 00 08 62 3676 00 05 98 3675 00 00 20 3673 00 00 20 3672 00 06 52 3791 00 17 46 3796 00 00 20 3795 00 00 20 3794 00 00 20 3792 00 03 50 3793 00 00 20 3818 00 04 80 3817 00 07 86 3816 00 00 20 3890 00 07 75 3889 00 00 20 3885 00 18 36 3886 00 00 20 3891 00 03 19 3892 00 00 20 3884 00 17 08 5392 00 06 16 5389 00 01 96 5391 00 05 59 5393 00 00 20 5390 00 01 41 5394 00 01 28 5395 00 04 65[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4351 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
5398 00 03 98 5397 00 00 41 5399 00 00 20 5400 00 00 20 5469 00 00 39 5468 00 00 20 5467 00 00 20 5466 00 00 20 5470 00 01 85 5471 00 00 92 5474 00 00 20 5472 00 03 96 5473 00 02 19 5462 00 03 99 5461 00 04 55 5460 00 00 20 5459 00 03 84 5475 00 00 20 5457 00 02 95 5456 00 00 20 5458 00 07 99 5477 00 02 55 5452 00 03 23 5478 00 00 26 5755 00 01 09 5881 00 07 56 5487jkLrk 00 01 80 5497 00 10 29 5496 00 00 20 5495 00 00 20 5494 00 11 95 5497 00 06 37
[पफा. सं. आर-25011/15/2013-ओआर-I]
पवन वुफमार, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 5th August, 2013
S.O. 1625.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited in Dist. Siwan in the State of Bihar for 'Patna to Motihari and Baitalpur Pipeline' for the transportation of Petroleum Product;
4352 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land, to Shri Arun Kumar Jha B.A.S. & Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited. (Pipelines Division) P.O. Dhelwan, Sipara, Dist. Patna (Bihar.) Pin – 800020.
SCHEDULE
Dist.: Siwan
State : Bihar
Mouja / Village Survey/Block No. Sub-Div.-No. Area
Hectare Are Sq.mtr.
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
CHHITAULI KALAN 2674 00 38 11
Thana No. 114 2621 00 00 20
2622 00 00 20
2623 00 00 20
2624 00 00 20
2625 00 00 20
2672 00 05 08
2626 00 04 64
2662 00 19 43
2671 00 21 70
2670 00 02 66
2669 00 01 47
2681 00 02 61
2668 00 06 16
2666 00 07 65
2665 00 02 19
2664 00 02 28
2663 00 12 15
2463 (Road) 00 01 12
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4353
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2685 00 02 71 2748 00 02 10 2747 00 01 79 2749 00 06 89 2746 00 00 20 2755 00 01 97 2754 00 16 20 2753 00 00 94 2759 00 06 72 3467 00 08 14 2933 00 02 24 2932 00 02 30 2931 00 07 34 2930 00 16 00 2774 00 00 20 2773 00 00 20 2929 00 00 88 2927 00 02 62 2925 00 00 57 2924 00 00 20 2926 00 02 00 2779 00 09 51 2783 00 05 82 2784 00 05 38 2785 00 01 83 2786 00 00 20 2823 00 06 14 2822 00 03 62 2817 00 16 99 2815 00 18 864354 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
2813 00 05 68 2807 00 00 20 2805 00 05 35 2806 00 04 79 2798 00 02 53 2803 00 06 16 2804 00 00 20 2802 00 09 88 2272 00 09 36 2270 00 13 41 2267 00 08 16 2266 00 00 20 2256 00 06 22 2265 00 04 18 2382 00 14 56 2383-Road 00 01 29 2385 00 12 49 2201 00 11 85 2200 00 24 85 2199 00 01 87 2211 00 04 92 2210 00 07 00 2208 00 00 20 2213 00 00 20 2209 00 03 73 2214 00 04 76 2215 00 02 84 2216 00 00 20[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4355 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
2107 00 00 20
2109 00 00 20
2110 00 00 20
2111 00 00 71
2218 00 01 45
2221 00 08 45
2108 00 01 18
2222 00 05 17
2223 00 00 77
2226 00 06 55
2224 00 06 87
2095-Road 00 01 13
PURANDRPUR 55-Road 00 02 45
Thana No-115 6 00 09 10
7 00 00 20
8 00 02 43
10 00 03 06
9 00 00 20
1 00 27 88
SATHWAR 1385 00 06 14
Thana No-89 1387 00 17 66
1388 00 03 74
1432 00 00 20
1431 00 01 36
1389 00 08 89
1430 00 02 96
1429 00 01 79
1165 00 00 20
1428 00 10 11
1426 00 03 81
4356 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1425 00 00 33 1189 00 07 38 1188 00 00 20 1190 00 00 34 1191 00 02 90 1187 00 00 20 1195 00 04 33 1193 00 01 36 1194 00 04 60 1201 00 00 57 1196 00 00 20 1197 00 00 35 1198 00 03 12 1200 00 02 50 1202 00 00 20 1203 00 00 20 1199 00 02 87 1206 00 06 11 1207 00 01 27 1211 00 01 59 1210 00 00 74 1213 00 01 40 1212 00 00 67 1217 00 00 20 1216 00 00 93 1214 00 01 43 1215 00 00 20 1209 00 05 30 1226 00 04 22[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4357 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1230 00 00 20
1235 00 00 20
1227 00 01 52
1228 00 04 40
1249 00 02 08
1248 00 07 11
1245 00 00 20
1246 00 00 20
1247 00 09 55
1255 00 00 20
168 00 00 20
169 00 00 20
165 00 02 18
147 00 03 52
146 00 00 20
151 00 01 31
150 00 02 82
149 00 02 65
148 00 01 57
152 00 03 73
146/1619 (ROAD) 00 02 37
153 00 00 20
BIRTI TOLA 61-Road 00 02 62
Thana No-88 210 00 00 20
209 00 00 20
211 00 01 90
214 00 16 96
213 00 01 13
4358 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
234 00 00 20
235 00 05 54
236 00 03 24
237 00 02 31
238 00 01 67
239 00 01 73
240 00 02 71
233 00 00 96
339 00 03 02
338 00 00 20
331 00 00 20
330 00 00 20
329 00 00 20
328 00 00 20
327 00 00 20
326 00 00 20
340 00 02 03
341 00 01 61
342 00 03 55
343 00 06 60
318/440 00 00 59
317 00 02 19
316 00 00 20
307-Nala 00 00 59
306-Nala 00 04 13
305-Nala 00 00 53
BHITHI 217 00 04 30
Thana No-86 216 00 00 20
214 00 06 76
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4359
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
198 00 03 73 199 00 00 20 200 00 00 40 197 00 05 12 201 00 00 96 192 00 10 10 191 00 04 34 189 00 02 54 188 00 02 32 182 00 03 78 179 00 04 43 178 00 05 86 177 00 00 20 170 00 00 65 184 00 07 16 183 00 00 20 185 00 09 47 156 (Cart track) 00 02 52 279 00 14 21 286 00 01 41 285 00 01 92 287 00 02 00 292 00 18 95 350-Cart track 00 00 59 351 00 43 44 349 00 03 21 348 00 01 64 346 00 00 25 345 00 00 204360 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
356 00 00 56 359 00 00 85 360 00 00 20 357 00 01 80 358 00 00 52 71 00 01 58 70 00 01 93 67 00 01 25 68 00 01 39 69 00 00 39 66 (Cart track) 00 01 21 64 00 02 15 65 00 02 62 78 00 01 58 63 00 00 84 62 00 01 19 61 00 01 14 60-Field Channel 00 00 97 52 00 00 20 59 00 05 06 58 00 00 61 57 00 06 17 56 00 00 76 48 (Cart Track) 00 09 13 604 00 07 86 48/3111 00 20 12 605 00 00 20 606 00 00 20[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4361 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
610 00 00 20 617 00 00 20 48/3110 00 06 92 626 00 05 16 625 00 09 62 624 00 00 20 627 00 22 80 687 00 01 97 649 00 00 20 650 00 00 20 651 00 00 99 652 00 01 90 653 00 00 20 654 00 05 16 686 00 00 20 685 00 13 71 684 00 02 31 679 00 00 25 681 00 04 39 680 00 00 20 683 00 00 20 682 00 08 44 2160 00 00 20
2161
00 03 02
2162 00 00 20
2164 00 01 25
2163 00 10 18
2165 00 05 14
4362 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2211 00 00 20 2147 00 00 20 2209 00 05 59 2213 00 07 99 2214 00 00 32 2208 00 01 54 2215 00 01 51 2216 00 02 51 2217 00 02 44 2219 00 00 20 2206 00 00 46 2205 00 02 97 2218 00 01 84 2204 00 03 82 2203 00 04 64 2202 00 00 38 2201 00 08 28 2200 00 04 57 2199 00 04 99 2198 00 00 61 2197 00 00 20 2237 00 00 34 2236 00 00 20 2196 00 08 30 2195 00 07 89 2240 00 00 20 2241 00 01 06 2194 (Field Channel) 00 01 70
2280-Field Channel 00 00 86[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4363 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
DUDHRA 4090 00 00 43
Thana No-73 4089 00 00 20
4092 00 02 68
4093 00 09 73
4094 00 11 09
4095 00 08 32
4099 00 00 28
4098 00 06 85
3137 00 00 97
3133 00 06 49
3132 00 00 61
3134 00 00 20
3131 00 02 50
3130 00 00 20
3124 00 09 33
3122 00 03 42
3121 00 01 15
3120 00 00 20
3119 00 05 93
3116 00 02 03
3117 00 04 80
3118 00 05 60
3106 00 00 37
3159 00 09 30
3160 00 07 99
2391 00 01 28
3098 00 00 20
2390 00 04 75
4364 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2389 00 10 84 2394 00 00 20 2388 00 03 44 2406 00 01 44 2407 00 07 67 2408 00 09 68 2410 00 07 36 2377 00 00 20 2376 00 06 13 2375 00 00 79 2374 00 07 18 2372 00 04 89 2371 00 00 20 2373 00 00 75 2468 00 00 20 2488/4986 00 05 63 2488 00 06 70 2485 00 00 20 2489 00 00 50 2491 00 07 01 2484 00 01 44 2492 00 00 50 2493 00 13 70 2483 00 02 67 2240 (DRAIN) 00 00 83 2503-ROAD 00 00 84 2227 (DRAIN) 00 01 26 2510 00 06 03[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4365 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
2509 00 02 51 2511 00 07 11 2508 00 00 20 2512 00 04 04 2152 00 01 21 2151 00 04 54 2147 00 04 89 2148 00 03 77 2146 00 04 33 2119 00 00 48 2118 00 03 97 2120 00 05 08 2116 00 00 90 2117 00 00 20 2114 00 00 20 2115 00 06 23 2124 00 01 15 2145 00 01 81 2121 00 00 20 2125 00 04 12 2126 00 00 20 2028 00 00 20 2029 00 00 20 2026 00 00 20 2023 00 02 91 2024 00 01 95 2025 00 00 84 2022 00 01 094366 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
2031 00 06 17 2019 00 00 26 2018 00 05 82 2017 00 11 13 1970 00 00 64 1971 00 02 64 1972 00 07 10 2016 00 02 66 2014 00 00 20 1975 00 02 61 1976 00 08 03 1984 00 03 94 1985 00 07 99 1986 00 01 92 1987 00 00 92 1988 00 00 20 1981 00 00 20 1989 00 07 73 1990 00 03 32 1992 00 00 20 1991 00 02 18 1825 00 00 20 1824/4982 00 03 37 1824 00 06 28
1823
00 02 76
1775 00 01 02
1822 00 01 76
1819 00 01 07
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4367
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1779 00 00 20
1780 00 00 20
1777 00 00 32
1816 00 00 96
1784 00 04 10
1785 00 04 25
1786 00 00 95
1801 00 00 63
1802 00 00 20
1800 00 10 40
1799 00 01 65
1798 00 00 20
1799/4991 00 04 93
1650-Dhamai Nadi 00 06 29
KHAWASPUR 399 00 04 62
Thana No. -74 400 00 04 96
401 00 00 20
406 00 04 55
397 00 06 75
409 00 00 20
396 00 04 46
395 00 00 20
410 00 00 27
394 00 01 35
393 00 00 20
376 00 06 39
377 00 09 43
378 00 07 64
383 00 01 804368 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
382 00 05 62 381 00 01 23 388 00 00 20 384 00 06 75 46 00 00 88 47 00 12 08 49 00 01 44 48 00 11 15 57 00 00 20 78 (ROAD) 00 03 15 109 00 09 96 99 00 06 60 106 00 01 31 100 00 00 38 105 00 06 91 103 00 02 20 104 00 03 88 93 00 04 09 123 00 03 13 122 00 00 20 92 00 00 20 124 00 04 97 125 00 02 22 91 00 08 92 90 00 03 83 89 00 00 20 85 00 00 20 86 00 05 75
88 00 11 45[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4369 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
4003 00 00 61
4 00 03 87
SIKATIA 1257 00 03 12
Thana No. -63 1258 00 05 60
1259 00 13 36
1301 00 01 03
1300 00 00 20
1267 00 00 29
1268 00 02 74
1270 00 04 64
1271 00 01 81
1272 00 01 56
1274 00 03 98
1297 00 00 20
1275 00 07 85
1276 00 07 18
1281 00 03 29
1282 00 00 20
1283 00 00 20
1278 00 01 17
1280 00 00 61
1279 00 03 36
2025 00 07 11
2022 00 03 45
2024 00 02 13
2021 00 00 32
2023 00 03 13
2018 00 04 44
4370 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2003 00 00 20
JALALPUR 197 00 01 69
Thana No. -62 196 00 04 83
195 00 12 22
194 00 03 74
218 00 00 76
193(ROAD) 00 03 85
182 00 07 20
192 00 00 20
184 00 03 75
183 00 02 66
185 00 02 06
176 00 00 27
179 00 00 56
177 00 03 42
178 00 04 20
161 00 16 41
170 00 00 20
162 00 04 85
164 00 01 67
163 00 01 09
149 00 00 20
145 00 06 08
144 00 00 20
140 00 00 20
147 00 00 62
146 00 08 24
82 00 00 20
83 00 08 28[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4371 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
84 00 02 73
81 00 06 78
85 00 00 20
89 00 02 83
88 00 00 20
80 00 01 93
93 00 01 82
92 00 00 59
90 00 00 20
79 00 00 20
94 00 02 96
95 00 00 20
96 00 03 53
36 00 08 62
35 00 11 03
34 00 00 20
33 00 01 58
32 00 07 84
2 00 01 51
30 00 08 06
5 00 01 37
4 00 00 20
6 00 04 87
7 00 00 03
8 00 04 59
9 00 02 13
11 00 02 12
DUMRA 2877 00 05 59
Thana No. -85 2873 00 00 20
4372 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2882 00 08 71
2881 00 00 20
2891 00 03 70
2890 00 05 14
2889 00 00 20
2896 00 00 20
2892 00 00 66
2893 00 03 10
2894 00 02 05
2895 00 02 75
2842 00 07 35
2942 00 14 63
2941 00 00 20
2943 00 13 21
2945(ROAD) 00 01 60
2958 00 16 43
2957 00 00 20
2970 00 07 39
2971 00 00 20
2969 00 10 15
2972 00 00 70
` 2968 00 00 31
2974 00 05 30
2975 00 02 88
2976 00 08 46
2978 00 00 20
2977 00 01 75
2985(CART TRACK) 00 01 94
3003 00 00 20
3002 00 12 06
3001 00 00 38
2994 00 07 89
2993 00 00 20
2991 00 00 20
2990 00 03 98
2989 00 01 80
2995 00 00 61
2996 00 00 20
2988 00 02 47
2987 00 00 20
2997 00 06 56
3068 00 07 59
2998 00 00 32
3062 00 00 20
3067 00 05 62
3065 00 00 20
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4373
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
3076 00 02 53 3077 00 00 20 3072 00 00 20 3075 00 19 21 3074 00 00 41 3082 00 01 23 3084 00 00 61 3083 00 06 15 3086 00 00 20 3092(ROAD) 00 01 68 3111(ROAD) 00 00 95 3112(ROAD) 00 01 45 4594 00 01 58 4501 00 07 04 4502 00 00 20 3377 00 08 34 4499 00 00 20 3378 00 09 82 4498 00 00 20 4495 00 00 20 3375 00 00 20 3382 00 00 20 3379 00 06 68 3380 00 05 70 3381 00 06 47 3383 00 00 20 3384 00 00 20 3385 00 00 20 3387 00 00 64 3386 00 07 05 3385 00 00 20 3346 00 03 26 3388 00 03 13 3345 00 03 14 3222 00 02 36 3321 00 16 44 3320 00 00 20 3323 00 00 20 3325 00 01 15 3326 00 03 34 3318 00 04 35 3317 00 16 01 3333 00 00 71 3334 00 01 18 3335 00 01 49 3521 00 03 74 3519 00 04 77 3518 00 03 87 3524 00 03 03 3523 00 02 224374 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
3530 00 03 65 3526 00 00 42 3527 00 00 30 3528 00 00 34 3529 00 02 72 3602 00 06 66 3603 00 02 55 3606 00 02 57 3611 00 02 65 3620 00 03 01 3616 00 03 38 3613 00 00 20 3614 00 00 20 3615 00 00 20 3618 00 00 20 3617 00 03 46 3625 00 00 20 3627 00 00 20 3626 00 12 23 3680 00 05 80 3647 00 00 20 3679 00 08 08 3648 00 00 20 3678 00 01 75 3677 00 08 62 3676 00 05 98 3675 00 00 20 3673 00 00 20 3672 00 06 52 3791 00 17 46 3796 00 00 20 3795 00 00 20 3794 00 00 20 3792 00 03 50 3793 00 00 20 3818 00 04 80 3817 00 07 86 3816 00 00 20 3890 00 07 75 3889 00 00 20 3885 00 18 36 3886 00 00 20 3891 00 03 19[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4375 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
3892 00 00 20 3884 00 17 08 5392 00 06 16 5389 00 01 96 5391 00 05 59 5393 00 00 20 5390 00 01 41 5394 00 01 28 5395 00 04 65 5398 00 03 98 5397 00 00 41 5399 00 00 20 5400 00 00 20 5469 00 00 39 5468 00 00 20 5467 00 00 20 5466 00 00 20 5470 00 01 85 5471 00 00 92 5474 00 00 20 5472 00 03 96 5473 00 02 19 5462 00 03 99 5461 00 04 55 5460 00 00 20 5459 00 03 84 5475 00 00 20 5457 00 02 95 5456 00 00 20 5458 00 07 99 5477 00 02 55 5452 00 03 23 5478 00 00 26 5755 00 01 09 5881 00 07 56 5487(ROAD) 00 01 80 5497 00 10 29 5496 00 00 20 5495 00 00 20 5494 00 11 95 5497 00 06 37
[F.No. R-25011/15 /2013-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
4376 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]नई दिल्ली, 5 अगस्त, 2013
का.आ. 1626.—केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसा प्रतीत होता है कि लोकहित में यह आवश्यक है कि पटना से मोतिहारी और बेतालपुर तक पेट्रोलियम पदार्थों के परिवहन हेतु जिला : सिवान, राज्य बिहार में इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ।
और केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में जिसके भीतर उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अध्सिूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में वणत है, उपयोग का अर्जन किया जाएऋ
अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन्स ;भूमि में उपयोग के अध्किार का अर्जनद्ध अध्निियम, 1962 ;1962 का 50द्ध की धरा 3 की उप-धरा ;1द्ध द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उक्त भूमि में उपयोग के अध्किार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती हैऋ
कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितब( है, उस तारीख से जिसको, भारत के राजपत्रा में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधरण जनता को उपलब्ध् करा दी जाती हैं, इक्कीस दिन के अन्दर, भूमि के भीतर पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने हेतु उपयोग के अध्किार के अर्जन के लिए, श्री अरूण कुमार झा, बि.प्र.से. व सक्षम प्राध्किारी इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, ;पाइपलाइन डिवीजनद्ध पटना, पो.ओ. ढेलवा, सिपारा, जिला पटना, पिन : 800020, बिहार को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा।
अनुसूची
जिला : सिवान
राज्य : बिहार
मौजा/ग्राम सर्वे/ब्लाक/सं. ;प्लोट सं.द्ध सब-डिव-सं. क्षेत्रापफल
हेक्टेयर आरे वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6
दहकाई 401 00 03 53
थाना नंबर-231 402 00 00 20
400 00 06 01
397 00 01 84
398 00 07 06
395 (रास्ता) 00 03 57
399 00 00 20
394 00 17 63
393 00 02 32
391 00 04 03
389 00 01 25
390 00 02 79
386 00 09 02
385 00 04 68
384 00 04 57
363 00 03 24
362 00 02 89
339 00 10 18
340 00 08 24
341 00 06 84
341407 00 01 88
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4377
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
265 00 05 02
264 00 00 20
269 00 00 20
270 00 00 20
266 00 04 14
267 00 02 85
268 00 02 13
248 00 00 42
247 00 00 20
244 00 03 47
243 00 00 48
245 00 04 31
242 00 07 93
241 00 00 64
दौन छापरा 288 00 09 02
थाना नंबर-230 286 00 13 43
280 00 01 98
281 00 04 32
282 00 00 20
279 00 17 51
200 (रास्ता) 00 01 40
196 00 01 46
193 00 17 63
194 00 03 17
70 00 00 63
71 00 00 20
69 00 03 16
67 00 02 87
66 00 01 86
65 00 02 10
63 00 04 01
62 00 08 60
59 00 04 04
58 00 04 15
56 00 05 15
57 00 02 21
4378 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
54 00 05 77
मंछा 855 00 01 21
थाना नंबर-225 857 00 05 58
854 00 01 90
853 00 03 36
858 00 00 68
859 00 00 20
851 00 00 20
852 00 02 20
848 00 04 55
849 00 02 42
847 00 00 41
846 00 02 40
844 00 02 86
843 00 00 20
845 00 03 72
842 00 03 69
भदेआ 231 00 03 38
थाना नंबर-226 211 00 00 20
212 00 24 00
209 00 03 45
210 00 00 20
198 00 05 77
199 00 06 70
200 00 08 55
201 00 07 51
183 00 14 99
185 00 00 20
184 00 11 59
178 00 02 01
179 00 00 20
164 00 00 74
177 00 15 27
176 00 00 20
171 00 06 59
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4379
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
169 00 15 09
170 00 00 20
166 00 00 20
168 00 05 46
85 00 03 05
86 00 00 20
167 00 00 54
90 00 03 91
91 00 01 79
92 00 02 36
93 00 03 01
114 00 01 58
113 00 09 63
112 00 00 20
115 00 01 24
110 00 06 10
109 00 02 63
108 00 03 17
107 00 01 24
106 00 00 20
117 00 01 85
118 00 01 28
119 00 02 01
105 00 00 20
104 00 01 59
121 00 14 54
123 00 00 20
122 00 00 20
10 00 00 28
9 00 00 20
उस्टी 540 00 07 54
थाना नंबर-224 541 00 01 55
542 00 00 20
539 00 06 43
538 00 02 86
536 00 12 37
4380 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
531 00 00 48
466 00 11 36
467 00 04 99
460 00 00 46
459 00 03 29
468 00 00 20
4001910 00 00 20
458 00 08 51
456 00 00 47
457 00 00 20
455 00 04 71
454 (रास्ता) 00 04 43
453 00 00 20
320 00 00 20
470 00 00 20
311(रास्ता) 00 00 20
312(रास्ता) 00 01 96
313 00 01 39
314(रास्ता) 00 03 86
317 00 00 20
315 00 06 55
2951931 00 00 20
310 00 00 20
316 00 00 40
291 00 00 20
290 00 02 33
289 00 05 48
288 00 06 61
287 00 04 47
284 00 00 20
286 00 04 61
190 00 00 20
191 00 00 29
192 00 00 61
193 00 01 43
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4381
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
196 00 03 52
199 00 00 20
198 00 02 82
197(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 04 40
200(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 04 14
201(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 42
202 00 00 20
89 00 00 20
88 00 02 06
84 00 04 62
83 00 06 53
78 00 01 74
76 00 00 20
82 00 02 55
81 00 03 40
79 00 07 32
74 00 01 54
72 00 00 20
80 00 11 54
महूअल 1005 00 00 20
थाना नंबर-202 1004 00 06 23
1003 00 06 82
1000 00 00 20
1001 00 00 20
999 00 16 81
992 00 05 93
973 00 08 12
974 00 00 38
975 00 09 02
977 00 00 20
986 00 01 93
981 00 10 71
984 00 00 20
983 00 00 39
982 00 04 99
946 00 11 214382 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
945 00 04 08 940 00 02 06 941 00 00 20 865(रास्ता) 00 01 42 857 00 00 20 858 00 05 89 859 00 06 15 860 00 00 35 861 00 00 20 815 00 02 78 816 00 00 20 814 00 07 32 813 00 07 20 819 00 00 38 823 00 06 10 806 00 00 20 822 00 02 28 805 00 01 90 824 00 01 99 804 00 02 08 801 00 03 87 800 00 03 80 799 00 08 60 798 00 00 97 797 00 00 20 752 00 01 42 793 00 14 50 792 00 01 91 790 00 13 20 787 00 07 13 788 00 01 38 783 00 05 49 784 00 00 20 782 00 00 58 499 00 04 40 780 00 01 19[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4383 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
500 00 06 84 778 00 00 20 501 00 02 30 777 00 00 62 503 00 05 96 510 00 02 80 504 00 00 74 506 00 01 27 505 00 00 20 507 00 03 31 508 00 00 36 509 00 00 20 543 00 05 19 546 00 05 55 545 00 01 01 547 00 06 64 548 00 04 38 497(रास्ता) 00 01 69 483 00 00 00 556 00 00 20 480 00 00 20 479 00 01 38 478 00 01 73 477 00 06 26 475 00 03 30 474 00 02 87 463 00 04 19 452 00 02 12 451 00 01 24 450 00 01 07 449 00 00 65 448 00 00 20 453 00 00 83 454 00 02 17 447 00 03 94 446 00 00 244384 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
441 00 00 96
433 00 00 70
434 00 02 90
432 00 04 14
408 00 00 77
407 00 00 20
409 00 03 13
403 00 08 75
402 00 00 20
4002802 00 00 20
369 00 00 27
401 00 08 40
400 00 03 61
394 00 03 45
393 00 00 20
395 00 06 43
396 00 06 98
397 00 00 20
391 00 00 43
मीराचक 361 00 01 41
थाना नंबर-199 362 00 00 20
367 00 00 20
360 00 02 97
359 00 01 31
358 00 00 71
356 00 03 09
354 00 03 18
355 00 00 20
353 00 06 23
348 00 10 16
210 00 00 20
211 00 00 20
209 00 00 54
207 00 01 20
208 00 05 68
214 00 05 10
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4385
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
ehjk pd Fkkuk uacj& 199 215 00 04 46
204 00 00 20
216 00 06 16
217 00 09 59
218 00 00 20
219 00 07 77
220 00 04 70
179jkLrk 00 01 52
189 00 02 17
188 00 00 85
187 00 01 14
186 00 00 78
190 00 00 20
185 00 03 74
184 00 02 01
183 00 00 20
180 00 23 07
38 00 01 68
39 00 05 20
37 00 00 20
36 00 02 02
34 00 02 25
35 00 03 10
मंदरा पाली 1378 00 00 61
थाना नंबर-394 1377 00 22 37
1375 00 09 35
1376 00 13 79
1372 00 08 83
1371 00 04 61
1368 00 00 20
1367 00 05 20
1363 00 00 92
1361 00 03 48
1362 00 02 04
1360 00 02 58
1359 00 00 20
1154 00 00 20
4386 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
enjk ikyh 1155 00 00 87
Fkkuk uacj&394 1156 00 03 83
1157 00 06 64
1160 00 00 27
1159 00 02 43
1158 00 00 39
1164 00 11 04
1165 00 07 33
1175 00 00 29
11751897 00 01 09
1174 00 03 60
1167 00 00 20
1173 00 07 06
1169 00 09 40
1137 00 00 36
1136 00 03 49
1024 00 07 24
1025jkLrk 00 01 89
1028 00 13 33
1032 00 17 53
1034 00 05 51
1033 00 03 47
1036 00 02 20
1037 00 02 09
1040 00 00 90
1039 00 02 91
1045 00 08 50
1044 00 01 94
1043 00 01 20
1046jkLrk 00 02 44
316 00 11 28
317 00 00 20
315 00 09 82
313 00 01 53
322 00 05 07
323 00 01 06
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4387
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
eanjk ikyh 327 00 11 86
Fkkuh uacj&394 328 00 09 70
334 00 00 87
335 00 06 39
337jkLrk 00 01 97
393jkLrk 00 00 20
383 00 09 78
366 00 08 78
382 00 03 09
367 00 10 24
368 00 02 93
369 00 05 11
362 00 06 86
361 00 07 41
357 00 00 20
355 00 11 94
354 00 16 27
349 00 03 16
348 00 02 07
347 00 07 15
346 00 18 27
345 00 03 33
72 00 02 86
71 00 03 80
70 00 02 53
69 00 01 21
68 00 00 78
67 00 00 64
66 00 00 20
64 00 00 20
73 00 13 01
49 00 13 47
50 00 06 10
51 00 03 11
48 00 31 26
41 00 01 83
Fkkuk uacj&394
1984 00 09 274388 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1983 00 06 96 1973 00 03 07 1972 00 00 20 1974 00 09 56 1975 00 03 04 1942 00 14 99 1971 00 00 20 1934 00 06 60 1943 00 00 20 1935 00 03 23 1933 00 01 91 1932 00 13 75 1896 00 07 63 1923 00 00 20 1921 00 00 20 1898 00 00 20 1922 00 00 35 1897 00 03 20 1887 00 06 47 1885 00 02 53 1886 00 08 27 1862 00 00 20 1884 00 01 98 1883 00 00 85 1881 00 00 20 1882 00 01 24 1863 00 02 48 1867 00 02 54 1868 00 00 20 1864 00 05 26 1866jkLrk 00 03 30 946 00 11 07 936 00 00 20 932 00 00 20[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4389 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
eanjkM+yh 422jkLrk 00 04 15
Fkkuk uacj&393 350 00 20 39
380 00 00 20
381 00 04 90
382 00 06 40
394 00 08 52
393 00 01 41
392 00 00 20
391dPpk jkLrk 00 01 66
53 00 03 28
402 00 01 96
408 00 00 31
409 00 00 20
412dPpk jkLrk 00 09 70
52 00 08 23
51 00 05 32
50 00 08 63
49 00 09 28
48 00 03 39
47 00 00 26
44 00 00 20
लहेजी 2571 00 01 75
थाना नंबर-392 2572 00 00 20
2570 00 04 55
2573 00 03 45
2574 00 00 20
2569 00 11 64
2568 00 05 92
2567 00 04 90
2541 00 02 04
2542 00 13 34
2537ukyk 00 01 87
2531 00 07 22
2530 00 00 20
2526 00 14 77
2529 00 11 48
2453 00 07 51
4390 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2552 00 01 40
2450 00 01 92
2449 00 02 18
2448 00 05 32
2447 00 01 49
2454 00 11 99
2446 00 00 20
2445 00 00 20
2444 00 06 39
2443 00 00 20
2455 00 00 20
पूरैना 807 00 00 20
थाना नंबर-383 802 00 04 62
804 00 09 38
803 00 03 05
801 00 04 09
773 Msbu 00 01 44
688 00 00 36
689 00 13 22
692 00 01 28
691 00 00 20
696jkLrk 00 02 33
679 00 02 50
678 00 04 65
677 00 01 14
667 00 02 99
668 00 18 27
660 00 00 20
645 00 11 88
648 00 09 23
647 00 00 20
644 00 06 51
642 00 02 72
639 00 00 20
640 00 00 20
641 00 01 21
578 00 05 96[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4391 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
590 00 00 76
592 00 00 20
591 00 00 68
513 00 00 20
580 00 00 40
579 00 11 78
512 00 09 72
511 00 00 20
510 00 11 11
581 00 00 20
508 00 07 41
509 00 03 52
505 00 04 60
506 00 00 67
490 00 04 35
501 00 00 20
502 00 04 23
504 00 00 96
503 00 01 35
522 ukyk 00 00 84
परारी 767 ukyk 00 01 23
थाना नंबर-384 769 00 00 52
770 00 11 27
331 00 12 33
340 00 00 20
339 00 09 06
338 00 16 46
337 00 12 01
352 00 03 00
315 00 10 14
369 00 00 75
368 00 03 04
314 00 00 20
313 00 00 20
367 00 00 64
366 00 00 20
371 00 01 474392 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
372 00 09 67 373 00 00 20 413 00 01 22 412 00 00 20 375 00 06 63 376 00 02 66 411 00 08 45 410 00 05 52 409 00 01 82 384 00 01 27 408 00 01 19 407 00 00 36 385 00 01 81 386 00 00 20 391 00 02 55 389 00 00 62 390 00 00 88 392 00 02 04 406 00 01 70 393 00 02 31 396 00 01 91 395 00 00 65 394 00 00 20 397 00 15 83 194808 00 00 20 162 00 00 20 161 00 06 45 399 00 00 20 160 00 00 91 159 00 07 96 158 00 04 23 448 00 04 85 113 00 18 48 104 00 01 09 108 00 00 37[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4393 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
106 00 01 76
107 00 00 20
98779 00 10 24
101 00 00 20
102 00 00 20
98778 00 01 28
98 00 00 36
99 00 09 36
100 00 05 94
89 00 02 66
72 00 06 71
69 00 00 74
71 00 05 63
70 00 10 98
46 00 09 54
45 00 00 20
43 00 06 48
44 00 05 39
41 00 00 64
29 00 00 20
30 00 11 06
तेलकाठq 3752 00 03 33
थाना नंबर-390 1199jkLrk 00 01 31
1132 00 05 04
1131 00 14 83
1138 00 02 18
1137 00 11 07
1136 00 00 20
1141 00 02 24
1125 00 00 20
1142 00 09 92
1123 00 23 99
866 00 06 93
867 00 00 20
1119 00 07 73
876 00 16 06
881 00 05 614394 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
876 00 00 45 883 00 00 20 880 00 06 70 895 00 01 13 879 00 02 69 892 00 02 59 893 00 14 01 894 00 01 14 896 00 04 28 897 00 01 65 898 00 00 20 943 00 00 20 900 00 01 61 901 00 00 20 904 00 03 92 899 00 02 48 905 00 01 08 903 00 03 00 906 00 01 14 932 00 05 76 930 00 00 20 931 00 05 49 933 00 00 20 926 00 00 77 934 00 02 00 925 00 07 03 924 00 00 96 920 00 02 13 921 00 04 26 922 00 03 23 923 00 00 76 592 00 00 20 598 00 07 10 597 00 01 86 595 00 02 23 594 00 00 20 480jkLrk 00 02 94 785jkLrk 00 00 20[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4395 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
601 00 00 20
602 00 05 29
614 00 08 83
611 00 00 20
626 00 01 39
625 00 00 20
612 00 00 20
613 00 00 67
610 00 00 20
628 00 01 54
627 00 01 48
623 00 02 20
633 00 03 90
622 00 00 20
632 00 01 92
629 00 00 20
630 00 00 20
631 00 00 20
634 00 01 83
635 00 01 11
636 00 04 17
642 00 00 20
473 00 00 20
639 00 00 20
637 00 01 96
638 00 00 20
640 00 00 20
472 00 08 97
460 00 00 20
471 00 01 20
470 00 13 54
465 00 01 40
469 00 10 53
468 00 04 53
431 00 02 18
430 00 00 97
रफीपूर 1135 00 02 68
थाना नंबर-386 1134 00 07 75
4396 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1133 00 00 25 1127 00 05 01 1128 00 00 20 1126 00 04 36 1111 00 00 20 1125 00 07 08 1113 00 00 20 1124 00 01 28 1122 00 03 33 1123 00 00 51 1121 00 00 20 1120 00 04 91 1119 00 04 02 470 00 00 20 1091 00 01 83 471 00 03 02 472 00 02 51 473 00 01 85 474 00 00 20 481 00 03 17 480 00 07 22 484 00 00 20 479 00 00 20 485 00 01 24 486 00 01 11 491 00 04 60 492 00 01 97 493 00 00 20 490 00 03 47 489 00 02 42 550 00 00 20 488 00 00 20 494 00 01 12 495 00 04 87 496 00 02 34 497 00 03 76[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4397 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
498 00 00 20 505 00 08 85 509 00 00 20 504 00 00 29 510 00 05 89 512 00 01 64 513 00 03 50 514 00 01 45 515 00 00 20 511 00 03 56 516 00 03 91 517 00 00 20 519 00 06 32 520 00 04 92 522 00 04 83 585jkLrk 00 04 48 523 00 03 56 171 00 00 46 170 00 00 20 169 00 05 56 112 00 06 03 111 00 00 20 113 00 15 99 114 00 00 20 96 00 01 33 95 00 00 80 94 00 00 20 76 00 11 01 75 00 00 20 77 00 08 70 78 00 00 20 74 00 13 08 72 00 02 71 73 00 07 79 57 00 02 93 68 00 01 35 58 00 08 274398 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
62 00 00 20 59 00 03 32 60 00 02 56 5 00 10 71 4 00 02 42
[पफा. सं. आर-25011/15/2013-ओआर-I]
पवन वुफमार, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 5th August, 2013
S.O. 1626.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited in Dist. Siwan in the State of Bihar for 'Patna to Motihari and Baitalpur Pipeline' for the transportation of Petroleum Product;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land, to Shri Arun Kumar Jha B.A.S. & Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited. (Pipelines Division), P.O. : Dhelwan, Sipara, Dist. Patna, (Bihar.) Pin-800020.
Encl. : Schedule
SCHEDULE
Dist. : Siwan
State : Bihar
Mouja / Village Survey/BlockNo. Sub-Div-No. Area
Hectare Are Sq.mtr.
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
DAHKAI
401 00 03 53
Thana No. 231 402 00 00 20
400 00 06 01
397 00 01 84
398 00 07 06
395-Road 00 03 57
399 00 00 20
394 00 17 63
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4399
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
389 00 01 25
390 00 02 79
386 00 09 02
385 00 04 68
384 00 04 57
363 00 03 24
362 00 02 89
339 00 10 18
340 00 08 24
341 00 06 84
341/407 00 01 88
261 00 01 38
262 00 03 73
265 00 05 02
264 00 00 20
269 00 00 20
270 00 00 20
266 00 04 14
267 00 02 85
268 00 02 13
248 00 00 42
247 00 00 20
244 00 03 47
243 00 00 48
245 00 04 31
242 00 07 93
241 00 00 64
DAUN CHHAPRA 288 00 09 02
Thana No. 230 286 00 13 43
280 00 01 98
281 00 04 32
282 00 00 20
279 00 17 51
200-Road 00 01 40
196 00 01 46
193 00 17 63
194 00 03 17
70 00 00 63
4400 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
65 00 02 10
63 00 04 01
62 00 08 60
59 00 04 04
58 00 04 15
56 00 05 15
57 00 02 21
55 00 00 20
60 00 00 20
54 00 05 77
MANCHHA 855 00 01 21
Thana No. 225 857 00 05 58
854 00 01 90
853 00 03 36
858 00 00 68
859 00 00 20
851 00 00 20
852 00 02 20
848 00 04 55
849 00 02 42
847 00 00 41
846 00 02 40
844 00 02 86
843 00 00 20
845 00 03 72
842 00 03 69
BHADEA 231 00 03 38
Thana No. 226 211 00 00 20
212 00 24 00
209 00 03 45
210 00 00 20
198 00 05 77
199 00 06 70
200 00 08 55
201 00 07 51
183 00 14 99
185 00 00 20
184 00 11 59
178 00 02 01
179 00 00 20
164 00 00 74
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4401
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
174 00 00 27 172 00 01 16 169 00 15 09 170 00 00 20 166 00 00 20 168 00 05 46 85 00 03 05 86 00 00 20 167 00 00 54 90 00 03 91 91 00 01 79 92 00 02 36 93 00 03 01 114 00 01 58 113 00 09 63 112 00 00 20 115 00 01 24 110 00 06 10 109 00 02 63 108 00 03 17 107 00 01 24 106 00 00 20 117 00 01 85 118 00 01 28 119 00 02 01 105 00 00 20 104 00 01 59 121 00 14 54 123 00 00 20 122 00 00 20 10 00 00 28 9 00 00 20
USTI
540 00 07 54
Thana No. 224 541 00 01 55
542 00 00 20
539 00 06 43
538 00 02 86
536 00 12 37
465 00 00 20
531 00 00 48
466 00 11 36
467 00 04 99
460 00 00 46
4402 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
458 00 08 51
456 00 00 47
457 00 00 20
455 00 04 71
454-Road 00 04 43
453 00 00 20
320 00 00 20
470 00 00 20
311-Road 00 00 20
312-Road 00 01 96
313 00 01 39
314-Road 00 03 86
317 00 00 20
315 00 06 55
295/1931 00 00 20
310 00 00 20
316 00 00 40
291 00 00 20
290 00 02 33
289 00 05 48
288 00 06 61
287 00 04 47
284 00 00 20
286 00 04 61
190 00 00 20
191 00 00 29
192 00 00 61
193 00 01 43
194 00 06 60
195 00 03 68
196 00 03 52
199 00 00 20
198 00 02 82
197-Cart Track 00 04 40
200-Cart Track 00 04 14
201-Cart Track 00 00 42
202 00 00 20
89 00 00 20
88 00 02 06
84 00 04 62
83 00 06 53
78 00 01 74
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4403
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
79 00 07 32
74 00 01 54
72 00 00 20
80 00 11 54
MAHUAL 1005 00 00 20
Thana No. 202 1004 00 06 23
1003 00 06 82
1000 00 00 20
1001 00 00 20
999 00 16 81
992 00 05 93
973 00 08 12
974 00 00 38
975 00 09 02
977 00 00 20
986 00 01 93
981 00 10 71
984 00 00 20
983 00 00 39
982 00 04 99
947 00 06 71
946 00 11 21
945 00 04 08
940 00 02 06
941 00 00 20
865(ROAD) 00 01 42
857 00 00 20 858 00 05 89 859 00 06 15 860 00 00 35 861 00 00 20 815 00 02 78 816 00 00 20 814 00 07 32 813 00 07 20 819 00 00 38 823 00 06 10 806 00 00 20 822 00 02 28 805 00 01 90 824 00 01 99 804 00 02 084404 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
MAHUAL 797 00 00 20
Thana No. 202 752 00 01 42
793 00 14 50
792 00 01 91
790 00 13 20
787 00 07 13
788 00 01 38
783 00 05 49
784 00 00 20
782 00 00 58
499 00 04 40
780 00 01 19
779 00 00 81
500 00 06 84
778 00 00 20
501 00 02 30
777 00 00 62
503 00 05 96
510 00 02 80
504 00 00 74
506 00 01 27
505 00 00 20
507 00 03 31
508 00 00 36
509 00 00 20
543 00 05 19
546 00 05 55
545 00 01 01
547 00 06 64
548 00 04 38
497(ROAD) 00 01 69
483 00 00 00 556 00 00 20 480 00 00 20 479 00 01 38 478 00 01 73 477 00 06 26 475 00 03 30 474 00 02 87 463 00 04 19 452 00 02 12 451 00 01 24[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4405 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
MAHUAL 454 00 02 17
Thana No. 202 447 00 03 94
446 00 00 24
442 00 00 51
441 00 00 96
433 00 00 70
434 00 02 90
432 00 04 14
408 00 00 77
407 00 00 20
409 00 03 13
403 00 08 75
402 00 00 20
400/2802 00 00 20
369 00 00 27
401 00 08 40
400 00 03 61
394 00 03 45
393 00 00 20
395 00 06 43
396 00 06 98
397 00 00 20
391 00 00 43
MIRACHAK 361 00 01 41
Thana No. 199 362 00 00 20
367 00 00 20
360 00 02 97
359 00 01 31
358 00 00 71
356 00 03 09
354 00 03 18
355 00 00 20
353 00 06 23
348 00 10 16
210 00 00 20
211 00 00 20
209 00 00 54
207 00 01 20
208 00 05 68
214 00 05 10
206 00 00 20
215 00 04 46
4406 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
219 00 07 77
220 00 04 70
179(ROAD) 00 01 52
189 00 02 17
188 00 00 85
187 00 01 14
186 00 00 78
190 00 00 20
185 00 03 74
184 00 02 01
183 00 00 20
180 00 23 07
38 00 01 68
39 00 05 20
37 00 00 20
36 00 02 02
34 00 02 25
35 00 03 10
MANDRA PALI 1378 00 00 61
Thana No. 394 1377 00 22 37
1375 00 09 35
1376 00 13 79
1372 00 08 83
1371 00 04 61
1368 00 00 20
1367 00 05 20
1363 00 00 92
1361 00 03 48
1362 00 02 04
1360 00 02 58
1359 00 00 20
1154 00 00 20
1155 00 00 87
1156 00 03 83
1157 00 06 64
1160 00 00 27
1159 00 02 43
1158 00 00 39
1164 00 11 04
1165 00 07 33
1175 00 00 29
1175/1897 00 01 09
1174 00 03 60
1167 00 00 20
1173 00 07 06
1169 00 09 40
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4407
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
MANDRA PALI 1137 00 00 36
Thana No. 394 1136 00 03 49
1024 00 07 24
1025(ROAD) 00 01 89
1028 00 13 33
1032 00 17 53
1034 00 05 51
1033 00 03 47
1036 00 02 20
1037 00 02 09
1040 00 00 90
1039 00 02 91
1045 00 08 50
1044 00 01 94
1043 00 01 20
1046(ROAD) 00 02 44
316 00 11 28
317 00 00 20
315 00 09 82
313 00 01 53
322 00 05 07
323 00 01 06
325 00 03 56
327 00 11 86
328 00 09 70
334 00 00 87
335 00 06 39
337(ROAD) 00 01 97
393(ROAD) 00 00 20
383 00 09 78
366 00 08 78
382 00 03 09
367 00 10 24
368 00 02 93
369 00 05 11
362 00 06 86
361 00 07 41
357 00 00 20
355 00 11 94
354 00 16 27
349 00 03 16
348 00 02 07
347 00 07 15
4408 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
71 00 03 80
70 00 02 53
69 00 01 21
68 00 00 78
67 00 00 64
66 00 00 20
64 00 00 20
73 00 13 01
49 00 13 47
50 00 06 10
51 00 03 11
48 00 31 26
41 00 01 83
MANDARAULI 1985 00 00 20
Thana No. 393 1984 00 09 27
1983 00 06 96
1973 00 03 07
1972 00 00 20
1974 00 09 56
1975 00 03 04
1942 00 14 99
1971 00 00 20
1934 00 06 60
1943 00 00 20
1935 00 03 23
1933 00 01 91
1932 00 13 75
1896 00 07 63
1923 00 00 20
1921 00 00 20
1898 00 00 20
1922 00 00 35
1897 00 03 20
1887 00 06 47
1885 00 02 53
1886 00 08 27
1862 00 00 20
1884 00 01 98
1883 00 00 85
1881 00 00 20
1882 00 01 24
1863 00 02 48
1867 00 02 54
1868 00 00 20
1864 00 05 26
1866(ROAD) 00 03 30
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4409
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
946 00 11 07
936 00 00 20
932 00 00 20
937 00 05 10
931 00 05 95
422(ROAD) 00 04 15
350 00 20 39
380 00 00 20
381 00 04 90
382 00 06 40
394 00 08 52
393 00 01 41
392 00 00 20
391(CART TRACK) 00 01 66
53 00 03 28
402 00 01 96
408 00 00 31
409 00 00 20
412(CART TRACK) 00 09 70
52 00 08 23
51 00 05 32
50 00 08 63
49 00 09 28
48 00 03 39
47 00 00 26
44 00 00 20
LAHEJI 2571 00 01 75
Thana No. 392 2572 00 00 20
2570 00 04 55
2573 00 03 45
2574 00 00 20
2569 00 11 64
2568 00 05 92
2567 00 04 90
2541 00 02 04
2542 00 13 34
2537(NALA) 00 01 87
2531 00 07 22
2530 00 00 20
2526 00 14 77
2529 00 11 48
2453 00 07 51
4410 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2447 00 01 49
2454 00 11 99
2446 00 00 20
2445 00 00 20
2444 00 06 39
2443 00 00 20
2455 00 00 20
PURAINA 807 00 00 20
Thana No. 383 802 00 04 62
804 00 09 38
803 00 03 05
801 00 04 09
773(Drain) 00 01 44
688 00 00 36
689 00 13 22
692 00 01 28
691 00 00 20
696(ROAD) 00 02 33
679 00 02 50
678 00 04 65
677 00 01 14
667 00 02 99
668 00 18 27
660 00 00 20
645 00 11 88
648 00 09 23
647 00 00 20
644 00 06 51
642 00 02 72
639 00 00 20
640 00 00 20
641 00 01 21
643 00 04 37
578 00 05 96
590 00 00 76
592 00 00 20
591 00 00 68
513 00 00 20
580 00 00 40
579 00 11 78
512 00 09 72
511 00 00 20
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4411
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
505 00 04 60
506 00 00 67
490 00 04 35
501 00 00 20
502 00 04 23
504 00 00 96
503 00 01 35
522(NALA) 00 00 84
PARARI 767(NALA) 00 01 23
Thana No. 384 769 00 00 52
770 00 11 27
331 00 12 33
340 00 00 20
339 00 09 06
338 00 16 46
337 00 12 01
352 00 03 00
315 00 10 14
369 00 00 75
368 00 03 04
314 00 00 20
313 00 00 20
367 00 00 64
366 00 00 20
370 00 01 79
371 00 01 47
372 00 09 67
373 00 00 20
413 00 01 22
412 00 00 20
375 00 06 63
376 00 02 66
411 00 08 45
410 00 05 52
409 00 01 82
384 00 01 27
408 00 01 19
407 00 00 36
385 00 01 81
386 00 00 20
391 00 02 55
389 00 00 62
390 00 00 88
4412 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
PARARI 396 00 01 91
Thana No. 384 395 00 00 65
394 00 00 20
397 00 15 83
194/808 00 00 20
162 00 00 20
161 00 06 45
399 00 00 20
160 00 00 91
159 00 07 96
158 00 04 23
448 00 04 85
113 00 18 48
104 00 01 09
108 00 00 37
105 00 05 50
98/780 00 00 20
106 00 01 76
107 00 00 20
98/779 00 10 24
101 00 00 20
102 00 00 20
98/778 00 01 28
98 00 00 36
99 00 09 36
100 00 05 94
89 00 02 66
72 00 06 71
69 00 00 74
71 00 05 63
70 00 10 98
46 00 09 54
45 00 00 20
43 00 06 48
44 00 05 39
41 00 00 64
29 00 00 20
30 00 11 06
TELKATHU 3752 00 03 33
Thana No. 390 1199(ROAD) 00 01 31
1132 00 05 04
1131 00 14 83
1138 00 02 18
1137 00 11 07
1136 00 00 20
1141 00 02 24
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4413
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
TELKATHU 1125 00 00 20
Thana No. 390 1142 00 09 92
1123 00 23 99
866 00 06 93
867 00 00 20
1119 00 07 73
876 00 16 06
882 00 02 02
881 00 05 61
876 00 00 45
883 00 00 20
880 00 06 70
895 00 01 13
879 00 02 69
892 00 02 59
893 00 14 01
894 00 01 14
896 00 04 28
897 00 01 65
898 00 00 20
943 00 00 20
900 00 01 61
901 00 00 20
904 00 03 92
899 00 02 48
905 00 01 08
903 00 03 00
906 00 01 14
932 00 05 76
930 00 00 20
931 00 05 49
933 00 00 20
926 00 00 77
934 00 02 00
925 00 07 03
924 00 00 96
920 00 02 13
921 00 04 26
922 00 03 23
923 00 00 76
592 00 00 20
598 00 07 10
4414 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
TELKATHU 785(ROAD) 00 00 20
Thana No. 390 600 00 00 20
601 00 00 20
602 00 05 29
614 00 08 83
611 00 00 20
626 00 01 39
625 00 00 20
612 00 00 20
613 00 00 67
610 00 00 20
628 00 01 54
627 00 01 48
623 00 02 20
633 00 03 90
622 00 00 20
632 00 01 92
629 00 00 20
630 00 00 20
631 00 00 20
634 00 01 83
635 00 01 11
636 00 04 17
642 00 00 20
473 00 00 20
639 00 00 20
637 00 01 96
638 00 00 20
640 00 00 20
472 00 08 97
460 00 00 20
471 00 01 20
470 00 13 54
465 00 01 40
469 00 10 53
468 00 04 53
431 00 02 18
430 00 00 97
RAFIPUR 1135 00 02 68
Thana No. 386 1134 00 07 75
1133 00 00 25
1127 00 05 01
1125 00 07 08[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4415 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
RAFIPUR 1113 00 00 20
Thana No. 386 1124 00 01 28
1122 00 03 33
1123 00 00 51
1121 00 00 20
1120 00 04 91
1119 00 04 02
470 00 00 20
1091 00 01 83
471 00 03 02
472 00 02 51
473 00 01 85
474 00 00 20
481 00 03 17
480 00 07 22
484 00 00 20
479 00 00 20
485 00 01 24
486 00 01 11
491 00 04 60
492 00 01 97
493 00 00 20
490 00 03 47
489 00 02 42
550 00 00 20
488 00 00 20
494 00 01 12
495 00 04 87
496 00 02 34
497 00 03 76
506 00 02 99
507 00 00 20
498 00 00 20
505 00 08 85
509 00 00 20
504 00 00 29
510 00 05 89
512 00 01 64
513 00 03 50
514 00 01 45
515 00 00 20
511 00 03 56
4416 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
RAFIPUR 522 00 04 83
Thana No. 386 585 (ROAD) 00 04 48
523 00 03 56
171 00 00 46
170 00 00 20
169 00 05 56
112 00 06 03
111 00 00 20
113 00 15 99
114 00 00 20
96 00 01 33
95 00 00 80
94 00 00 20
76 00 11 01
75 00 00 20
77 00 08 70
78 00 00 20
74 00 13 08
72 00 02 71
73 00 07 79
57 00 02 93
68 00 01 35
58 00 08 27
61 00 07 33
62 00 00 20
59 00 03 32
60 00 02 56
5 00 10 71
4 00 02 42
[F. No. R-25011/15/2013-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4417ubZ fnYyh] 5 vxLr] 2013
dk-vk- 1627-—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksd fgr esa ;g vko";d gS fd iVuk ls eksfrgkjh vkSj csrkyiqj rd isVksfy;e inkFkksZ ds ifjogu gsrq ftyk floku] jkT; fcgkj esa bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs"ku fyfeVsM kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg, A
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko";d izrhr gksrk gS fd ml Hkwfe esa ftlds Hkhrj mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS vkSj tks bl vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa of.kZr gS] mi;ksx dk vtZu fd;k tk,(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] iSVksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbUl Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu vf/kfu;e] 1962 1962 dk 50 dh /kkjk 3 dh mi&/kkjk 1 kjk iznk "kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] mDr Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu djus ds vius vk"k; dh ?kks'k.kk djrh gS(
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwph esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks] Hkkjr ds jkti= esa ;Fkk izdkf"kr bl vfklwpuk dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gS] bDdhl fnu ds vUnj] Hkwfe ds Hkhrj ikbiykbu fcNk, tkus gsrq mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds vtZu ds fy,] Jh v:.k dqekj k] fc-iz-ls- o lke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs"ku fyfeVsM] ikbiykbu fMohtu iVuk] iks-vks- syok] flikjk] ftyk iVuk] fiu% 800020] fcgkj dks fyf[kr :i eas vkksi Hkst ldsxkA
अनुसूची
तहसील : सिवान
राज्य : बिहार
मौजा/ग्राम सर्वे/ब्लाक/सं. ;प्लोट सं.द्ध सब-डीव-सं. क्षेत्रापफल
हेक्टेयर आरे वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6
edqaniwj 469 00 00 27
Fkkuk uacj&157 470 00 00 20
468 00 00 91
467 00 01 28
466 00 01 75
462 00 03 93
463 00 00 20
461 00 02 39
460 00 02 46
457 00 00 20
459 00 00 79
458 00 04 78
454 00 00 20
450 dPpk jkLrk 00 09 50
36 00 05 38
37 00 00 29
35 00 21 10
40 00 01 40
34 00 09 45
41 00 00 20
33 00 02 08
4418 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
52 00 02 92
82 00 03 83
31 00 00 20
30 00 06 18
23 00 08 12
25 00 00 20
24 00 03 63
22 00 05 61
27 00 00 20
21 00 03 72
16 00 00 20
28 00 00 20
20 00 01 68
18 00 01 91
17 00 00 20
19 00 03 01
9 00 03 31
8 00 00 20
Hkyqvk eqdqan 405 00 00 20
Fkkuk uacj&158 404 00 00 20
403 00 00 20
266 00 00 20
81 00 09 69
85 00 00 20
82 00 01 90
83 00 00 20
84 00 00 20
80 00 01 36
78 00 02 78
77454 00 04 03
76 00 14 85
75 00 00 20
74 00 04 24
73455 00 02 74
72 00 06 97
70 00 02 71
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4419
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
68 00 00 20
63 00 00 34
62 00 00 20
uan ikyh 324 00 00 20
Fkkuk uacj&159 319 00 02 62
318 00 05 63
317 00 00 20
297 00 15 67
298 00 02 44
296 00 19 17
267 00 02 15
268 00 06 53
598 00 09 56
261 00 02 32
265 00 16 79
262 00 04 25
263 00 01 78
264 00 08 34
thjksnsbZ 1990 00 03 98
Fkkuk uacj&152 1988 00 01 52
1991 00 00 20
lwjoky 1625 jkLrk 00 00 20
Fkkuk uacj&139 2285jkLrk 00 01 24
2287jkLrk 00 02 18
2261 00 02 53
2257 00 05 02
2260 00 07 57
2259 00 00 62
2251 00 16 04
2250 00 18 31
2241 00 11 97
2242 00 00 20
2223 00 36 98
2163 00 16 81
2162 00 00 20
2161 00 00 39
2164 00 13 58
4420 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2160 00 02 23 2159 00 00 20 2157 00 04 45 2166 00 11 17 2156 00 04 37 2167 00 02 53 2168 00 13 51 2154 00 00 49 2153 00 00 43 2169 00 06 61 2152 00 00 90 2170 00 05 89 2171 00 04 84 2172 00 02 79 2151 00 01 19 2150 00 01 37 2173 00 03 04 2149 00 01 43 2174 00 02 59 2148 00 04 63 2175 00 02 34 2146jkLrk 00 01 70 2143 00 08 02 2142 00 10 03 2125 00 18 00 2124 00 09 09 2123 00 00 20 2117 00 00 20 2116 00 04 31 2115 00 04 79 2114 00 18 53 2030 00 00 20 2031 00 00 20 2032 00 00 20 2033 00 00 20 2113 00 00 20[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4421 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
2068 00 00 20 2067 00 00 20 2066 00 00 20 748 00 10 05 781 00 00 20 774 00 02 95 775 00 00 20 773 00 07 76 769 00 01 72 772 00 00 20 771 00 00 20 770 00 00 20 767 00 02 31 763 00 07 58 765 00 12 56 764 00 00 20 659 jkLrk 00 01 43 652 00 01 32 653 00 05 88 651 00 00 20 656 00 01 58 655 00 01 72 654 00 04 38 657 00 00 20 629 00 01 68 628 00 02 41 626 00 11 24 627 00 00 20 630 00 00 20 625 00 00 20 624 00 00 20 384 00 03 76 385 00 07 62 374 00 00 20 386 jkLrk 00 00 20 397 00 03 974422 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
402 00 02 37 403 00 02 42 408 00 02 46 409 00 00 20 410 00 02 58 413 00 03 43 415 00 02 13 420 00 00 20 421 00 06 60 422 00 02 95 439 00 02 70 423 00 04 33 438 00 02 93 437 00 00 76 428 00 00 20 436 00 09 02 434 00 09 67 435 00 00 20 432 00 05 60 433 00 11 08 462 00 00 20 464 00 03 88 483 00 00 20 484 00 05 86 485 00 03 78 486 00 00 20 463 00 00 31 492 00 01 27 488 00 03 10 491 00 02 20 494 00 00 20 490 00 02 49 489 00 01 71 495 00 02 02 477 00 01 37 476 00 00 42[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4423 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
497 00 00 85
500 jkLrk 00 01 53
46 00 08 43
63 00 00 20
64 00 12 45
45 00 09 85
43 00 00 20
42 00 00 20
44 00 02 44
eqbZu 2913 00 05 31
Fkkuk uacj&137 2924 00 00 20
2912 00 02 94
2914 00 02 65
2915 00 06 03
2916 00 03 45
2917 00 06 75
2918 00 04 61
2919 00 03 83
2920 00 07 44
2909 00 00 20
2857 00 09 33
2904 00 09 06
2903 00 00 97
2901 00 00 20
2902 00 02 74
2863 00 00 20
2864 00 00 20
2869 00 07 36
2868 00 07 17
2867 00 11 58
2871 00 00 20
2653 00 01 02
2652 00 16 11
2676 00 00 20
2677 00 00 20
2678 00 03 12
4424 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2680 00 04 26 2651 00 00 20 2650 00 01 27 2681 00 10 72 2698 00 00 20 2697 00 00 20 2682 00 01 48 2683 00 00 50 2684 00 11 06 2686 00 05 42 2687 00 00 20 2691 00 00 20 2688 00 03 92 2638 00 00 20 2637 00 10 60 2689 00 00 20 2690 00 00 20 2634 00 00 20 2632 00 00 20 2636 00 02 86 2635 00 05 37 2628 00 02 84 2629 00 06 61 2630 00 00 88 2627 00 01 24 2624 00 14 18 2625 00 22 89 1499 00 02 96 1500 00 00 60 1509 00 05 82 1498 00 00 20 1510 00 00 20 1511 00 00 20 1508 00 10 19 1507 00 00 20 1505 00 00 20 2021ukyk 00 01 81[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4425 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
2023 00 14 25
2022 00 02 83
2024 00 01 47
2020 00 04 14
2018 00 16 31
2019 00 00 20
2017 00 00 41
2011 00 08 67
2012 00 00 20
2006 00 06 15
2007ukyk 00 01 62
1863 00 00 20
1881 00 00 20
1882 00 04 46
1883 00 06 59
1885 00 00 54
1884 00 03 72
1886 00 00 46
1887 00 00 20
1880 00 09 96
1878 00 06 97
1877 00 00 20
1879 00 00 20
1872 00 10 55
1873 00 06 05
1828 00 07 69
1827 00 00 20
1829 00 02 61
1830 00 02 60
1750 dPpk jkLrk 00 00 20
1826 00 03 66
1825 00 01 14
1823 00 00 20
1822 00 00 20
1821 00 00 20
1820 00 00 20
1751 00 12 054426 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1755 00 13 79
1760 00 01 35
1759 00 09 60
1756 00 00 20
1762 00 00 20
1758 00 06 80
1763 00 08 72
1757dPpk jkLrk 00 00 20
75 00 00 20
74 00 00 20
72 00 00 20
1766 00 06 28
73 00 04 28
1767 00 02 68
1768 00 00 20
1770 00 09 85
1771 00 08 33
22 00 00 42
18 00 01 33
1772 00 09 72
19 00 00 20
17 00 06 95
1773 00 02 89
1774 00 00 20
16 00 05 48
15 00 04 31
10 00 12 83
11 00 08 11
13 00 01 92
14 00 00 20
12 00 00 97
8 00 11 10
7 00 05 48
2 00 04 90
1 00 00 20
VhVjk 1848 00 04 66
Fkkuk uacj&75 1846 00 00 20
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4427
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1845 00 05 61
1844 00 07 30
1843 00 00 20
1842 00 10 54
1838 00 00 20
1841 00 01 72
1840 00 00 25
fct;iwj 793 00 13 92
Fkkuk uacj&136 792 00 05 89
791 00 02 36
790 00 00 20
788 00 01 65
798 00 00 79
785 00 08 07
784 00 16 14
783 00 09 33
807 00 00 20
829 00 06 98
781 00 00 20
780 00 16 85
777 00 10 56
776 00 08 16
772 00 03 31
771 00 05 19
770 00 05 03
769 00 00 20
768 00 03 30
767 00 00 20
766 00 10 09
765 00 05 67
849 00 04 48
764 00 00 20
751 00 04 64
752 00 00 20
750 00 12 19
749 00 01 23
4428 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
741 00 19 40
754 00 00 20
740 00 03 72
738 00 07 46
737 00 00 57
736 00 06 69
735 00 01 82
734 00 00 20
iks[kjsjk 1147 00 00 66
Fkkuk uacj&76 1148 00 00 20
1135 00 04 06
1190 00 06 07
1191 00 02 80
1134 00 07 79
1126 00 09 28
1111 00 01 02
1110 00 01 60
1104 00 00 20
1101 00 00 20
1112 00 03 90
1113 00 06 39
1114 00 06 15
1115 00 00 20
1100 00 01 61
1099 00 06 27
1098 00 00 20
1096 00 06 41
1094jkLrk 00 02 19
1082 00 01 49
1083 00 09 65
1084 00 02 35
1075 00 13 33
1074 00 00 20
10641186 00 00 20
1065 00 06 75
1066 00 01 25
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4429
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1058 00 00 91
1057 00 05 18
1055 00 07 06
1054 00 00 20
1049 00 00 20
1053 00 05 79
1052 00 06 26
1042 00 16 12
1040 00 10 23
1039 00 06 58
1037 00 02 11
1038 00 00 91
1032 00 02 73
1033 00 00 20
1031 00 06 85
1030 00 00 20
1021 00 05 06
1029 00 12 01
1022 00 09 86
1028 00 00 20
1017 00 16 59
1013 00 02 43
1014 00 09 57
1015 00 00 20
1016 00 00 20
dqynhik 409 00 02 40
Fkkuk uacj&77 410 00 08 98
411 00 00 78
412 00 02 75
406 00 00 20
413 00 04 15
405 00 01 79
414 00 00 38
392 00 06 76
393 00 00 20
376 00 00 44
377 00 02 10
4430 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
383 00 05 45
382 00 03 80
381 00 04 27
380 00 02 93
379 00 02 71
378 00 02 00
293 00 14 39
292 00 00 20
360 00 00 20
359 00 01 41
296 00 07 27
295 00 00 20
299 00 06 84
300 00 03 87
304 00 09 05
306 00 06 75
305 00 00 20
307 00 06 64
yNehiwj 1287 00 01 49
Fkkuk uacj&78 1288 00 16 26
1289 00 00 20
1290 00 01 71
1292 00 00 89
1293 00 01 14
1294 00 00 32
1296 00 00 20
1291 00 11 19
1372 00 00 20
1342 00 13 47
1341 00 00 20
1340 00 00 20
1339 00 00 20
1346 00 14 99
1338 00 14 43
1348 00 00 20
1337 00 01 94
1336 00 04 81
1276 jsyos 00 06 33
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4431
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
12621408jsyos 00 01 25
11721407jsyos 00 01 03
11711409jsyos 00 04 37
1171jkLrk 00 04 29
1107 00 05 89
1167 00 00 47
1168 00 00 20
1108 00 01 47
1109 00 01 64
1110 00 01 66
1111 00 01 87
1115 00 00 20
1113 00 00 59
1112 00 01 02
1166 00 03 94
1165 00 04 21
1164 00 04 19
191 00 03 85
192 00 03 93
193 00 00 94
194 00 04 91
195 00 00 77
196 00 14 27
205 00 00 20
198 00 01 88
200 00 04 93
199 00 04 51
158 00 00 91
157 00 08 37
154 00 04 18
156 00 00 20
155 00 03 15
153 00 00 20
151 00 12 25
150 00 00 20
70 00 12 66
71 00 02 094432 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
68 00 08 85
67 00 00 20
66 00 03 99
72 00 02 51
78 jkLrk 00 02 22
65jkLrk 00 00 20
81 00 02 55
82 00 00 20
80 00 06 78
97dPpk jkLrk 00 02 33
981402 00 01 83
108 00 07 62
109 00 00 20
101 00 01 09
102 00 01 11
103 00 00 76
104 00 00 20
107 00 09 75
106 00 12 74
csykliqj 220 00 03 13
Fkkuk uacj&79 221 00 02 88
219 00 00 20
225 00 04 31
226 00 02 64
227 00 00 20
218 00 07 57
217 00 00 20
247 00 00 20
248 00 00 20
241 00 00 53
240 00 00 20
246 00 04 93
245 00 04 87
250 00 00 20
251 00 00 20
253 00 00 29
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4433
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
244 00 03 16 255 00 02 64 256 00 00 20 257 00 00 20 243 00 01 89 242 00 00 20 259 00 04 46 258 00 00 46 260 00 00 93 261 00 04 78 262 00 02 65 267 00 00 27 268 00 00 20 269 00 00 20 266 00 01 60 272 00 00 20 273 00 00 20 265 00 02 27 264 00 03 45 263 00 00 99 164 00 00 20 275 00 02 39 274 00 00 20 276 00 00 20 163 00 07 68 166 00 04 69 162 00 03 71 161462 00 00 20 157461 00 00 20 161 00 03 93 157 00 07 53 156 00 08 82 149 00 00 50 148 00 00 20 155 00 00 20 144 00 02 07
194jsyos 00 06 004434 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
lsorkiwj 2393jkLrk 00 01 22
Fkkuk uacj&44 2390 00 03 79
2392 00 02 91
2304 00 13 09
2391 00 01 24
2303 00 01 49
2302 00 13 33
2301 00 02 03
2394 jkLrk 00 02 57
2289 00 00 20
2290 00 04 40
2291&dPpk jkLrk 00 00 20
2267 00 15 74
2266 00 07 72
2268 00 00 20
2264 00 00 98
2265 00 01 39
2263 00 02 44
2262 00 07 41
2261 00 03 98
2260 00 00 79
2217jkLrk 00 04 60
2215 00 00 20
2214 00 01 98
2213 00 03 75
2212 00 01 27
2211 00 04 41
2177 00 00 20
2210 00 04 44
2187 00 03 86
2186 00 04 00
2185 00 05 16
2184 00 07 12
2183 00 00 20
2182 00 00 20
2179 00 01 75
2178 00 01 17
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4435
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2181 00 02 39 2103jkLrk 00 01 46 21034746 00 09 16 2068 00 00 37 2072 00 00 67 2071 00 04 66 2073 00 00 20 2074 00 06 24 2075 00 00 20 2079 00 02 15 2078 00 01 95 2080 00 00 20 2081 00 03 31 2083 00 03 77 2089 00 00 20 2088 00 09 14 2087 00 03 63 2091 00 00 63 2086 00 00 20 2092 00 12 25 2093 00 00 20 1982 00 16 72 1981 00 03 89 1769jkLrk 00 01 72 539 00 04 56 547 00 03 96 540 00 00 36 548 00 00 36 546 00 06 18 545 00 02 65 549 00 05 02 550 00 01 72 551 00 03 37 552 00 06 26 556 00 04 81 553 00 00 314436 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
554 00 01 40 566 00 03 22 567 00 00 84 565 00 11 51 568 00 01 27 564 00 00 30 562 00 01 14 570 00 08 14 571 00 00 20 563 00 00 20 575 00 07 34 574 00 00 59 576 00 02 86 579 00 03 62 580 00 03 73 578 00 00 79 614 00 00 20 647 00 03 64 646 00 02 79 645 00 02 91 643 00 01 32 644 00 08 06 725 00 00 20 642 00 01 87 641 00 01 83 640 00 00 20 726 00 06 01 723 00 00 62 727 00 09 71 728 00 01 61 735 00 00 74 734 00 06 47 733 00 05 32 745 00 00 20 746 00 01 24 751 00 05 53[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4437 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
761 00 16 46 762 00 00 20 763 00 00 20 764jkLrk 00 03 30 772 00 03 74 773 00 00 20 771 00 02 03 774 00 04 46 770 00 00 20 769 00 00 20 775 00 05 79 776 00 00 35 777 00 01 00 284 00 00 20 278 00 11 55 279 00 00 82 277 00 04 45 276 00 04 41 280 00 00 20 275 00 03 06 268 00 06 23 266 00 05 32 265 00 02 08 264 00 02 71 263 00 08 93 154 00 01 24 262 00 05 56 165 00 02 25 248 00 00 20 166 00 05 28 167 00 00 20 247 00 02 41 168 00 07 35 169 00 05 64 1704702 00 00 20 242 00 00 994438 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
239 00 08 40
237 00 12 38
236 00 00 20
233 00 02 26
234 00 27 92
231 00 06 84
186&dPpk jkLrk 00 03 15
188 00 04 46
353 unh 00 06 57
[पफा. सं. आर-25011/15/2013-ओआर-I]
पवन वुफमार, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 5th August, 2013
S.O. 1627.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited in Dist. Siwan in the State of Bihar for 'Patna to Motihari and Baitalpur Pipeline' for the transportation of Petroleum Product;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land, to Shri Arun Kumar Jha B.A.S. & Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited. (Pipelines Division) P.O. Dhelwan, Sipara, Dist. Patna (Bihar.) Pin – 800020.
SCHEDULE
Dist.: Siwan
State : Bihar
Mouja / Village Survey/Block No. Sub-Div-No. Area
Hectare Are Sq.mtr. (1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6) MAKUNDPUR 469 00 00 27 Thana No-157 470 00 00 20
468 00 00 91
467 00 01 28
466 00 01 75
462 00 03 93
463 00 00 20
461 00 02 39 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4439 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
458 00 04 78
454 00 00 20
450 (Cart Track) 00 09 50
36 00 05 38
37 00 00 29
35 00 21 10
40 00 01 40
34 00 09 45
41 00 00 20
33 00 02 08
32 00 00 40
52 00 02 92
82 00 03 83
31 00 00 20
30 00 06 18
23 00 08 12
25 00 00 20
24 00 03 63
22 00 05 61
27 00 00 20
21 00 03 72
16 00 00 20
28 00 00 20
20 00 01 68
18 00 01 91
17 00 00 20
19 00 03 01
9 00 03 31
8 00 00 20
BHALUA MUKUND 405 00 00 20
Thana No-158 404 00 00 20
403 00 00 20
266 00 00 20
81 00 09 69
85 00 00 20
82 00 01 90
83 00 00 20
84 00 00 20
80 00 01 36
78 00 02 78
77/454 00 04 03
4440 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
76 00 14 85
75 00 00 20
74 00 04 24
73/455 00 02 74
72 00 06 97
70 00 02 71
71 00 03 61
69 00 03 86
68 00 00 20
63 00 00 34
62 00 00 20
NAND PALI 324 00 00 20
Thana No-159 319 00 02 62
318 00 05 63
317 00 00 20
297 00 15 67
298 00 02 44
296 00 19 17
267 00 02 15
268 00 06 53
598 00 09 56
261 00 02 32
265 00 16 79
262 00 04 25
263 00 01 78
264 00 08 34
JIRADEI 1990 00 03 98
Thana No-152 1988 00 01 52
1991 00 00 20
SURWAL 1625 (ROAD) 00 00 20
Thana No-139 2285 (ROAD) 00 01 24
2287 (ROAD) 00 02 18
2261 00 02 53
2257 00 05 02
2260 00 07 57
2259 00 00 62
2251 00 16 04
2250 00 18 31
2241 00 11 97
2242 00 00 20
2163 00 16 81[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4441 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
2162 00 00 20
2161 00 00 39
2164 00 13 58
2165 00 00 20
2160 00 02 23
2159 00 00 20
2157 00 04 45
2166 00 11 17
2156 00 04 37
2167 00 02 53
2168 00 13 51
2154 00 00 49
2153 00 00 43
2169 00 06 61
2152 00 00 90
2170 00 05 89
2171 00 04 84
2172 00 02 79
2151 00 01 19
2150 00 01 37
2173 00 03 04
2149 00 01 43
2174 00 02 59
2148 00 04 63
2175 00 02 34
2146 (ROAD) 00 01 70
2143 00 08 02
2142 00 10 03
2125 00 18 00
2124 00 09 09
2123 00 00 20
2117 00 00 20
2116 00 04 31
2115 00 04 79
2114 00 18 53
2030 00 00 20
2031 00 00 20
2032 00 00 20
4442 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2070 00 00 20
2068 00 00 20
2067 00 00 20
2066 00 00 20
748 00 10 05
781 00 00 20
774 00 02 95
775 00 00 20
773 00 07 76
769 00 01 72
772 00 00 20
771 00 00 20
770 00 00 20
767 00 02 31
763 00 07 58
765 00 12 56
764 00 00 20
659 (ROAD) 00 01 43
652 00 01 32
653 00 05 88
651 00 00 20
656 00 01 58
655 00 01 72
654 00 04 38
657 00 00 20
629 00 01 68
628 00 02 41
626 00 11 24
627 00 00 20
630 00 00 20
625 00 00 20
624 00 00 20
384 00 03 76
385 00 07 62
374 00 00 20
386 (ROAD) 00 00 20
397 00 03 97
398 00 04 90
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4443
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
408 00 02 46
409 00 00 20
410 00 02 58
413 00 03 43
415 00 02 13
420 00 00 20
421 00 06 60
422 00 02 95
439 00 02 70
423 00 04 33
438 00 02 93
437 00 00 76
428 00 00 20
436 00 09 02
434 00 09 67
435 00 00 20
432 00 05 60
433 00 11 08
462 00 00 20
464 00 03 88
483 00 00 20
484 00 05 86
485 00 03 78
486 00 00 20
463 00 00 31
492 00 01 27
488 00 03 10
491 00 02 20
494 00 00 20
490 00 02 49
489 00 01 71
495 00 02 02
477 00 01 37
476 00 00 42
475 00 00 20
496 00 05 54
497 00 00 85
500 (ROAD) 00 01 53
64 00 12 454444 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
45 00 09 85
43 00 00 20
42 00 00 20
44 00 02 44
MUIAN 2913 00 05 31
Thana No. 137 2924 00 00 20
2912 00 02 94
2914 00 02 65
2915 00 06 03
2916 00 03 45
2917 00 06 75
2918 00 04 61
2919 00 03 83
2920 00 07 44
2909 00 00 20
2857 00 09 33
2904 00 09 06
2903 00 00 97
2901 00 00 20
2902 00 02 74
2863 00 00 20
2864 00 00 20
2869 00 07 36
2868 00 07 17
2867 00 11 58
2871 00 00 20
2653 00 01 02
2652 00 16 11
2676 00 00 20
2677 00 00 20
2678 00 03 12
2679 00 05 24
2680 00 04 26
2651 00 00 20
2650 00 01 27
2681 00 10 72
2698 00 00 20
2697 00 00 20
2684 00 11 06[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4445 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
2686 00 05 42 2687 00 00 20 2691 00 00 20 2688 00 03 92 2638 00 00 20 2637 00 10 60 2689 00 00 20 2690 00 00 20 2634 00 00 20 2632 00 00 20 2636 00 02 86 2635 00 05 37 2628 00 02 84 2629 00 06 61 2630 00 00 88 2627 00 01 24 2624 00 14 18 2625 00 22 89 1499 00 02 96 1500 00 00 60 1509 00 05 82 1498 00 00 20 1510 00 00 20 1511 00 00 20 1508 00 10 19 1507 00 00 20 1505 00 00 20 2021-Nala 00 01 81 1512 00 00 20 2023 00 14 25 2022 00 02 83 2024 00 01 47 2020 00 04 14 2018 00 16 31 2019 00 00 20 2017 00 00 41 2011 00 08 67 2012 00 00 20
2007 (NALA) 00 01 62
1863 00 00 204446 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1881 00 00 20
1882 00 04 46
1883 00 06 59
1885 00 00 54
1884 00 03 72
1886 00 00 46
1887 00 00 20
1880 00 09 96
1878 00 06 97
1877 00 00 20
1879 00 00 20
1872 00 10 55
1873 00 06 05
1828 00 07 69
1827 00 00 20
1829 00 02 61
1830 00 02 60
1750-Cart Track 00 00 20
1826 00 03 66
1825 00 01 14
1823 00 00 20
1822 00 00 20
1821 00 00 20
1820 00 00 20
1824 00 04 38
1751 00 12 05
1755 00 13 79
1760 00 01 35
1759 00 09 60
1756 00 00 20
1762 00 00 20
1758 00 06 80
1763 00 08 72
1757 (CART TRACK) 00 00 20
75 00 00 20
74 00 00 20
72 00 00 20
1766 00 06 28
73 00 04 28
1767 00 02 68
1768 00 00 20
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4447
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1770 00 09 85
1771 00 08 33
22 00 00 42
18 00 01 33
1772 00 09 72
19 00 00 20
17 00 06 95
1773 00 02 89
1774 00 00 20
16 00 05 48
15 00 04 31
10 00 12 83
11 00 08 11
13 00 01 92
14 00 00 20
12 00 00 97
8 00 11 10
7 00 05 48
2 00 04 90
1 00 00 20
TITRA 1848 00 04 66
Thana No. 75 1846 00 00 20
1849 00 00 20
1845 00 05 61
1844 00 07 30
1843 00 00 20
1842 00 10 54
1838 00 00 20
1841 00 01 72
1840 00 00 25
BIJAIPUR 793 00 13 92
Thana No. 136 792 00 05 89
791 00 02 36
790 00 00 20
788 00 01 65
798 00 00 79
785 00 08 07
784 00 16 14
4448 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
781 00 00 20
780 00 16 85
777 00 10 56
776 00 08 16
772 00 03 31
771 00 05 19
770 00 05 03
769 00 00 20
768 00 03 30
767 00 00 20
766 00 10 09
765 00 05 67
849 00 04 48
764 00 00 20
751 00 04 64
752 00 00 20
750 00 12 19
749 00 01 23
748 00 00 20
747 00 01 38
741 00 19 40
754 00 00 20
740 00 03 72
738 00 07 46
737 00 00 57
736 00 06 69
735 00 01 82
734 00 00 20
POKHRERA 1147 00 00 66
Thana No. 76 1148 00 00 20
1135 00 04 06
1190 00 06 07
1191 00 02 80
1134 00 07 79
1126 00 09 28
1111 00 01 02
1110 00 01 60
1104 00 00 20
1112 00 03 90 1113 00 06 39[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4449 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1114 00 06 15 1115 00 00 20 1100 00 01 61 1099 00 06 27 1098 00 00 20 1096 00 06 41 1094(ROAD) 00 02 19 1082 00 01 49 1083 00 09 65 1084 00 02 35 1075 00 13 33 1074 00 00 20 1064/1186 00 00 20 1065 00 06 75 1066 00 01 25 1064 00 00 45 1059 00 12 39 1058 00 00 91 1057 00 05 18 1055 00 07 06 1054 00 00 20 1049 00 00 20 1053 00 05 79 1052 00 06 26 1042 00 16 12 1040 00 10 23 1039 00 06 58 1037 00 02 11 1038 00 00 91 1032 00 02 73 1033 00 00 20 1031 00 06 85 1030 00 00 20 1021 00 05 06 1029 00 12 01 1022 00 09 86 1028 00 00 20 1017 00 16 59
1014 00 09 57 4450 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1016 00 00 20
KULDIPA 409 00 02 40
Thana No. 77 410 00 08 98
411 00 00 78
412 00 02 75
406 00 00 20
413 00 04 15
405 00 01 79
414 00 00 38
392 00 06 76
393 00 00 20
376 00 00 44
377 00 02 10
391 00 01 56
383 00 05 45
382 00 03 80
381 00 04 27
380 00 02 93
379 00 02 71
378 00 02 00
293 00 14 39
292 00 00 20
360 00 00 20
359 00 01 41
296 00 07 27
295 00 00 20
299 00 06 84
300 00 03 87
304 00 09 05
306 00 06 75
305 00 00 20
307 00 06 64
LACHHMIPUR 1287 00 01 49
Thana No. 78 1288 00 16 26
1289 00 00 20
1290 00 01 71
1292 00 00 89
1293 00 01 14
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4451
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1372 00 00 20
1342 00 13 47
1341 00 00 20
1340 00 00 20
1339 00 00 20
1346 00 14 99
1338 00 14 43
1348 00 00 20
1337 00 01 94
1336 00 04 81
1276 (RAILWAY) 00 06 33
1262/1408 (RAILWAY) 00 01 25
1172/1407 (RAILWAY) 00 01 03
1171/1409 (RAILWAY) 00 04 37
1171 (ROAD) 00 04 29
1107 00 05 89
1167 00 00 47
1168 00 00 20
1108 00 01 47
1109 00 01 64
1110 00 01 66
1111 00 01 87
1115 00 00 20
1113 00 00 59
1112 00 01 02
1166 00 03 94
1165 00 04 21
1164 00 04 19
191 00 03 85
192 00 03 93
193 00 00 94
194 00 04 91
195 00 00 77
196 00 14 27
205 00 00 20
198 00 01 88
200 00 04 93
199 00 04 51
154 00 04 184452 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
156 00 00 20
155 00 03 15
153 00 00 20
151 00 12 25
150 00 00 20
70 00 12 66
69 00 00 46
71 00 02 09
68 00 08 85
67 00 00 20
66 00 03 99
72 00 02 51
78 (Road) 00 02 22
65 (ROAD) 00 00 20
81 00 02 55
82 00 00 20
80 00 06 78
97 (CART TRACK) 00 02 33
98/1402 00 01 83
108 00 07 62
109 00 00 20
101 00 01 09
102 00 01 11
103 00 00 76
104 00 00 20
107 00 09 75
106 00 12 74
BELASPUR 220 00 03 13
Thana No. 79 221 00 02 88
219 00 00 20
225 00 04 31
226 00 02 64
227 00 00 20
218 00 07 57
217 00 00 20
247 00 00 20
248 00 00 20
241 00 00 53
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4453
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
250 00 00 20 251 00 00 20 253 00 00 29 254 00 00 26 252 00 00 20 244 00 03 16 255 00 02 64 256 00 00 20 257 00 00 20 243 00 01 89 242 00 00 20 259 00 04 46 258 00 00 46 260 00 00 93 261 00 04 78 262 00 02 65 267 00 00 27 268 00 00 20 269 00 00 20 266 00 01 60 272 00 00 20 273 00 00 20 265 00 02 27 264 00 03 45 263 00 00 99 164 00 00 20 275 00 02 39 274 00 00 20 276 00 00 20 163 00 07 68 166 00 04 69 162 00 03 71 161/462 00 00 20 157/461 00 00 20 161 00 03 93 157 00 07 53 156 00 08 82 149 00 00 50
144 00 02 074454 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
154 00 08 39
194(RAILWAY) 00 06 00
SEWTAPUR 2393-Road 00 01 22
Thana No-44 2390 00 03 79
2392 00 02 91
2304 00 13 09
2391 00 01 24
2303 00 01 49
2302 00 13 33
2301 00 02 03
2394 Road 00 02 57
2289 00 00 20
2290 00 04 40
2291Cart Track 00 00 20
2267 00 15 74
2266 00 07 72
2268 00 00 20
2264 00 00 98
2265 00 01 39
2263 00 02 44
2262 00 07 41
2261 00 03 98
2260 00 00 79
2217-Road 00 04 60
2215 00 00 20
2214 00 01 98
2213 00 03 75
2212 00 01 27
2211 00 04 41
2177 00 00 20
2210 00 04 44
2187 00 03 86
2186 00 04 00
2185 00 05 16
2184 00 07 12
2183 00 00 20
2182 00 00 20
2179 00 01 75
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4455
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2103-Road 00 01 46 2103/4746 00 09 16 2068 00 00 37 2072 00 00 67 2071 00 04 66 2073 00 00 20 2074 00 06 24 2075 00 00 20 2079 00 02 15 2078 00 01 95 2080 00 00 20 2081 00 03 31 2083 00 03 77 2089 00 00 20 2088 00 09 14 2087 00 03 63 2091 00 00 63 2086 00 00 20 2092 00 12 25 2093 00 00 20 1982 00 16 72 1981 00 03 89 1769-Road 00 01 72 539 00 04 56 547 00 03 96 540 00 00 36 548 00 00 36 546 00 06 18 545 00 02 65 549 00 05 02 550 00 01 72 551 00 03 37 552 00 06 26 556 00 04 81 553 00 00 31 553/4707 00 02 68 555 00 06 73 554 00 01 40 566 00 03 22
565 00 11 514456 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
568 00 01 27 564 00 00 30 562 00 01 14 570 00 08 14 571 00 00 20 563 00 00 20 575 00 07 34 574 00 00 59 576 00 02 86 579 00 03 62 580 00 03 73 578 00 00 79 614 00 00 20 647 00 03 64 646 00 02 79 645 00 02 91 643 00 01 32 644 00 08 06 725 00 00 20 642 00 01 87 641 00 01 83 640 00 00 20 726 00 06 01 723 00 00 62 727 00 09 71 728 00 01 61 735 00 00 74 734 00 06 47 733 00 05 32 745 00 00 20 746 00 01 24 751 00 05 53 750 00 10 30 752 00 00 20 761 00 16 46 762 00 00 20 763 00 00 20 764-Road 00 03 30[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4457 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
774 00 04 46
770 00 00 20
769 00 00 20
775 00 05 79
776 00 00 35
777 00 01 00
284 00 00 20
278 00 11 55
279 00 00 82
277 00 04 45
276 00 04 41
280 00 00 20
275 00 03 06
268 00 06 23
266 00 05 32
265 00 02 08
264 00 02 71
263 00 08 93
154 00 01 24
262 00 05 56
165 00 02 25
248 00 00 20
166 00 05 28
167 00 00 20
247 00 02 41
168 00 07 35
169 00 05 64
170/4702 00 00 20
242 00 00 99
241 00 07 77
240 00 01 82
239 00 08 40
237 00 12 38
236 00 00 20
233 00 02 26
234 00 27 92
231 00 06 84
186 Cart Track 00 03 15
188 00 04 46
353 River 00 06 57
[F. No. R-25011/15/2013-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
4458 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]ubZ fnYyh] 5 vxLr] 2013
का.आ. 1628.--dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksd fgr esa ;g vko";d gS fd iVuk ls eksfrgkjh vkSj csrkyiqj rd isVksfy;e inkFkks ds ifjogu gsrq ftyk iVuk] jkT; fcgkj esa bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs"ku fyfeVsM kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg, A
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko";d izrhr gksrk gS fd ml Hkwfe esa ftlds Hkhrj mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS vkSj tks bl vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa of.kZr gS] mi;ksx dk vtZu fd;k tk,(
vr%] vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] iSVksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbUl Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZZZZZZZu vf/kfu;e] 1962 1962 dk 50 dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk1 kjk iznk "kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] mDr Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu djus ds vius vk"k; dh ?kks'k.kk djrh gSA
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwph esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks] Hkkjr ds jkti= esa ;Fkk izdkf"kr bl vf/klwpuk dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gS] bDdhl fnu ds vUnj] Hkwfe ds Hkhrj ikbiykbu fcNk, tkus gsrq mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds vtZu ds fy,] Jh v:.k dqekj k] fc-iz-ls- o lke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs"ku fyfeVsM] ikbiykbu fMohtu iVuk] iks-vks- syok] flikjk] ftyk iVuk] fiu %&800020] fcgkj dks fyf[kr :i eas vkksi Hkst ldsxkA
अनुसूची
तहसील : पटना
राज्य : बिहार
मौजा/ग्राम सर्वे/ब्लाक/सं. ;प्लोट सं.द्ध सब-डीव-सं. क्षेत्रापफल
हेक्टेयर आरे वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6
इब्राहीमपुर 230 00 05 22
थाना नंबर-61 229 00 11 63
228 00 05 92
227 00 00 20
220 00 01 10
223 00 03 83
224 00 02 27
225 00 02 57
226 00 05 23
60 00 06 04
61 00 00 38
54 00 04 30
53 00 03 98
52 00 03 20
51 00 07 84
50 00 02 53
64 00 01 42[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4459 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
66 00 09 40
21 00 00 20
67 00 00 20
8 00 07 57
5 00 03 56
7 00 06 30
6 00 01 57
9 00 00 65
2 00 05 99
10 00 00 20
अल्हानपुरा 2451 00 00 74
थाना नंबर-60 2450 00 04 26
2440 00 12 01
2449 00 00 20
2439 00 06 42
2437 00 01 08
2438 00 06 86
2441 (नाला) 00 01 92
2422 (नाला) 00 06 19
1393 00 00 50
1396 00 03 13
1397 00 05 74
1398 00 05 81
2358 00 06 04
2359 00 00 20
2357 00 03 74
2361 00 00 37
2343 00 04 04
2341 00 00 20
2342 00 04 45
2362 00 00 20
2363 00 00 20
2364 00 05 42
4460 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2340 00 04 84
2367 00 00 47
2368 00 00 30
2336 00 05 71
2335 00 03 47
2334 00 06 38
2333 00 00 20
2318 00 11 14
2314 00 03 37
2315 00 05 36
1868 (रास्ता) 00 01 24
2209 00 00 20
2204 00 09 98
2203 00 14 12
2202 (रास्ता) 00 01 85
2167 00 00 20
2168 00 04 76
2169 00 03 08
2170 00 05 46
2171 00 02 10
2173 00 09 89
2199 00 00 20
2197 00 03 82
2196 00 09 16
2195 00 01 72
2194 00 01 80
माधोपुर 465 00 00 20
थाना नंबर-64 464 00 06 60
463 00 00 20
बजीदपुर (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 96
थाना नंबर-65 1349 (रेलवे) 00 00 20
1347 (रेलवे) 00 00 20
1348 (रेलवे) 00 04 14
1346 (रेलवे) 00 05 83
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4461
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1345 (रेलवे) 00 03 83
1259 (रेलवे) 00 04 94
1253 00 02 47
1254 00 00 20
1252 00 08 22
1251 00 00 20
बीसुनपुरा 3224 00 09 96
थाना नंबर-66 3225 00 08 81
3227 00 00 20
3226 00 05 69
3222 00 00 20
3221 00 05 51
3220 00 05 81
3219 00 06 66
3217 00 00 37
3181 00 06 29
3182 00 00 20
3180 00 02 92
2895 00 00 78
2894 00 00 20
2893 00 02 86
2892 00 03 58
2889 00 00 20
2900 00 06 97
2899 00 05 03
2898 00 00 20
2890 00 02 11
2901 (रास्ता) 00 02 69
3249 (रास्ता) 00 01 15
2547 00 68 46
2546 00 00 72
2545 00 01 45
2538 00 04 88
4462 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
2540 00 03 70
2536 00 00 20
2511 00 00 20
2541 00 01 12
2542 00 00 25
2452 00 00 20
2453 00 00 20
2451 00 06 67
2450 00 05 74
2449 00 01 62
2465 00 00 20
2446 00 01 78
2447 00 02 30
2448 00 03 97
2363 00 04 51
2362 00 00 20
2364 00 02 24
2365 00 00 20
2418 00 01 85
2419 00 01 72
2420 00 00 20
2422 00 00 20
2423 00 01 37
2424 00 03 47
1565 (रास्ता) 00 01 18
1117 00 00 20
1116 00 03 31
1115 00 00 34
1135 00 04 45
1134 00 00 20
1140 00 01 43
1139 00 02 66
1138 00 00 20
1141 00 03 17
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4463
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1158 00 03 46 1161 00 03 42 1169 00 01 72 1171 00 00 83 1170 00 00 56 1191 00 02 50 1190 00 00 70 1192 00 00 32 1189 00 04 46 1203 00 00 20 1204 00 01 37 1205 00 05 60 1206 00 01 43 1220 00 01 16 1277 00 03 29 1282 00 01 46 1283 00 02 66 1295 00 02 51 1296 00 04 04 1302 00 01 46 1303 00 01 80 1308 00 03 10 1309 00 00 98 1310 00 01 18 1273 00 07 06 1311 00 01 67 1312 00 00 20 1317 00 00 20 1324 00 00 20 1323 00 00 20 1325 00 00 77 1326 00 00 40
1342 00 01 104464 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1341 00 01 31
1340 00 01 24
1328 00 08 39
1339 00 01 22
1336 00 01 24
1335 00 00 79
1331 00 01 63
1329 00 05 77
1330 00 03 01
681 00 07 34
683 00 01 68
680 00 02 95
682 00 14 02
522 (रास्ता अेस.अेच.-78) 00 04 38
362 00 00 36
368 00 02 42
404 00 00 20
369 00 02 35
371 00 00 82
370 00 01 44
374 00 02 06
375 00 02 30
376 00 00 73
377 00 00 94
378 00 02 21
379 00 02 44
380 00 02 50
381 00 02 00
382 00 01 68
384 00 01 82
394 00 00 20
395 00 05 96
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4465
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
399 00 02 23
396 00 05 22
परखोतीमपुर पैनाठी 1083 00 03 14
थाना नंबर-68 1082 00 02 00
1081 00 04 10
1084 00 10 40
1080 00 09 68
1135 00 01 15
1134 00 06 74
1140 00 00 20
1141 00 07 45
1142 00 00 20
1146 00 04 36
1148 00 02 44
1147 00 09 65
1172 00 01 45
1171 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 48
1145 00 00 20
1208 00 02 76
1209 00 11 15
1210 00 00 20
1211 00 00 20
1201 00 00 20
1202 00 00 20
1203 00 00 20
1205 00 04 72
1204 00 03 49
1196 00 03 12
1197 00 00 25
1195 00 02 35
1194 00 00 20
1193 00 07 67
1187(कच्चा रास्ता) 00 00 954466 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
961 00 00 20
962 00 09 42
963 00 02 75
960 00 00 20
959 00 00 20
964 00 02 27
965 00 04 02
957 00 00 20
958 00 00 20
956 00 00 29
941 00 06 23
955 00 00 65
954 00 01 09
944 00 02 36
945 00 02 58
953 00 01 44
952 00 02 66
951 00 01 90
950 00 03 31
1256 00 00 50
927 00 04 98
929 00 00 20
928 00 02 94
926 00 00 48
925 00 00 20
923 00 05 29
922 00 00 91
907 (नाला) 00 02 08
906 (नाला) 00 01 24
905 (नाला) 00 01 18
619 (नाला) 00 01 12
614 00 02 42
615 00 02 89
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4467
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
617 00 00 86
618 00 00 20
610 00 00 42
622 00 04 82
624 00 01 34
623 00 01 96
625 00 01 93
626 00 01 80
627 00 02 66
628 00 06 37
629 00 02 23
630 00 00 20
619 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 22
619 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 96
680 00 00 20
679 00 00 90
678 00 06 65
906 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 01 24
645 00 00 20
661 00 01 94
671 00 03 89
673 00 00 20
670 00 00 20
672 00 05 83
667 00 07 03
666 00 00 20
125 (रास्ता) 00 03 24
107 00 00 20
109 00 03 79
110 00 09 32
112 00 04 66
113 00 00 94
115 00 09 204468 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
118 00 00 62
117 00 08 38
116 00 09 68
10 00 00 25
11 00 01 26
18 00 03 13
19 00 00 20
17 00 01 76
12 00 02 84
16 00 00 90
15 00 00 20
14 00 00 20
13 00 07 50
31 (नाला) 00 01 04
32 00 01 12
44 00 00 25
47 00 04 25
48 00 04 86
49 00 04 68
46 00 01 14
50 00 07 42
9 (कच्चा रास्ता) 00 04 27
51 (रास्ता) 00 01 15
52 (रास्ता) 00 01 32
53 (रास्ता) 00 01 20
1 (रास्ता) 00 00 20
2 00 00 20
कुतलुपुर 2719 (रास्ता) 00 00 82
थाना नंबर-56 1196 00 00 20
1197 00 17 47
2726 00 05 20
1193 00 01 69
1200 (रास्ता) 00 01 39
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4469
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1226 00 19 37 2725 00 00 20 1240 00 08 30 1239 00 11 53 1242 00 03 34 1243 00 03 12 1078 00 00 20 1082 00 05 40 1081 00 10 73 1080 00 05 65 1065 00 00 20 1064 00 05 66 1063 00 03 65 927 00 02 76 928 00 09 13 929 00 07 52 931 00 05 40 918 00 00 20 917 00 05 29 916 00 05 92 915 00 00 20 705 00 00 40 706 00 08 72 707 00 01 45 708 00 00 20 711 00 00 20 907 00 00 90 906 00 01 94 905 00 03 32 902 00 01 30 904 00 01 10 903 00 04 964470 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
896 00 03 07 895 00 05 15 894 00 00 20 761 00 02 39 760 00 00 20 762 00 03 00 765 00 01 74 763 00 00 82 764 00 02 58 766 00 06 04 767 00 03 67 768 00 00 20 750 00 00 20 749 00 01 66 771 00 11 77 772 00 00 76 776 00 00 20 747 00 02 89 745 00 10 27 746 00 00 64 744 00 00 20 743 00 04 36 742 00 02 06 741 00 00 20 788 00 08 69 789 00 00 20 552 00 00 97 553 00 04 43 554 00 03 16 555 00 04 16 531 00 01 44 530 00 00 25[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4471 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
528 00 01 33
511 00 09 80
513 00 00 20
512 00 03 06
509 00 00 20
508 00 08 94
507 00 05 56
515 00 00 20
मुन्सेपुर 938 00 00 65
थाना नंबर-19 939 00 00 20
936 00 07 18
935 00 03 55
934 00 01 49
933 00 00 22
922(नाला) 00 00 91
952 00 00 78
953 00 03 50
954 00 00 20
955 00 06 48
956 00 03 34
957 00 09 30
965 00 00 20
966 00 04 72
967 00 00 20
964 00 02 29
963 00 00 25
968 00 02 68
969 00 02 70
970 00 03 49
971 00 03 53
972 00 00 20
973 00 03 89
4472 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
850 00 07 70 849 00 00 20 848 00 00 31 849 00 00 20 847 00 05 34 846 00 02 53 844 00 00 20 749 00 01 69 800 00 03 70 801 00 04 32 799 00 00 20 798 00 02 58 802 00 00 55 803 00 00 20 776 00 01 60 797 00 03 61 795 00 01 51 796 00 00 20 777 00 10 07 793 00 01 52 792 00 01 68 791 00 05 52 790 00 00 90 789 00 00 20 788 00 08 51 787 00 06 71 786 00 00 20 532 00 00 32 534 00 09 26 535 00 03 29 536 00 03 10 539 00 01 07 547 00 01 82[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4473 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
546 00 05 68
545 00 02 05
544 00 02 36
543 00 01 45
521 00 03 18
520 00 03 40
519 00 00 98
518 00 00 20
552(नाला) 00 01 36
557 00 00 20
559 00 02 94
560 00 04 76
561 00 05 87
562 00 04 38
563 00 03 64
564 00 01 31
572 00 01 34
569 00 08 24
568 00 06 36
202 00 01 12
201 00 11 71
1165 00 05 53
1164 00 03 84
8 00 07 03
7 00 06 41
नरैनपुर 408 jkLrk 00 02 44
थाना नंबर-20 292 00 04 99
291 00 11 43
290 00 16 71
289 00 04 40
301 00 00 91
302 00 10 58
4474 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
282 00 03 29 281 00 01 99 280 00 02 33 279 00 00 20 303 00 00 90 176 00 19 64 177 00 02 52 178 00 00 20 175 00 01 78 174 00 00 20 179 00 26 31 187 00 01 59 184 00 08 49 185 00 08 16 75 00 02 27 183 00 01 37 76 00 12 94 98 00 13 16 97 00 08 78 96 00 01 99 95 00 00 20 102 00 12 05 103 00 02 78 16 00 00 20 20 00 13 70 21 00 05 33 22 00 00 20 25 00 00 20 19 00 05 36 18 00 02 32 17 00 00 20 26 00 11 12 4 00 07 98[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4475 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
आनन्दपुर 2657 00 09 71
थाना नंबर-36 2656 00 07 61
2655 00 00 20
372 00 15 28
374 jkLrk 00 03 52
366 00 03 00
367 00 05 86
3593598 00 04 70
359 00 07 63
356 00 07 10
202 00 03 32
203 00 15 54
200 00 04 00
204 00 24 37
192 00 07 03
133 00 06 61
135 00 11 51
136 00 12 71
124 00 09 54
120 00 15 62
117 00 13 00
118 00 04 20
112 00 09 91
111 00 00 20
110 00 11 69
109 00 19 97
108 00 01 66
71 00 01 26
माधोपुर. 869 00 07 21
थाना नंबर-21 870 00 07 51
871 00 06 71
872 00 03 78
874 00 20 144476 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
889 00 06 65
890 00 00 20
878 00 00 20
884 00 14 14
881 00 00 20
885 00 00 20
883 00 07 30
882 00 07 46
886 00 00 20
880 00 00 20
10981414 ukyk 00 03 50
636 00 04 66
637 00 03 43
638 00 02 05
639 00 00 20
640 00 08 41
641 00 00 20
632 00 04 98
653 00 00 61
654 00 01 64
631 00 13 40
666 00 08 05
665 00 05 46
664 00 00 20
667 00 01 91
670 00 03 97
671 00 00 20
668 00 00 20
669 00 01 94
672 00 00 92
606 00 00 20
605 00 02 53
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4477
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
602 00 05 94 585 00 00 71 601 00 00 34 591 00 02 95 592 00 02 28 593 00 00 55 590 00 05 72 562 jkLrk 00 01 81 540 00 11 46 561 00 00 20 560 00 12 01 559 00 09 20 715 00 05 26 169 00 05 40 170 00 03 37 173 00 02 14 172 00 08 54 179 00 00 25 180 00 00 20 178 00 00 47 63 00 05 75 64 00 00 36 621422 00 08 65 61 00 01 07 62 00 00 20 66 00 00 20 67 00 09 89 60 00 01 24 58 00 00 20 68 00 00 20 59 00 05 934478 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
मानेर 341 00 00 56
थाना नंबर-7 334 00 03 63
333 00 05 41
332 00 08 25
225 00 09 95
226 00 05 24
245 00 04 57
255 00 04 00
250 00 00 20
254 00 01 41
258 00 00 73
257 00 00 20
261 00 00 20
259 00 02 37
260 00 04 19
263 00 03 12
264 00 02 68
266 00 02 60
267 00 02 19
268 00 00 36
269 00 00 20
270 00 00 20
203 00 09 85
204 00 11 10
207 00 02 07
205 00 03 03
193 00 00 20
206 00 07 44
191 00 02 03
190 00 05 52
104 00 04 36
189 00 05 30
188 00 07 16
185 00 12 58
184 00 06 89
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4479
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
180 00 05 21 181 00 00 20 179 00 05 26 178 00 01 41 168 00 00 20 176 00 04 55 175 00 01 55 171 00 04 08 173 00 01 82 174 00 00 20 172 00 00 82
[पफा. सं. आर.-25011/16/2013-ओआर-I]
पवन वुफमार, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 5th August, 2013
S.O. 1628.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest
that a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited in Dist. Patna in the State of Bihar for 'Patna to Motihari and Baitalpur Pipeline' for the transportation of Petroleum Product;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land, to Shri Arun Kumar Jha B.A.S. & Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited. (Pipelines Division) P.O. Dhelwan, Sipara, Dist. Patna
(Bihar.) Pin–800020.
SCHEDULE
Dist.: Patna
State : Bihar
Mouja / Village Survey/BlockNo. Sub-Div-No. Area
Hectare Are Sq.mtr.
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
IBRAHIMPUR 230 00 05 22
Thana 229 00 11 63
Number :-61 228 00 05 92
227 00 00 20
220 00 01 10
4480 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
225 00 02 57
226 00 05 23
60 00 06 04
61 00 00 38
54 00 04 30
53 00 03 98
52 00 03 20
51 00 07 84
50 00 02 53
49 00 01 08
64 00 01 42
66 00 09 40
21 00 00 20
67 00 00 20
8 00 07 57
5 00 03 56
7 00 06 30
6 00 01 57
9 00 00 65
2 00 05 99
10 00 00 20
ALHANPURA 2451 00 00 74
Thana 2450 00 04 26
Number:-60 2440 00 12 01
2449 00 00 20
2439 00 06 42
2437 00 01 08
2438 00 06 86
2441 (NALA) 00 01 92
2422 (NALA) 00 06 19
1393 00 00 50 1396 00 03 13 1397 00 05 74 1398 00 05 81 2358 00 06 04 2359 00 00 20 2357 00 03 74 2361 00 00 37
2342 00 04 45[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4481 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
2362 00 00 20 2363 00 00 20 2364 00 05 42 2365 00 01 32 2340 00 04 84 2367 00 00 47 2368 00 00 30 2336 00 05 71 2335 00 03 47 2334 00 06 38 2333 00 00 20 2318 00 11 14 2314 00 03 37 2315 00 05 36
1868 (ROAD) 00 01 24
2209 00 00 20 2204 00 09 98 2203 00 14 12
2202 (ROAD) 00 01 85
2167 00 00 20
2168 00 04 76
2169 00 03 08
2170 00 05 46
2171 00 02 10
2173 00 09 89
2199 00 00 20
2197 00 03 82
2196 00 09 16
2195 00 01 72
2194 00 01 80
MADHOPUR 465 00 00 20
Thana Number :- 64 464 00 06 60
463 00 00 20
BAZIDPUR (CART TRACK) 00 00 96
Thana 1349 (RAILWAY) 00 00 20
Number :-65 1347 (RAILWAY) 00 00 20
1348 (RAILWAY) 00 04 14
1346 (RAILWAY) 00 05 83
1345 (RAILWAY) 00 03 83
1259 (RAILWAY) 00 04 94
1253 00 02 474482 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1254 00 00 20
1252 00 08 22
1251 00 00 20
BISHUNPURA 3224 00 09 96
Thana
3225 00 08 81
Number :- 66 3227 00 00 20
3226 00 05 69
3222 00 00 20
3221 00 05 51
3220 00 05 81
3219 00 06 66
3217 00 00 37
3181 00 06 29
3182 00 00 20
3180 00 02 92
2895 00 00 78
2894 00 00 20
2893 00 02 86
2892 00 03 58
2889 00 00 20
2900 00 06 97
2899 00 05 03
2898 00 00 20
2890 00 02 11
2901 (ROAD) 00 02 69
3249 (ROAD) 00 01 15
2547 00 68 46 2546 00 00 72 2545 00 01 45 2538 00 04 88 2539 00 03 64 2540 00 03 70 2536 00 00 20 2511 00 00 20 2541 00 01 12 2542 00 00 25 2452 00 00 20 2453 00 00 20 2451 00 06 67[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4483 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
2465 00 00 20 2446 00 01 78 2447 00 02 30 2448 00 03 97 2363 00 04 51 2362 00 00 20 2364 00 02 24 2365 00 00 20 2418 00 01 85 2419 00 01 72 2420 00 00 20 2422 00 00 20 2423 00 01 37 2424 00 03 47
1565 (ROAD) 00 01 18
1117 00 00 20 1116 00 03 31 1115 00 00 34 1135 00 04 45 1134 00 00 20 1140 00 01 43 1139 00 02 66 1138 00 00 20 1141 00 03 17 1158 00 03 46 1161 00 03 42 1169 00 01 72 1171 00 00 83 1170 00 00 56 1191 00 02 50 1190 00 00 70 1192 00 00 32 1189 00 04 46 1203 00 00 20 1204 00 01 37 1205 00 05 60 1206 00 01 43 1220 00 01 16 1277 00 03 294484 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1295 00 02 51
1296 00 04 04
1302 00 01 46
1303 00 01 80
1308 00 03 10
1309 00 00 98
1310 00 01 18
1273 00 07 06
1311 00 01 67
1312 00 00 20
1317 00 00 20
1324 00 00 20
1323 00 00 20
1325 00 00 77
1326 00 00 40
1327 00 00 71
1342 00 01 10
1341 00 01 31
1340 00 01 24
1328 00 08 39
1339 00 01 22
1336 00 01 24
1335 00 00 79
1331 00 01 63
1329 00 05 77
1330 00 03 01
681 00 07 34
683 00 01 68
680 00 02 95
682 00 14 02
522(ROAD SH-78) 00 04 38
362 00 00 36
368 00 02 42
404 00 00 20
369 00 02 35
371 00 00 82
370 00 01 44
374 00 02 06
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4485
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
378 00 02 21
379 00 02 44
380 00 02 50
381 00 02 00
382 00 01 68
384 00 01 82
394 00 00 20
395 00 05 96
397 00 03 31
398 00 01 33
399 00 02 23
396 00 05 22
Parkhotimpur Painathi 1083 00 03 14
Thana number :- 68 1082 00 02 00
1081 00 04 10
1084 00 10 40
1080 00 09 68
1135 00 01 15
1134 00 06 74
1140 00 00 20
1141 00 07 45
1142 00 00 20
1146 00 04 36
1148 00 02 44
1147 00 09 65
1172 00 01 45
1171 (CART TRACK) 00 01 48
1145 00 00 20
1208 00 02 76
1209 00 11 15
1210 00 00 20
1211 00 00 20
1201 00 00 20
1202 00 00 20
1203 00 00 20
1205 00 04 72
1204 00 03 49
1196 00 03 12
1197 00 00 25
4486 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1193 00 07 67
1191 00 02 63
1187 (CART TRACK) 00 00 95
961 00 00 20
962 00 09 42
963 00 02 75
960 00 00 20
959 00 00 20
964 00 02 27
965 00 04 02
957 00 00 20
958 00 00 20
956 00 00 29
941 00 06 23
955 00 00 65
954 00 01 09
944 00 02 36
945 00 02 58
953 00 01 44
952 00 02 66
951 00 01 90
950 00 03 31
1256 00 00 50
927 00 04 98
929 00 00 20
928 00 02 94
926 00 00 48
925 00 00 20
923 00 05 29
922 00 00 91
907(NALA) 00 02 08
906 (NALA) 00 01 24
905 (NALA) 00 01 18
619 (NALA) 00 01 12
614 00 02 42
615 00 02 89
616 00 07 68
617 00 00 86
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4487
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
624 00 01 34
623 00 01 96
625 00 01 93
626 00 01 80
627 00 02 66
628 00 06 37
629 00 02 23
630 00 00 20
619 (CART TRACK) 00 01 22
619 (CART TRACK) 00 01 96
680 00 00 20
679 00 00 90
678 00 06 65
906 (Cart Track) 00 01 24
645 00 00 20
661 00 01 94
671 00 03 89
673 00 00 20
670 00 00 20
672 00 05 83
667 00 07 03
666 00 00 20
125 (ROAD) 00 03 24
107 00 00 20
109 00 03 79
110 00 09 32
112 00 04 66
113 00 00 94
111 00 02 53
115 00 09 20
118 00 00 62
117 00 08 38
116 00 09 68
10 00 00 25
11 00 01 26
18 00 03 13
19 00 00 20
4488 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
15 00 00 20
14 00 00 20
13 00 07 50
31 (NALA) 00 01 04
32 00 01 12
44 00 00 25
47 00 04 25
48 00 04 86
49 00 04 68
46 00 01 14
50 00 07 42
9 (CART TRACK) 00 04 27
51 (ROAD) 00 01 15
52 (ROAD) 00 01 32
53 (ROAD) 00 01 20
1 (ROAD) 00 00 20
2 00 00 20
KUTALPUR Thana number :- 56 2719(Road) 00 00 82
1196 00 00 20
1197 00 17 47
2726 00 05 20
1193 00 01 69
1200 (Road) 00 01 39
1225 00 01 33
1226 00 19 37
2725 00 00 20
1240 00 08 30
1239 00 11 53
1242 00 03 34
1243 00 03 12
1078 00 00 20
1082 00 05 40
1081 00 10 73
1080 00 05 65
1065 00 00 20
1064 00 05 66
1063 00 03 65
927 00 02 76
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4489
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
918 00 00 20 917 00 05 29 916 00 05 92 915 00 00 20 705 00 00 40 706 00 08 72 707 00 01 45 708 00 00 20 711 00 00 20 907 00 00 90 906 00 01 94 905 00 03 32 902 00 01 30 904 00 01 10 903 00 04 96 898 00 00 20 897 00 00 32 896 00 03 07 895 00 05 15 894 00 00 20 761 00 02 39 760 00 00 20 762 00 03 00 765 00 01 74 763 00 00 82 764 00 02 58 766 00 06 04 767 00 03 67 768 00 00 20 750 00 00 20 749 00 01 66 771 00 11 77 772 00 00 76 776 00 00 20 747 00 02 89 745 00 10 27 746 00 00 64 744 00 00 204490 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
788 00 08 69
789 00 00 20
552 00 00 97
553 00 04 43
554 00 03 16
555 00 04 16
531 00 01 44
530 00 00 25
511 / 2716 00 07 65
529 00 00 20
528 00 01 33
511 00 09 80
513 00 00 20
512 00 03 06
509 00 00 20
508 00 08 94
507 00 05 56
515 00 00 20
MUNSEPUR 938 00 00 65
Thana Number :- 19 939 00 00 20
936 00 07 18
935 00 03 55
934 00 01 49
933 00 00 22
922(Nala) 00 00 91
952 00 00 78
953 00 03 50
954 00 00 20
955 00 06 48
956 00 03 34
957 00 09 30
965 00 00 20
966 00 04 72
967 00 00 20
964 00 02 29
963 00 00 25
968 00 02 68
969 00 02 70
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4491
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
973 00 03 89 974 00 00 20 851 00 02 69 850 00 07 70 849 00 00 20 848 00 00 31 849 00 00 20 847 00 05 34 846 00 02 53 844 00 00 20 749 00 01 69 800 00 03 70 801 00 04 32 799 00 00 20 798 00 02 58 802 00 00 55 803 00 00 20 776 00 01 60 797 00 03 61 795 00 01 51 796 00 00 20 777 00 10 07 793 00 01 52 792 00 01 68 791 00 05 52 790 00 00 90 789 00 00 20 788 00 08 51 787 00 06 71 786 00 00 20 532 00 00 32 534 00 09 26 535 00 03 29 536 00 03 10 539 00 01 07 547 00 01 82 540 00 00 20 546 00 05 68 545 00 02 05
543 00 01 454492 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
521 00 03 18 520 00 03 40 519 00 00 98 518 00 00 20
552(Nala) 00 01 36
557 00 00 20
559 00 02 94
560 00 04 76
561 00 05 87
562 00 04 38
563 00 03 64
564 00 01 31
572 00 01 34
569 00 08 24
568 00 06 36
202 00 01 12
201 00 11 71
1165 00 05 53
1164 00 03 84
8 00 07 03
7 00 06 41
NARAINPUR 408 (Road) 00 02 44
Thana Number :- 20 292 00 04 99
291 00 11 43
290 00 16 71
289 00 04 40
301 00 00 91
302 00 10 58
284 00 00 20
283 00 01 17
282 00 03 29
281 00 01 99
280 00 02 33
279 00 00 20
303 00 00 90
176 00 19 64
177 00 02 52
178 00 00 20
175 00 01 78
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4493
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
187 00 01 59
184 00 08 49
185 00 08 16
75 00 02 27
183 00 01 37
76 00 12 94
98 00 13 16
97 00 08 78
96 00 01 99
95 00 00 20
102 00 12 05
103 00 02 78
16 00 00 20
20 00 13 70
21 00 05 33
22 00 00 20
25 00 00 20
19 00 05 36
18 00 02 32
17 00 00 20
26 00 11 12
4 00 07 98
34 00 01 33
ANANDPUR 2657 00 09 71
Thana Number :- 36 2656 00 07 61
2655 00 00 20
372 00 15 28
374 (Road) 00 03 52
366 00 03 00
367 00 05 86
359/3598 00 04 70
359 00 07 63
356 00 07 10
202 00 03 32
203 00 15 54
200 00 04 00
204 00 24 37
192 00 07 03
133 00 06 61
135 00 11 51
136 00 12 71
4494 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
124 00 09 54
120 00 15 62
117 00 13 00
118 00 04 20
112 00 09 91
111 00 00 20
110 00 11 69
109 00 19 97
108 00 01 66
71 00 01 26
MADHOPUR 869 00 07 21
Thana Number :- 21 870
00 07 51
871 00 06 71
872 00 03 78
873 00 03 31
874 00 20 14
889 00 06 65
890 00 00 20
878 00 00 20
884 00 14 14
881 00 00 20
885 00 00 20
883 00 07 30
882 00 07 46
886 00 00 20
880 00 00 20
1098 / 1414 (Nala) 00 03 50
636 00 04 66
637 00 03 43
638 00 02 05
639 00 00 20
640 00 08 41
641 00 00 20
632 00 04 98
653 00 00 61
654 00 01 64
631 00 13 40
666 00 08 05
665 00 05 46
664 00 00 20
667 00 01 91
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4495
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
670 00 03 97
671 00 00 20
668 00 00 20
669 00 01 94
672 00 00 92
606 00 00 20
605 00 02 53
604 00 07 27
603 00 05 65
602 00 05 94
585 00 00 71
601 00 00 34
591 00 02 95
592 00 02 28
593 00 00 55
590 00 05 72
562 (Road) 00 01 81
540 00 11 46
561 00 00 20
560 00 12 01
559 00 09 20
715 00 05 26
169 00 05 40
170 00 03 37
173 00 02 14
172 00 08 54
179 00 00 25
180 00 00 20
178 00 00 47
63 00 05 75
64 00 00 36
62 / 1422 00 08 65
61 00 01 07
62 00 00 20
66 00 00 20
67 00 09 89
60 00 01 24
58 00 00 20
68 00 00 20
59 00 05 93
53 00 01 37
4496 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
50 00 37 06
MANER 341 00 00 56
Thana Number :-7 334 00 03 63
333 00 05 41
332 00 08 25
225 00 09 95
226 00 05 24
245 00 04 57
255 00 04 00
250 00 00 20
254 00 01 41
258 00 00 73
257 00 00 20
261 00 00 20
259 00 02 37
260 00 04 19
263 00 03 12
264 00 02 68
266 00 02 60
267 00 02 19
268 00 00 36
269 00 00 20
270 00 00 20
203 00 09 85
204 00 11 10
207 00 02 07
205 00 03 03
193 00 00 20
206 00 07 44
191 00 02 03
190 00 05 52
104 00 04 36
189 00 05 30
188 00 07 16
185 00 12 58
184 00 06 89
180 00 05 21
181 00 00 20
179 00 05 26
178 00 01 41
168 00 00 20
176 00 04 55
175 00 01 55
171 00 04 08
173 00 01 82
[F. No. R-25011/16/2013-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4497नई दिल्ली, 5 अगस्त, 2013
का.आ. 1629.—केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसा प्रतीत होता है कि लोक हित में यह आवश्यक है कि पटना से मोतिहारी और बेतालपुर तक पेट्रोलियम पदार्थो के परिवहन हेतु जिला पटना, राज्य बिहार में इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ।
और केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में जिसके भीतर उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित है, उपयोग का अर्जन किया जाए;
अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन्स (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उप-धारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उक्त भूमि में उपयोग के अध्ािंकार 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, भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के अन्दर, भूमि के भीतर पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने हेतु उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के लिए, श्री अरूण कुमार झा, बि.प्र.से. व सक्षम प्राधिकारी इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, (पाइपलाइन डिवीजन) पटना, पो.ओ. ढेलवा, सिपारा, जिला पटना, पिनः 800020, बिहार को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा।
अनुसूची
जिला : पटना
राज्य : बिहार
मौजा/ग्राम सर्वे/ब्लाक/सं. ;प्लोट सं.द्ध सब-डीव-सं. क्षेत्रापफल
हेक्टेयर आरे वर्ग मीटर
;1द्ध ;2द्ध ;3द्ध ;4द्ध ;5द्ध ;6द्ध
रामबाद 1639 00 00 88
थाना नंबर-7/110 1640 00 01 64
1641 00 04 12
1642 00 04 02
1643 00 03 46
1644 00 00 20
1671 00 04 57
1670 00 10 49
1675 00 00 20
1669 00 03 41
1676 00 03 79
1677 00 02 52
1679 00 00 20
1678 00 02 42
1688 00 03 05
4498 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1682 00 00 20 1684 00 02 61 1685 00 00 27 1687 00 01 36 1686 00 00 72 1697 00 01 14 1698 00 02 03 1699 00 06 15 1700 00 00 20 1702 00 03 47 1854 00 00 20 1855 00 00 20 1703 00 02 16 1706 00 01 13 1707 00 01 05 1856 00 00 48 1857 00 02 36 1710 00 00 20 1858 00 02 87 1859 00 03 93 1860 00 03 16 1836 00 00 20 1876 00 01 86 1861 00 02 18 1877 00 00 20 1862 00 02 74 1837 00 06 06 1625 00 00 20 1863 00 00 20 1864 00 00 20[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4499 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1838 00 01 77 1839 00 00 20 1622 00 00 63 1621 00 02 44 1840 00 00 20 1620 00 05 63 1619 00 03 45 1618 00 01 86 1617 00 03 06 1616 00 02 31 1615 00 01 59 1614 00 01 34 1611 00 01 66 1609 00 03 15 1607 00 08 13 1603 00 03 60 1600 00 04 56 1598 00 00 74 1555 00 00 20 1555/1906 00 26 08 1584 00 00 32 1585 00 00 20 1583 00 02 54 1582 00 01 81 1581 00 02 41 1580 00 02 34 1579 00 02 59 1578 00 10 34 1577 00 08 12 1569 00 05 194500 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1570 00 03 91
1568 (रास्ता) 00 01 00
1437 00 01 37
1438 00 01 65
1439 00 01 52
1440 00 01 92
1441 00 01 68
1442 00 02 20
1443 00 01 67
1444 00 01 21
1425 00 05 27
1424 00 02 52
1423 00 02 17
1422 00 02 12
1420/1910 00 02 45
1421 00 01 03
1420 00 01 29
1419 00 01 46
1418 00 00 20
1417 00 01 89
1416 00 01 11
1415 00 01 57
1414 00 02 17
1406 00 02 04
1405 00 01 46
1404 00 02 73
1403 00 02 31
1402 00 04 08
1398 00 02 65
1397 00 09 45
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4501
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1396 00 00 28
रामपुर दीअरा तौफीर 246 00 03 96
थाना नंबर-7/109 245 00 02 17
244 00 02 00
243 00 07 80
242 00 05 32
241 00 03 02
240 00 02 30
239 00 00 68
238 00 00 20
रामपुर दीअरा 924 00 00 67
थाना नंबर-07/108 923 00 05 64
922 00 02 42
921 00 03 56
920 00 02 26
919 00 00 20
917 00 07 00
911 00 02 90
917/944 00 02 38
910 00 07 31
905 00 05 45
904 00 06 20
903 00 04 37
902 00 00 20
901 00 01 78
899 00 00 86
900 00 01 10
898 00 03 83
897 00 10 03
4502 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
889 00 02 02 888 00 07 72 887 00 07 78 866 00 00 20 868 00 01 81 869 00 01 60 870 00 01 69 828 00 02 75 827 00 02 38 826 00 03 37 825 00 01 99 824 00 02 52 823 00 01 70 822 00 02 30 818 00 06 85 820 00 00 20 819 00 00 20 817 00 07 54 816 00 07 14 775 00 00 20 774 00 00 20 776 00 00 20 777 00 00 42 778 00 00 54 779 00 00 94 780 00 01 09 781 00 04 01 783 00 00 20[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4503 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
कीटा चौहत्तर 6209 00 01 04
थाना नंबर-6 6208 00 00 20
6213 00 03 16
6207 00 00 74
6215 00 03 96
6206 00 00 20
6205 00 03 83
6204 00 03 17
6203 00 01 27
6202 00 00 34
6199 00 02 36
6198 00 01 92
6197 00 01 36
6196 00 01 13
6193 00 01 58
6192 00 02 72
6191 00 01 37
6187 00 13 90
6181 00 05 47
6175 00 02 17
6176 00 00 20
6174 00 01 69
6173 00 03 43
6170 00 02 33
6169 00 02 34
6168 00 02 59
6141 00 00 20
6140 00 00 20
6142 00 12 97
6143 00 18 76
4504 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
6118 00 13 69
6111/6885 00 33 58
6094 00 00 56
2202 00 38 69
1287 00 07 94
1288 00 12 62
1289 00 10 16
1298 00 00 20
1297 00 00 32
1290 00 00 20
1296 00 31 80
1334 00 21 06
1360 00 15 88
1361 00 06 72
1362 00 11 12
1363 00 04 84
1364 00 05 45
760 00 02 22
761 00 01 43
762 00 01 16
763 00 02 05
764 00 02 33
765 00 01 61
766 00 08 44
767 00 02 80
768 00 03 01
769 00 02 53
770 00 02 33
771 00 02 63
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4505
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
773 00 01 45 774 00 01 45 775 00 01 32 776 00 01 66 777 00 01 69 778 00 01 56 783 00 08 51 784 00 20 57 663 00 14 22 664 00 05 98 666 00 04 32 666/6944 00 02 09 667 00 05 68 668 00 24 97 714 00 05 57 713 00 15 42 712 00 15 38 683 00 02 22 684 00 12 65 685 00 06 19 686 00 05 56 687 00 19 15 688/7043 00 41 81 688/7027 00 00 29 688/7026 00 04 87 688/7025 00 08 30 688/7024 00 13 15 688/7023 00 04 74 82 00 40 30 81 00 11 824506 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
80 00 17 52 79 00 13 19 78 00 07 33 77 00 07 86 76 00 07 30 75 00 04 22 67 00 00 20 74 00 04 55 73 00 10 19 72 00 08 48 74/6901 00 54 53 1/7102 00 15 58 1/7103 00 40 21 1/7119 00 04 81 1/7106 00 00 20 1/7105 00 62 45
[पफा. सं. आर-25011/16/2013-ओआर-I]
पवन वुफमार, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 5th August, 2013
S.O. 1629.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited in Dist. Patna in the State of Bihar for 'Patna to Motihari and Baitalpur Pipeline' for the transportation of Petroleum Product;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land, to Shri Arun Kumar Jha B.A.S. & Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited. (Pipelines Division) P.O. Dhelwan, Sipara, Dist. Patna (Bihar.) Pin–800020.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4507SCHEDULE
Dist.: Patna
State : Bihar
Mouja / Village Survey/Block No. Sub-Div-No. Area
Hectare Are Sq.mtr.
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
RAMBAD 1639 00 00 88
Thana Number 7/110 1640 00 01 64
1641 00 04 12
1642 00 04 02
1643 00 03 46
1644 00 00 20
1671 00 04 57
1670 00 10 49
1675 00 00 20
1669 00 03 41
1676 00 03 79
1677 00 02 52
1679 00 00 20
1678 00 02 42
1688 00 03 05
1683 00 00 73
1682 00 00 20
1684 00 02 61
1685 00 00 27
1687 00 01 36
1686 00 00 72
1697 00 01 14
1698 00 02 03
1699 00 06 15
1700 00 00 20
1702 00 03 47
1854 00 00 20
1855 00 00 20
1703 00 02 16
1706 00 01 13
1707 00 01 05
1856 00 00 48
4508 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1857 00 02 36 1710 00 00 20 1858 00 02 87 1859 00 03 93 1860 00 03 16 1836 00 00 20 1876 00 01 86 1861 00 02 18 1877 00 00 20 1862 00 02 74 1837 00 06 06 1625 00 00 20 1863 00 00 20 1864 00 00 20 1838 00 01 77 1839 00 00 20 1622 00 00 63 1621 00 02 44 1840 00 00 20 1620 00 05 63 1619 00 03 45 1618 00 01 86 1617 00 03 06 1616 00 02 31 1615 00 01 59 1614 00 01 34 1611 00 01 66 1609 00 03 15 1607 00 08 13 1603 00 03 60 1600 00 04 56 1598 00 00 74 1555 00 00 20 1555/1906 00 26 08[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4509 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1585 00 00 20 1583 00 02 54 1582 00 01 81 1581 00 02 41 1580 00 02 34 1579 00 02 59 1578 00 10 34 1577 00 08 12 1569 00 05 19 1570 00 03 91
1568 (Road) 00 01 00
1437 00 01 37 1438 00 01 65 1439 00 01 52 1440 00 01 92 1441 00 01 68 1442 00 02 20 1443 00 01 67 1444 00 01 21 1425 00 05 27 1424 00 02 52 1423 00 02 17 1422 00 02 12 1420/1910 00 02 45 1421 00 01 03 1420 00 01 29 1419 00 01 46 1418 00 00 20 1417 00 01 89 1416 00 01 11 1415 00 01 57 1414 00 02 17 1406 00 02 044510 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1403 00 02 31
1402 00 04 08
1398 00 02 65
1397 00 09 45
1396 00 00 28
RAMPUR DIARA TAUFIR 246 00 03 96
Thana Number :- 7/109 245 00 02 17
244 00 02 00
243 00 07 80
242 00 05 32
241 00 03 02
240 00 02 30
239 00 00 68
238 00 00 20
RAMPUR DIARA 924 00 00 67
Thana Number :-07/108 923 00 05 64
922 00 02 42
921 00 03 56
920 00 02 26
919 00 00 20
917 00 07 00
911 00 02 90
917 / 944 00 02 38
910 00 07 31
905 00 05 45
904 00 06 20
903 00 04 37
902 00 00 20
901 00 01 78
899 00 00 86
900 00 01 10
898 00 03 83
897 00 10 03
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4511
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
888 00 07 72
887 00 07 78
866 00 00 20
868 00 01 81
869 00 01 60
870 00 01 69
828 00 02 75
827 00 02 38
826 00 03 37
825 00 01 99
824 00 02 52
823 00 01 70
822 00 02 30
818 00 06 85
820 00 00 20
819 00 00 20
817 00 07 54
816 00 07 14
775 00 00 20
774 00 00 20
776 00 00 20
777 00 00 42
778 00 00 54
779 00 00 94
780 00 01 09
781 00 04 01
783 00 00 20
782 00 05 14
KITA CHAUHATTAR 6209 00 01 04
Thana Number :- 6 6208 00 00 20
6213 00 03 16
6207 00 00 74
6215 00 03 96
4512 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
6204 00 03 17 6203 00 01 27 6202 00 00 34 6199 00 02 36 6198 00 01 92 6197 00 01 36 6196 00 01 13 6193 00 01 58 6192 00 02 72 6191 00 01 37 6187 00 13 90 6181 00 05 47 6175 00 02 17 6176 00 00 20 6174 00 01 69 6173 00 03 43 6170 00 02 33 6169 00 02 34 6168 00 02 59 6141 00 00 20 6140 00 00 20 6142 00 12 97 6143 00 18 76 6119 00 08 66 6118 00 13 69 6111/6885 00 33 58 6094 00 00 56 2202 00 38 69 1287 00 07 94 1288 00 12 62 1289 00 10 16 1298 00 00 20 1297 00 00 32[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4513 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1334 00 21 06 1360 00 15 88 1361 00 06 72 1362 00 11 12 1363 00 04 84 1364 00 05 45 760 00 02 22 761 00 01 43 762 00 01 16 763 00 02 05 764 00 02 33 765 00 01 61 766 00 08 44 767 00 02 80 768 00 03 01 769 00 02 53 770 00 02 33 771 00 02 63 772 00 03 02 773 00 01 45 774 00 01 45 775 00 01 32 776 00 01 66 777 00 01 69 778 00 01 56 783 00 08 51 784 00 20 57 663 00 14 22 664 00 05 98 666 00 04 32 666/6944 00 02 09 667 00 05 68 668 00 24 97 714 00 05 57 713 00 15 424514 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
712 00 15 38
683 00 02 22
684 00 12 65
685 00 06 19
686 00 05 56
687 00 19 15
688 / 7043 00 41 81
688 / 7027 00 00 29
688 / 7026 00 04 87
688 / 7025 00 08 30
688 / 7024 00 13 15
688 / 7023 00 04 74
82 00 40 30
81 00 11 82
80 00 17 52
79 00 13 19
78 00 07 33
77 00 07 86
76 00 07 30
75 00 04 22
67 00 00 20
74 00 04 55
73 00 10 19
72 00 08 48
74 / 6901 00 54 53
1 / 7102 00 15 58
1 / 7103 00 40 21
1 / 7119 00 04 81
1 / 7106 00 00 20
1 / 7105 00 62 45
[F. No. R-25011/16/2013-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4515ubZ fnYyh] 5 vxLr] 2013
का.आ. 1630.—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksd fgr esa ;g vko";d gS fd iVuk ls eksfrgkjh vkSj csrkyiqj rd isVksfy;e inkFkks ds ifjogu gsrq ftyk iwoZ paikju] jkT; fcgkj esa bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs"ku fyfeVsM kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg, A
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko";d izrhr gksrk gS fd ml Hkwfe esa ftlds Hkhrj mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS vkSj tks bl vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa of.kZr gS] mi;ksx dk vtZu fd;k tk,(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] iSVksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbUl Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu vf/kfu;e] 1962 1962 dk 50 dh /kkjk 3 dh mi&/kkjk1 kjk iznk "kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] mDr Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu djus ds vius vk"k; dh ?kks'k.kk djrh gSA
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwph esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks] Hkkjr ds jkti= esa ;Fkk izdkf"kr bl vfklwpuk dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gS] bDdhl fnu ds vUnj] Hkwfe ds Hkhrj ikbiykbu fcNk, tkus gsrq mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds vtZu ds fy,] Jh v:.k dqekj k] fc-iz-ls- o lke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs"ku fyfeVsM] ikbiykbu fMohtu iVuk] iks-vks- syok] flikjk] ftyk iVuk] fiu% 800020] fcgkj dks fyf[kr :i eas vkksi Hkst ldsxkA
अनुसूची
जिला : पूर्व चंपारन
राज्य : बिहार
मौजा/ग्राम सर्वे/ब्लाक/सं. ;प्लोट सं.द्ध सब-डीव-सं. क्षेत्रापफल
हेक्टेयर आरे वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6
nkeks chjrh 1169 00 15 34
Fkkuk uacj&177 1172 00 00 20
1168 00 01 43
1167 00 06 15
1166 00 00 81
1164 00 00 92
1163 00 11 73
1161 00 00 20
1162 00 14 54
1159 00 01 85
1058 jkLrk 00 04 77
652 00 00 20
648 00 12 32
645 00 10 91
646 00 06 70
643 00 03 43
4516 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
641 00 04 28
611 00 06 26
613 00 00 45
612 00 09 40
609 00 05 28
445 00 11 73
444 00 00 20
446 00 02 87
455 00 10 65
447 00 00 20
454 00 10 17
461 00 00 20
462 00 06 26
460 00 00 20
463 00 07 64
466 00 07 07
465 00 03 46
467 00 03 83
468 00 00 20
469 00 02 09
471 00 01 83
479 00 25 53
491 00 00 20
482 00 00 20
478 00 00 20
480 00 12 79
516 00 00 20
481 00 00 20
524 00 02 29
518 00 04 82
520 00 04 54
521 00 00 20
522 00 00 20
519 00 15 02
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4517
1 2 3 4 5 6
517 00 00 20
512 00 01 96
uokMk 1942 00 04 14
Fkkuk uacj&180 1943 00 00 69
1944 00 00 20
1941 00 07 70
1938 00 01 00
1939 00 00 20
1936 00 03 04
1937 00 12 37
1931 00 00 20
1930 00 02 73
1880 00 00 20
1881 00 18 15
1879 00 02 63
1876 00 06 64
1882 00 06 02
1874 00 04 19
1873 00 00 20
1884 00 01 51
1885 00 09 91
1886 00 00 20
1889 00 03 78
1887 00 00 26
1888 00 03 28
1890 00 00 20
1784 00 06 97
1785 00 05 29
1786 00 00 20
1783 00 00 20
1781 00 04 46
1782 00 05 19
1678 00 00 20
1679 00 06 29
4518 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
1681 00 06 17
1683 00 00 20
1684 00 00 20
16832060 00 01 47
1682 00 03 30
1698 00 06 60
1699 00 00 73
1697 00 01 23
1711 00 02 82
1709 00 00 20
1710 00 08 10
1712 00 00 65
17152062 00 08 03
1714 00 00 85
1715 00 08 55
1521 00 00 20
1519 00 00 20
1520 00 05 87
1716 00 00 20
1487 00 10 17
1486 00 04 62
1489 00 05 41
1495 00 03 13
1491 00 00 20
1490 00 00 20
1494 00 01 68
1496 00 07 70
1510 00 00 20
1497 00 01 23
1509 00 06 69
1502 00 09 66
1475 00 00 20
1503 00 06 56
1474 00 03 50
1471 00 00 20
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4519
1 2 3 4 5 6
14722052 00 00 20
1473 00 07 46
1553 00 00 20
1472 00 03 15
1427 00 07 08
1428 00 08 11
1429 00 03 62
1430 00 00 20
1425 00 00 20
1424 00 04 36
1423 00 06 13
1422 00 00 54
1407 00 06 50
1412 00 00 20
1411 00 02 36
1410 00 15 27
1415 00 01 11
1133 jkLrk 00 15 36
1130 00 00 20
1131 00 01 98
1129 00 00 20
1132 00 14 27
222 00 07 85
221 00 00 20
223 00 02 06
224 00 00 48
220 00 13 98
219 00 00 20
218 00 00 70
oksYgk 1051 00 00 20
Fkkuk uacj&165 1052 00 03 65
1038 00 12 81
1039 00 08 08
4520 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
felhj Vksyk 496 00 00 39
Fkkuk uacj&163 493 00 10 16
502 00 06 21
503 00 09 20
505 00 01 04
504 00 00 83
364 00 00 20
479 00 10 26
480 00 00 90
478 00 08 34
477 00 06 18
365 00 02 39
386 00 04 38
389 00 00 20
387 00 05 22
388 00 02 53
384 00 05 37
370 00 00 20
385 00 00 20
383 00 06 83
382 00 00 20
378 00 10 10
379 00 02 30
377 00 00 84
330 jkLrk 00 01 80
329 jkLrk 00 03 31
310 jkLrk 00 02 21
317 00 00 20
318 00 11 94
301 dsuky 00 01 68
300 00 04 21
299 00 07 04
248 00 12 11
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4521
1 2 3 4 5 6
246 00 04 37
283 jkLrk 00 02 71
266 00 09 21
267 00 02 98
267499 00 01 80
263 00 00 20
262 00 00 20
264 00 16 56
255 00 00 20
260 00 02 29
257 00 06 30
258 00 03 11
129 00 14 21
131 00 01 25
152 00 11 49
151 00 02 51
150 00 06 71
140 00 05 98
139 00 00 67
138 00 00 20
141 00 12 13
142 00 00 20
93 00 11 71
92 jkLrk 00 02 07
143 00 00 88
90 00 14 40
91 00 00 20
89 00 17 17
88 00 00 20
85 00 00 65
86 00 20 49
87 00 00 20
2 00 36 63
27 00 21 224522 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
26 00 01 71
25 00 00 20
21 00 00 46
1 ukyk 00 02 61
511 ukyk 00 01 75
vghj xuok 402 00 03 95
Fkkuk uacj&162 401 00 09 60
400 jkLrk 00 04 55
399 00 06 52
398 00 14 48
396 00 11 33
44 00 14 56
46 00 16 28
51 00 06 38
36 00 52 21
17 00 09 76
16 00 13 18
15 00 11 16
jkeiqjok 246 00 12 46
Fkkuk uacj&160 261 00 19 27
262 00 05 95
260 00 12 32
263 00 00 20
282 00 06 48
265 00 11 66
281 00 02 37
279 00 02 57
280 00 20 24
277 00 00 20
294 00 22 88
295 00 00 20
296 00 02 14
297 00 27 58
336 jkLrk 00 06 58[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4523
1 2 3 4 5 6
337 00 02 51
7 00 20 77
6 00 00 20
9 00 07 48
8 00 05 49
10 00 01 95
11 00 00 20
12 ukyk 00 04 05
xk; ?kkV 213 es[kok unh 00 06 55
Fkkuk uacj&153 214 es[kok unh 00 07 24
215 es[kok unh 00 02 12
216 00 10 01
217 00 00 20
208 00 08 25
220 00 13 38
221 00 15 24
230 01 12 26
144 LVsV gkbos 4 00 03 19
265 00 00 20
262 00 02 59
143 dPpk jkLrk 00 02 26
128 00 32 56
139 00 05 21
112 00 11 08
142 00 53 19
97 00 00 34
96 00 03 34
93 00 05 36
91 00 10 84
89 00 00 20
87 00 00 20
88 00 10 54
85 00 07 43
84 00 10 284524 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
83 00 00 59
81 00 07 94
82 00 00 66
yksfg;kj mtSu 267 jkLrk 00 04 28
Fkkuk uacj&133 jkLrk 00 04 02
2745 00 08 06
2746 00 02 60
2747 00 13 55
2748 00 03 11
2753 00 01 12
2752 00 03 15
2761 00 19 63
2762 00 00 20
2764 00 05 73
2760 00 00 57
2759 00 02 82
2682 jkLrk 00 01 89
2765 00 10 36
2768 00 08 97
2785 00 18 02
2767 00 06 73
2787 00 01 06
2786 jkLrk 00 00 26
2678 00 06 73
2676 00 30 79
2677 00 02 63
2675 00 00 26
2654 00 14 50
2650 00 07 94
2656 00 06 23
2655 00 04 73
2644 00 13 91
2646 00 09 72
2647 00 19 08
2611 00 21 85
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4525
1 2 3 4 5 6
2607 00 04 76
2606 00 00 96
2605 00 09 84
2597 00 06 05
2598 00 00 20
2595 00 11 61
2596 00 10 15
2589 00 19 22
2588 00 00 20
2573 00 12 93
2572 00 17 21
3010 00 07 91
2574 00 01 53
2570 00 03 24
2568 00 07 83
2563 00 04 67
2564 00 00 20
2566 00 14 29
2567 00 00 52
2553 00 51 55
2554 00 10 34
1764 00 00 20
1765 00 00 66
1727 00 00 20
1762 00 18 84
1729 00 05 87
1730 00 07 46
1725 00 21 27
1724 00 02 66
1721 00 34 09
1622 jkLrk 00 03 38
1709 00 00 20
1708 00 00 20
1623 ukyk 00 06 73
1545 00 39 54
4526 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
1544 00 00 20
1543 00 07 15
1546 00 05 74
1542 00 25 78
1541 00 08 91
1540 00 00 20
1522 /kukmrh unh 00 12 17
t;flagiqj 4291 00 07 14
Fkkuk uacj&85 4292 00 04 23
4289 00 03 96
4250 jkLrk 00 03 82
4286 00 08 30
4283 00 03 82
4284 00 01 42
4282 00 07 15
4272 00 04 34
4281 00 11 64
4280 00 12 95
4278 00 09 30
4277 00 07 58
4298 00 09 37
4305 00 00 20
4299 00 10 61
4300 00 02 15
4301 00 00 20
4538 dPpk jkLrk 00 28 10
4541 00 03 05
4540 00 01 15
4539 00 00 20
4537 00 06 41
4536 00 02 67
4502 jkLrk 00 03 60
4464 00 17 45
4489 00 08 20
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4527
1 2 3 4 5 6
4488 00 13 68
4467 00 00 20
4483 00 05 05
4480 00 03 68
4482 00 00 97
4472 00 00 20
4481 00 02 15
4473 00 05 60
4437 00 01 77
4474 00 12 22
4477 00 15 42
4418 00 00 20
4505 00 00 20
4475 00 00 20
4476 00 00 20
4436 00 00 20
4435 00 15 08
4427 00 26 87
4425 00 04 20
4426 00 09 60
4424 00 13 77
4445 00 00 40
4381 00 20 75
4392 00 00 20
4391 00 00 45
4382 00 00 62
4383 00 00 20
4390 00 13 64
43896841 00 01 89
4389 00 10 57
4388 00 00 75
4013 jkLrk 00 04 97
4015 00 22 21
4528 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
4021 00 00 68
4022 00 22 69
4023 00 11 77
3968 00 00 39
3964 jkLrk 00 05 71
2744 00 07 10
2743 00 00 32
2745 00 17 66
2747 00 27 00
2746 00 00 20
2739 00 00 20
2748 00 17 63
2749 00 00 20
2727 00 03 30
2738 00 00 94
2728 00 04 11
2729 00 09 09
2731 00 09 73
2732 00 07 41
2730 00 05 17
2532 jkLrk 00 04 69
2523 00 11 42
2524 00 08 74
2525 00 06 33
2526 00 02 11
2501 00 01 28
2502 00 00 20
2500 00 09 14
2499 00 05 57
2498 00 08 50
2432 00 15 71
2433 00 00 20
2449 00 07 09
2431 00 14 01
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4529
1 2 3 4 5 6
2451 00 08 71
2454 00 00 20
2453 00 00 20
2430 00 00 66
2387 00 31 89
24616829 00 04 99
2462 00 00 20
2463 00 00 80
2386 00 01 63
2368 jkLrk 00 05 71
2385 00 00 20
2366 00 01 21
2367 00 06 95
2365 00 00 20
2360 00 28 27
2364 00 01 20
2361 00 00 40
2363 00 00 20
2359 00 00 89
2358 00 00 31
489 00 16 06
490 00 01 01
484 00 04 81
491 00 07 36
492 00 09 09
493 00 02 56
495 00 19 16
518 00 09 60
523 00 03 99
522 00 05 97
526 00 06 36
525 00 00 20
535 00 03 73
4530 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
530 00 01 82
529 00 01 04
532 00 01 48
531 00 01 91
533 00 05 02
534 00 08 60
177 00 00 20
171 00 02 00
170 00 06 59
169 00 08 12
172 00 00 61
173 00 05 13
174 00 00 20
175 00 08 58
164 00 02 89
165 00 05 37
159 00 05 86
160 00 01 52
142 00 09 81
143 00 00 20
144 00 02 03
146 00 02 74
145 00 04 88
147 00 07 17
148 00 03 74
155 00 00 20
154 00 01 68
151 00 08 38
152 00 00 20
110 00 10 08
91 00 00 56
92 00 00 20
109 00 07 07
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4531
1 2 3 4 5 6
106 00 00 72
104 00 06 18
99 00 07 95
93 00 00 20
100 00 02 01
53 ukyk 00 01 54
51 00 10 75
52 00 00 20
39 jkLrk 00 04 70
38 00 10 03
37 00 06 02
36 00 07 66
32 00 06 81
30 00 01 85
33 00 06 40
25 00 15 72
24 00 00 20
23 00 07 47
722 00 00 20
723 00 07 51
730 00 08 26
731 00 00 20
16 00 06 29
9 00 04 70
741 00 08 73
743 00 00 20
740 00 11 36
744 00 01 76
749 00 07 11
748 00 00 20
763 00 09 93
762 00 09 93
752 00 00 52
753 00 06 29
4532 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
754 00 04 77
760 00 02 02
759 00 04 80
755 00 00 96
758 00 06 33
757 00 11 16
767 00 00 20
769 00 00 94
768 00 10 94
csyok jk; Vksyk cSjkxh 292 00 07 65
Fkkuk uacj&72 291 00 03 05
290 00 03 65
288 00 05 27
2911824 00 00 20
287 00 06 79
2861826 00 02 78
285 00 05 51
286 00 00 20
284 00 14 94
2841831 00 04 29
282 00 00 34
281 00 03 08
272 00 00 20
280 00 17 94
279 00 00 20
276 00 08 75
274 00 00 20
275 00 03 48
277 00 02 69
225 jkLrk 00 10 04
218 00 07 25
217 00 05 71
20 00 31 08
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4533
1 2 3 4 5 6
15 00 13 13
14 00 00 20
19 00 01 06
16 00 09 59
17 00 00 20
18 00 00 20
13 00 08 61
11 00 04 33
10 00 02 48
8 00 08 54
9 00 00 20
4 00 21 68
3 00 00 20
78dPpk jkLrk 00 02 42
1 00 00 20
csyok jk; Vksyk ukjh vkjok 263 00 17 05
Fkkuk uacj&71 265 00 00 20
262 00 00 20
268 00 01 86
267 00 05 22
269 00 03 19
271 00 00 27
270 00 13 86
275 00 00 92
276 00 06 47
285 dsuky 00 05 05
284 00 11 21
282 00 00 30
247 00 12 36
248 00 00 20
245 00 00 64
244 00 00 20
2431653 00 07 14
4534 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
242 00 06 46
241 00 00 63
231 00 07 38
229 00 00 20
230 00 07 20
210 00 04 72
209 00 17 72
208 00 04 39
Nijk Hkkl 8120 00 02 73
Fkkuk uacj&56 8121 00 03 52
8122 00 00 20
8119 00 08 93
8116 00 05 23
8117 00 04 80
8114 00 00 20
8113 00 07 02
8115 00 05 17
8112 00 10 31
8110 00 00 20
8111 00 00 92
8109 00 06 51
7942 00 00 20
7943 00 00 20
7944 00 00 20
8106 00 05 13
8105 00 04 19
8107 00 00 94
8108 00 00 20
81048162 00 02 33
8104 00 05 11
8103 00 03 44
8101 00 00 20
8102 00 12 51
8098 00 23 85[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4535
1 2 3 4 5 6
7969 00 00 20
8096 00 00 20
8095 00 07 40
8094 00 00 77
8093 00 08 45
7980 00 07 53
8091 00 01 17
8092 00 00 20
8089 00 29 20
8088 jkLrk 00 05 09
8087 00 05 44
8085 00 00 20
8086¹dsuky 00 03 10
8084 00 18 49
8083 00 12 47
8081 00 02 06
8082 00 05 18
8080 00 05 31
8079 00 13 57
8077 00 09 61
8078 00 00 20
8063 00 07 90
8075 00 08 65
8074 00 05 87
8065 00 00 20
8066 00 07 43
8073 00 09 58
8072 00 00 20
8067 00 03 69
8059 00 03 29
8056 00 04 25
8048 00 05 20
8047 00 03 45
4536 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
8041 00 00 57
8038 00 05 04
8040 00 01 07
6436 00 00 69
8037 00 08 46
8036 00 00 20
6437 00 04 65
8035 00 00 47
6442 00 01 55
6443 00 00 20
8032 00 07 95
8031 00 05 32
8028 00 07 27
8027 00 03 35
6445 00 05 27
8026 00 00 20
7516 00 05 59
7513 00 03 79
7517 00 09 93
7519 00 00 82
7520 00 00 20
7535 00 00 20
7524 00 06 29
7521 00 00 20
7523 00 01 94
7522 00 01 84
7507 00 08 96
7500 00 14 25
7501 00 00 20
7499 00 00 20
7498 00 00 40
7497 00 22 42
7380 00 00 20
7496 00 01 88
7492 00 01 74
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4537
1 2 3 4 5 6
7493 00 05 87
7489 00 00 20
7490 00 05 61
7488 00 10 63
7486 00 07 27
7484 00 00 79
7491 00 12 02
7483 00 00 20
7386 00 00 20
7479 00 00 52
7478 00 10 02
7475 00 00 37
7476 00 02 43
7477 00 02 93
7463 00 03 45
7464 00 00 20
7461 00 09 20
7462 00 08 30
7447 jkLrk 00 04 18
6501 00 27 75
6502 00 06 60
6503 00 11 78
5971 00 00 69
5970 00 00 98
5969 00 05 85
5964 00 01 19
5965 00 07 17
5967 00 03 17
5966 00 02 76
5940 00 17 73
5939 00 03 93
5929 00 07 93
5938 00 01 88
5930 00 16 42
4538 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
5918 00 07 16
5919 00 00 20
5932 00 00 20
5917 00 06 94
5916 00 05 98
5898 00 00 20
5900 00 00 20
5901 00 31 61
5905 00 00 20
5906 00 03 08
[पफा. सं. आर.-25011/17/2013-ओआर-I]
पवन वुफमार, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 5th August, 2013
S.O. 1630.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited in Dist. East Champaran in the State of Bihar for 'Patna to Motihari and Baitalpur Pipeline' for the transportation of Petroleum Product;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land, to Shri Arun Kumar Jha B.A.S. & Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited.
(Pipelines Division) P.O. Dhelwan, Sipara, Dist. Patna (Bihar.) Pin – 800020.
SCHEDULE
Dist.: Purba Champaran
State : Bihar
Mouja / Village Survey/Block No. Sub-Div-No. Area
Hectare Are Sq.mtr. (1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6) DAMO BIRTI 1169 00 15 34 Thana No:-177 1172 00 00 20
1168 00 01 43
1167 00 06 15
1166 00 00 81[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4539
1 2 3 4 5 6
1164 00 00 92
1163 00 11 73
1161 00 00 20
1162 00 14 54
1159 00 01 85
1058(ROAD) 00 04 77
652 00 00 20
648 00 12 32
645 00 10 91
646 00 06 70
643 00 03 43
642 00 03 35
647 00 00 20
641 00 04 28
611 00 06 26
613 00 00 45
612 00 09 40
609 00 05 28
445 00 11 73
444 00 00 20
446 00 02 87
455 00 10 65
447 00 00 20
454 00 10 17
461 00 00 20
462 00 06 26
460 00 00 20
463 00 07 64
466 00 07 07
465 00 03 46
467 00 03 83
468 00 00 20
469 00 02 09
471 00 01 83
479 00 25 53
491 00 00 20
482 00 00 20
478 00 00 20
480 00 12 79
4540 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
518 00 04 82
520 00 04 54
521 00 00 20
522 00 00 20
519 00 15 02
514 00 00 20
517 00 00 20
512 00 01 96
NAWADA 1942 00 04 14
Thana No:-180 1943 00 00 69
1944 00 00 20
1941 00 07 70
1938 00 01 00
1939 00 00 20
1936 00 03 04
1937 00 12 37
1931 00 00 20
1930 00 02 73
1880 00 00 20
1881 00 18 15
1879 00 02 63
1876 00 06 64
1882 00 06 02
1874 00 04 19
1873 00 00 20
1884 00 01 51
1885 00 09 91
1886 00 00 20
1889 00 03 78
1887 00 00 26
1888 00 03 28
1890 00 00 20
1784 00 06 97
1785 00 05 29
1786 00 00 20
1783 00 00 20
1781 00 04 46
1782 00 05 19
1678 00 00 20
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4541
1 2 3 4 5 6
1683 00 00 20
1684 00 00 20
1683/2060 00 01 47
1682 00 03 30
1698 00 06 60
1699 00 00 73
1697 00 01 23
1711 00 02 82
1709 00 00 20
1710 00 08 10
1712 00 00 65
1715/2062 00 08 03
1714 00 00 85
1715 00 08 55
1521 00 00 20
1519 00 00 20
1520 00 05 87
1716 00 00 20
1487 00 10 17
1486 00 04 62
1489 00 05 41
1495 00 03 13
1491 00 00 20
1490 00 00 20
1494 00 01 68
1496 00 07 70
1510 00 00 20
1497 00 01 23
1509 00 06 69
1502 00 09 66
1475 00 00 20
1503 00 06 56
1474 00 03 50
1471 00 00 20
1472/2052 00 00 20
1473 00 07 46
1553 00 00 20
1472 00 03 15
1427 00 07 08
4542 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
1425 00 00 20
1424 00 04 36
1423 00 06 13
1422 00 00 54
1407 00 06 50
1412 00 00 20
1411 00 02 36
1410 00 15 27
1415 00 01 11
1133(ROAD) 00 15 36
1130 00 00 20
1131 00 01 98
1129 00 00 20
1132 00 14 27
222 00 07 85
221 00 00 20
223 00 02 06
224 00 00 48
220 00 13 98
219 00 00 20
218 00 00 70
WOLHA 1051 00 00 20
Thana No:-165 1052 00 03 65
1038 00 12 81
1039 00 08 08
1040 00 08 83
1041 00 00 20
MISIR TOLA 496 00 00 39
Thana No:-163 493 00 10 16
502 00 06 21
503 00 09 20
505 00 01 04
504 00 00 83
364 00 00 20
479 00 10 26
480 00 00 90
478 00 08 34
477 00 06 18
365 00 02 39
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4543
1 2 3 4 5 6
388 00 02 53
384 00 05 37
370 00 00 20
385 00 00 20
383 00 06 83
382 00 00 20
378 00 10 10
379 00 02 30
377 00 00 84
330-Road 00 01 80
329-Road 00 03 31
310-Road 00 02 21
317 00 00 20
318 00 11 94
301-Canal
00 01 68
300 00 04 21
299 00 07 04
248 00 12 11
247 00 01 32
249 00 08 04
246 00 04 37
283-Road 00 02 71
266 00 09 21
267 00 02 98
267/499 00 01 80
263 00 00 20
262 00 00 20
264 00 16 56
255 00 00 20
260 00 02 29
257 00 06 30
258 00 03 11
129 00 14 21
131 00 01 25
152 00 11 49
151 00 02 51
150 00 06 71
140 00 05 98
139 00 00 67
138 00 00 20
4544 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
93 00 11 71
92-Road 00 02 07
143 00 00 88
90 00 14 40
91 00 00 20
89 00 17 17
88 00 00 20
85 00 00 65
86 00 20 49
87 00 00 20
2 00 36 63
28 00 04 16
27 00 21 22
26 00 01 71
25 00 00 20
21 00 00 46
1-Nala 00 02 61
511-Nala 00 01 75
AHIR GANWA 402 00 03 95
Thana No:-162 401 00 09 60
400-Road 00 04 55
399 00 06 52
398 00 14 48
396 00 11 33
44 00 14 56
46 00 16 28
51 00 06 38
36 00 52 21
17 00 09 76
16 00 13 18
15 00 11 16
RAMPURWA 246 00 12 46
Thana No:-160 261 00 19 27
262 00 05 95
260 00 12 32
263 00 00 20
282 00 06 48
265 00 11 66
281 00 02 37
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4545
1 2 3 4 5 6
294 00 22 88
295 00 00 20
296 00 02 14
297 00 27 58
328 00 00 20
336-Road 00 06 58
337 00 02 51
7 00 20 77
6 00 00 20
9 00 07 48
8 00 05 49
10 00 01 95
11 00 00 20
12-Nala 00 04 05
GAY GHAT 213-Mekhwa Nadi 00 06 55
Thana No:-153 214-Mekhwa Nadi 00 07 24
215-Mekhwa Nadi 00 02 12
216 00 10 01 217 00 00 20 208 00 08 25 220 00 13 38 221 00 15 24 230 01 12 26
144-SH-54 00 03 19
265 00 00 20 262 00 02 59
143-Cart track 00 02 26
128 00 32 56 139 00 05 21 112 00 11 08 142 00 53 19 97 00 00 34 96 00 03 34 93 00 05 36 91 00 10 84 89 00 00 20 87 00 00 20 88 00 10 54 85 00 07 43 86 00 00 204546 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1
2 3 4 5 6
81 00 07 94
82 00 00 66
267-Road 00 04 28 LOHIYAR UJAIN (Road) 00 04 02
Thana No:-133 2745 00 08 06
2746 00 02 60
2747 00 13 55
2748 00 03 11
2753 00 01 12
2752 00 03 15
2761 00 19 63
2762 00 00 20
2764 00 05 73
2760 00 00 57
2759 00 02 82
2682-Road 00 01 89
2765 00 10 36 2768 00 08 97 2785 00 18 02 2767 00 06 73 2787 00 01 06
2786 (Road) 00 00 26
2678 00 06 73 2676 00 30 79 2677 00 02 63 2675 00 00 26 2654 00 14 50 2650 00 07 94 2656 00 06 23 2655 00 04 73 2644 00 13 91 2646 00 09 72 2647 00 19 08 2611 00 21 85 2607 00 04 76 2606 00 00 96 2605 00 09 84 2597 00 06 05 2598 00 00 20[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4547
1 2 3 4 5 6
2588 00 00 20
2573 00 12 93
2572 00 17 21
3010 00 07 91
2574 00 01 53
2570 00 03 24
2568 00 07 83
2563 00 04 67
2564 00 00 20
2566 00 14 29
2567 00 00 52
2553 00 51 55
2554 00 10 34
1764 00 00 20
1765 00 00 66
1727 00 00 20
1762 00 18 84
1729 00 05 87
1730 00 07 46
1725 00 21 27
1724 00 02 66
1721 00 34 09
1622-Road 00 03 38
1709 00 00 20 1708 00 00 20
1623-Nala 00 06 73
1545 00 39 54 1544 00 00 20 1543 00 07 15 1546 00 05 74 1542 00 25 78 1541 00 08 91 1540 00 00 20
1522(Dhanauti River) 00 12 17
JAISINHPUR Thana No:-85 4291 00 07 14
4292 00 04 23
4289 00 03 96
4250-Road 00 03 82
4286 00 08 30 4283 00 03 82 4284 00 01 42 4282 00 07 154548 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
4272 00 04 34
4281 00 11 64
4280 00 12 95
4278 00 09 30
4277 00 07 58
4298 00 09 37
4305 00 00 20
4299 00 10 61
4300 00 02 15
4301 00 00 20
4538-Cart track 00 28 10
4541 00 03 05 4540 00 01 15 4539 00 00 20 4537 00 06 41 4536 00 02 67
4502-Road 00 03 60
4464 00 17 45 4489 00 08 20 4490 00 00 20 4488 00 13 68 4467 00 00 20 4483 00 05 05 4480 00 03 68 4482 00 00 97 4472 00 00 20 4481 00 02 15 4473 00 05 60 4437 00 01 77 4474 00 12 22 4477 00 15 42 4418 00 00 20 4505 00 00 20 4475 00 00 20 4476 00 00 20 4436 00 00 20 4435 00 15 08 4427 00 26 87 4425 00 04 20 4426 00 09 60 4424 00 13 77 4445 00 00 40[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4549
1 2 3 4 5 6
4381 00 20 75
4392 00 00 20
4391 00 00 45
4382 00 00 62
4383 00 00 20
4390 00 13 64
4389-6841 00 01 89
4389 00 10 57
4388 00 00 75
4013-Road 00 04 97
4015 00 22 21 4020 00 00 20 4019 00 19 67 4021 00 00 68 4022 00 22 69 4023 00 11 77 3968 00 00 39
3964 -Road 00 05 71
2744 00 07 10 2743 00 00 32 2745 00 17 66 2747 00 27 00 2746 00 00 20 2739 00 00 20 2748 00 17 63 2749 00 00 20 2727 00 03 30 2738 00 00 94 2728 00 04 11 2729 00 09 09 2731 00 09 73 2732 00 07 41 2730 00 05 17
2532-Road 00 04 69
2523 00 11 42 2524 00 08 74 2525 00 06 33 2526 00 02 11 2501 00 01 284550 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
2498 00 08 50
2432 00 15 71
2433 00 00 20
2449 00 07 09
2431 00 14 01
2450 00 06 74
2451 00 08 71
2454 00 00 20
2453 00 00 20
2430 00 00 66
2387 00 31 89
2461/6829 00 04 99
2462 00 00 20
2463 00 00 80
2386 00 01 63
2368-Road 00 05 71
2385 00 00 20 2366 00 01 21 2367 00 06 95 2365 00 00 20 2360 00 28 27 2364 00 01 20 2361 00 00 40 2363 00 00 20 2359 00 00 89 2358 00 00 31 489 00 16 06 490 00 01 01 484 00 04 81 491 00 07 36 492 00 09 09 493 00 02 56 495 00 19 16 518 00 09 60 523 00 03 99 522 00 05 97 526 00 06 36 525 00 00 20 535 00 03 73[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4551
1 2 3 4 5 6
529 00 01 04
532 00 01 48
531 00 01 91
533 00 05 02
534 00 08 60
177 00 00 20
171 00 02 00
170 00 06 59
169 00 08 12
172 00 00 61
173 00 05 13
174 00 00 20
175 00 08 58
164 00 02 89
165 00 05 37
159 00 05 86
160 00 01 52
142 00 09 81
143 00 00 20
144 00 02 03
146 00 02 74
145 00 04 88
147 00 07 17
148 00 03 74
155 00 00 20
154 00 01 68
151 00 08 38
152 00 00 20
110 00 10 08
91 00 00 56
92 00 00 20
109 00 07 07
108 00 10 01
107 00 04 82
106 00 00 72
104 00 06 18
99 00 07 95
93 00 00 20
100 00 02 01
53-Nala 00 01 54
4552 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
39-Road 00 04 70
38 00 10 03
37 00 06 02
36 00 07 66
32 00 06 81
30 00 01 85
33 00 06 40
25 00 15 72
24 00 00 20
23 00 07 47
722 00 00 20
723 00 07 51
730 00 08 26
731 00 00 20
16 00 06 29
9 00 04 70
741 00 08 73
743 00 00 20
740 00 11 36
744 00 01 76
749 00 07 11
748 00 00 20
763 00 09 93
762 00 09 93
752 00 00 52
753 00 06 29
761 00 01 62
754 00 04 77
760 00 02 02
759 00 04 80
755 00 00 96
758 00 06 33
757 00 11 16
767 00 00 20
769 00 00 94
768 00 10 94
BELWA RAY TOLA BAIRAGI 292 00 07 65
Thana No:-72 291 00 03 05
290 00 03 65
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4553
1 2 3 4 5 6
286/1826 00 02 78
285 00 05 51
286 00 00 20
284 00 14 94
284/1831 00 04 29
282 00 00 34
281 00 03 08
272 00 00 20
280 00 17 94
279 00 00 20
276 00 08 75
274 00 00 20
275 00 03 48
277 00 02 69
225(Road) 00 10 04
218 00 07 25 217 00 05 71 20 00 31 08 216 00 02 03 21 00 10 02 15 00 13 13 14 00 00 20 19 00 01 06 16 00 09 59 17 00 00 20 18 00 00 20 13 00 08 61 11 00 04 33 10 00 02 48 8 00 08 54 9 00 00 20 4 00 21 68 3 00 00 20
78(Cart track) 00 02 42
1 00 00 20
BELWA RAY TOLA 263 00 17 05
NARIARWA 265 00 00 20
Thana No:-71 262 00 00 20
268 00 01 86
4554 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1
2 3 4 5 6
270 00 13 86
275 00 00 92
276 00 06 47
285-CANAL 00 05 05
284 00 11 21
282 00 00 30
247 00 12 36
248 00 00 20
245 00 00 64
244 00 00 20
243/1653 00 07 14
243 00 04 79
240 00 00 20
242 00 06 46
241 00 00 63
231 00 07 38
229 00 00 20
230 00 07 20
210 00 04 72
209 00 17 72
208 00 04 39
CHHAPRA BHAS 8120 00 02 73
Thana No:-56 8121 00 03 52
8122 00 00 20
8119 00 08 93
8116 00 05 23
8117 00 04 80
8114 00 00 20
8113 00 07 02
8115 00 05 17
8112 00 10 31
8110 00 00 20
8111 00 00 92
8109 00 06 51
7942 00 00 20
7943 00 00 20
7944 00 00 20
8106 00 05 13
8105 00 04 19
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4555
1 2 3 4 5 6
8104 00 05 11
8103 00 03 44
8101 00 00 20
8102 00 12 51
8097 00 00 20
8098 00 23 85
7969 00 00 20
8096 00 00 20
8095 00 07 40
8094 00 00 77
8093 00 08 45
7980 00 07 53
8091 00 01 17
8092 00 00 20
8089 00 29 20
8088 (Road) 00 05 09
8087 00 05 44 8085 00 00 20
8086 (Canal) 00 03 10
8084 00 18 49 8083 00 12 47 8081 00 02 06 8082 00 05 18 8080 00 05 31 8079 00 13 57 8077 00 09 61 8078 00 00 20 8063 00 07 90 8075 00 08 65 8074 00 05 87 8065 00 00 20 8066 00 07 43 8073 00 09 58 8072 00 00 20 8067 00 03 69 8059 00 03 29 8056 00 04 25 8048 00 05 20 8047 00 03 454556 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6
8038 00 05 04
8040 00 01 07
6436 00 00 69
8037 00 08 46
8036 00 00 20
6437 00 04 65
8035 00 00 47
6442 00 01 55
6443 00 00 20
8032 00 07 95
8031 00 05 32
8028 00 07 27
8027 00 03 35
6445 00 05 27
8026 00 00 20
7516 00 05 59
7513 00 03 79
7517 00 09 93
7519 00 00 82
7520 00 00 20
7535 00 00 20
7524 00 06 29
7521 00 00 20
7523 00 01 94
7522 00 01 84
7507 00 08 96
7500 00 14 25
7501 00 00 20
7499 00 00 20
7498 00 00 40
7497 00 22 42
7380 00 00 20
7496 00 01 88
7492 00 01 74
7493 00 05 87
7489 00 00 20
7490 00 05 61
7488 00 10 63
7486 00 07 27
7484 00 00 79
7491 00 12 02
7483 00 00 20
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4557
1 2 3 4 5 6
7386 00 00 20
7479 00 00 52
7478 00 10 02
7475 00 00 37
7476 00 02 43
7477 00 02 93
7463 00 03 45
7464 00 00 20
7461 00 09 20
7462 00 08 30
7447(Road) 00 04 18
6501 00 27 75 6502 00 06 60 6503 00 11 78 5971 00 00 69 5970 00 00 98 5969 00 05 85 5964 00 01 19 5965 00 07 17 5967 00 03 17 5966 00 02 76 5940 00 17 73 5939 00 03 93 5929 00 07 93 5938 00 01 88 5930 00 16 42 5924 00 02 53 5918 00 07 16 5919 00 00 20 5932 00 00 20 5917 00 06 94 5916 00 05 98 5898 00 00 20 5900 00 00 20 5901 00 31 61 5905 00 00 20 5906 00 03 08
[F. No. R-25011/17/2013-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
4558 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]ubZ fnYyh] 5 vxLr] 2013
का.आ. 1631.—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksd fgr esa ;g vko";d gS fd iVuk ls eksfrgkjh vkSj csrkyiqj rd isVksfy;e inkFkksZ ds ifjogu gsrq ftyk iqcZ paikju] jkT; fcgkj esa bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs"ku fyfeVsM kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg, A
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko";d izrhr gksrk gS fd ml Hkwfe esa ftlds Hkhrj mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS vkSj tks bl vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa of.kZr gS] mi;ksx dk vtZu fd;k tk,( vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] isVksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbUl Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu vf/kfu;e] 1962 1962 dk 50 dh /kkjk 3 dh mi&/kkjk1 kjk iznk "kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] mDr Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu djus ds vius vk"k; dh ?kks'k.kk djrh gSA
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwph esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks] Hkkjr ds jkti= esa ;Fkk izdkf"kr bl vf/klwpuk dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gS] bDdhl fnu ds vUnj] Hkwfe ds Hkhrj ikbiykbu fcNk, tkus gsrq mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds vtZu ds fy,] Jh v:.k dqekj k] fc-iz-ls- o lke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs"ku fyfeVsM] ikbiykbu fMohtu iVuk] iks-vks- syok] flikjk] ftyk iVuk] fiu% 800020] fcgkj dks fyf[kr :i eas vkksi Hkst ldsxkA
अनुसूची
जिला पूर्व चंपारन
राज्य : बिहार मौजा/ग्राम सर्वे/ब्लाक/सं. ;प्लोट सं.द्ध सब-डीव-सं. क्षेत्रापफल
हेक्टेयर आरे वर्ग मीटर 1
2 3 4 5 6 fcljkeiqj
700 unh 00 17 87 nqcSfy;k
696 00 20 59 Fkkuk uacj&206
695 00 44 43
674 00 01 50
702 00 00 57
673 01 59 59
697 00 05 57
698 00 11 39
665 01 69 45
672 00 09 91
634 00 12 63
633 00 00 20
472 00 02 36
471 00 00 20
473 00 01 93
721 00 01 86
719 00 03 97
474 00 09 37
750 ,EcsdEksUV 00 01 84[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4559 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
fcljkeiqj 489 00 00 20
nqcSfy;k 488 00 07 05
Fkkuk uacj&206 487 00 03 25
490 00 17 71
440 00 26 05
443 00 00 20
439 00 06 97
438 00 08 69
437 00 05 77
402 00 00 20
413 dPpk jkLrk 00 04 63
426 00 00 20
425 00 00 20
401 00 00 20
403 00 03 63
434 00 00 90
406 00 18 17
409 00 03 71
408 00 00 20
410 00 00 40
361 00 23 96
362 00 00 54
363 00 00 20
360 00 00 20
334 jkLrk 00 01 42
gqlsuh 5950 00 07 43
Fkkuk uacj&245 5951 00 02 89
5952 00 05 13
5953 00 09 84
5954 00 08 52
5945 00 00 20
5944 00 00 20
5943 00 00 93
5956 00 01 99
4560 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
gqlsuh 5942 00 05 45
Fkkuk uacj&245 5941 00 03 58
5940 00 04 52
5937 00 00 20
5938 00 01 15
5939 00 03 52
5933 00 00 20
5915 dPpk jkLrk 00 01 69
5934 00 01 83
5935 00 03 52
6039 00 00 20
6040 00 14 45
6038 00 00 20
5914jkLrk 00 01 68
5913jkLrk 00 01 96
5912jkLrk 00 01 42
3113 00 08 42
3112 00 04 11
3106 00 00 20
3105 00 08 72
3108 00 09 57
3104 00 00 20
3103 00 00 47
3102 00 03 09
3109 00 03 30
3101 00 05 27
3100 00 00 20
3072 00 07 35
3073 00 04 44
3074 00 04 63
3075 00 04 84
3076 00 00 20
3088 00 04 02
3078 00 05 00[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4561 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
gqlsuh 3079 00 04 31
Fkkuk uacj&245 3087 00 00 20
3080 00 04 11
3081 00 05 02
3082 00 13 01
3018 00 00 20
3083 00 00 20
2925 00 00 84
2992 00 00 48
2991 00 02 57
3082 00 13 01
2990 00 03 94
2989 00 05 08
2994 00 00 28
2988 00 02 30
2926 00 00 20
2987 00 02 71
2986 00 01 74
2985 00 02 78
2996 00 00 20
2984 00 01 53
2999 00 01 93
2976 00 07 86
2975 00 03 08
2974 00 02 19
2973 00 01 94
3002 00 00 20
2972 00 00 91
2971 00 04 57
2970 00 04 33
2967 00 01 79
2966 00 00 18
2965 00 00 20
2960dPpk jkLrk 00 01 77
666dPpk jkLrk 00 00 20
4562 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
gqlsuh 667 00 00 20
Fkkuk uacj&245 2872 00 60 07
668dPpk jkLrk 00 01 23
2870 00 08 22
648jkLrk 00 03 40
756 00 01 87
735 00 00 20
757 00 01 43
758 00 00 20
755 00 07 47
753 00 00 65
752 00 00 20
754 00 03 85
771 00 01 22
772 00 03 01
773 00 00 20
750 00 14 59
749 00 04 72
775 00 03 63
440 00 01 88
445 00 00 20
441 00 00 20
439 00 04 97
437 00 00 47
438 00 09 59
436 00 01 80
425 00 08 55
435 00 00 20
424 00 00 78
430 00 01 57
427 00 02 71
426 00 00 20
418 00 01 73
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4563
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
gqlsuh 429 00 00 20
Fkkuk uacj&245 320 00 04 44
321 00 00 20
319 00 07 41
801 00 00 20
318 00 02 36
316 00 00 20
803 00 14 91
802 00 00 51
804 00 02 02
811 00 02 11
810 00 04 37
805 00 00 20
806 00 00 20
809 00 07 17
292jkLrk 00 01 08
291jkLrk 00 01 13
290jkLrk 00 01 03
818 00 05 47
817 00 00 20
819 00 10 43
288 ukyk 00 10 47
244 00 01 57
233 00 07 78
232 00 12 28
235 00 00 20
231 00 09 96
230 00 05 71
226 00 06 97
222 00 00 20
223 00 02 51
224 00 09 88
225 00 00 20
4564 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
gqlsuh 210 00 00 20
Fkkuk uacj&245 1158jkLrk 00 03 92
1013 00 01 99
1014 00 10 76
1015 00 06 29
1016 00 19 56
1020 00 00 20
1022 00 00 81
1023 00 08 64
1025 00 03 64
1026 00 00 20
1024 00 09 45
1032 00 09 92
1031 00 00 20
1033 00 00 20
1040 00 00 20
1039 00 01 10
1038 00 13 31
1037 00 07 55
1113 00 00 20
1036 00 07 04
1114 00 00 30
1115 00 05 24
1121 00 00 20
1119 00 05 27
1120 00 09 52
1118 00 00 20
1129 00 00 20
1128 00 07 23
1130 00 18 74
1157dPpk jkLrk 00 02 28
1155 00 03 21
1154 00 00 20
1156 00 04 39
1158 jkLrk 00 03 12
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4565
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1417 00 08 28
1418 00 00 20
1419 00 00 20
1411 00 18 68
1412 00 00 63
1413 00 00 20
1410 00 00 20
1409 00 14 14
1431 00 04 46
1408 00 03 43
1407 00 00 20
1433 00 20 07
1400 00 00 20
1399 00 02 51
1398 00 00 20
1434dPpk jkLrk 00 04 39
1441 00 27 97
1439 00 00 32
jkeiqj [ktqfj;k 3140 00 00 20
Fkkuk uacj&35 3141 00 02 05
3142 00 04 98
3143 00 00 20
lsEHkqvkiqj 1424 00 17 07
Fkkuk uacj&36 1347 00 00 20
1346 00 02 83
1345 00 10 15
1344 00 10 84
1342 00 04 17
1294 00 01 51
1215 00 00 57
1216 00 01 16
1213 00 13 75
1217 00 08 61
4566 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
lsEHkqvkiqj 1220 00 19 67
Fkkuk uacj&36 1262 00 00 20
1261 00 01 85
1260 00 02 86
1259 00 05 16
1256 00 00 20
1258 00 03 84
1257 00 04 96
1252 00 01 80
1232 00 06 79
1233 00 05 98
1245 00 04 83
1246 00 01 38
1244 00 04 53
1247 00 00 20
1243 00 06 51
1242 00 02 98
1241 00 00 20
1497 00 02 10
1510 00 00 20
1506 00 19 46
1507 00 04 63
1505 00 00 21
1727 00 11 05
1730 00 26 85
1733 00 17 85
1734 00 01 78
1732 00 47 55
1735 00 00 62
1736 00 05 36
1737 00 08 84
1739 00 06 74
779 00 00 49
1740 00 07 90
1743 00 01 68
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4567
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1742 00 06 88
762 00 00 84
1744 00 08 34
1763 00 01 46
1749 00 04 38
1750 00 06 29
1751 00 00 20
1752 00 00 90
1753 00 03 05
1754 00 02 71
1755 00 02 72
1756 00 02 04
1757 00 03 96
1758 00 01 02
1760 00 00 20
1759 00 06 17
cjgkjok [kqnZ 1295 00 09 02
Fkkuk uacj&34 1296 00 00 20
1294 00 05 89
1289 00 00 86
1291 00 01 42
1292 00 07 41
1293 00 06 80
1285 00 00 68
1284 00 05 50
1280 00 07 99
1185 00 00 27
1232 00 00 20
1279 00 08 63
1278 00 00 20
1234 00 08 20
1277 00 03 38
1275 00 03 68
4568 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1273 00 18 04
1236 00 01 44
1237 00 00 20
1239 00 04 17
1240 00 00 20
1272 00 02 87
1271 00 03 18
1242 00 10 84
1269 00 01 96
1245 00 05 39
1246 00 05 27
1247 00 03 30
1248 00 03 31
1249 00 06 32
1250 00 04 76
1251 00 00 31
1252 00 00 20
1254 00 00 20
1253 00 05 36
1256 00 04 47
1255 00 00 54
1260 00 07 88
12641659 00 09 91
1264 00 06 13
991 00 00 82
ljksrkj 8743 dPpk jkLrk 00 01 33
Fkkuk uacj&33 8740 00 09 59
8742 00 00 45
8741 00 03 42
8736 00 02 56
8737 00 00 70
8738 00 01 95
8739 00 00 20
8735 00 01 88
8734 00 03 04
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4569
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
8732 00 02 57 8731 00 12 03 8730 00 00 20 8727 00 07 79 8724 00 00 20 8726 00 07 33 8415 00 00 20 8725 00 07 42 8714 00 04 00 8417 00 00 20 8418 00 06 59 8712 00 05 39 8420 00 09 99 8119 00 00 20 8422 00 07 47 8421 00 01 51 8118 00 00 20 8425 00 00 61 8426 00 03 52 8427 00 05 77 8431 jkLrk 00 00 20 7971 00 00 20 7970 00 01 96 7969 00 04 00 7968 00 00 20 7945 00 10 82 7943 00 00 20 7946 00 03 51 7942 00 01 58 7947 00 02 32 7941 00 02 85 7948 00 02 70 7961 00 03 48 7949 00 01 244570 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
7953 00 00 20 7952 00 03 71 7951 00 03 45 7954 00 04 19 7955 00 06 10 7956 00 03 01 7931 00 03 94 7906 00 00 28 7907 00 00 20 7930 00 02 07 7929 00 02 63 7908 00 00 20 7928 00 05 42 7925 00 03 17 7922 00 03 76 7921 00 01 78 7909 00 00 20 7911 00 03 10 7919 00 01 59 7913 00 00 20 7912 00 07 64 7897 00 03 39 7900 00 02 34 7898 00 00 40 7899 00 05 74 7980 00 00 26 7894 00 01 29 4774 00 01 58 7880 00 00 20 8000 00 06 92 7999 00 00 20 8001 00 02 02 8002 00 05 57
8018 00 08 49[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4571 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
8023 00 10 81 8022 00 00 20 4607 00 05 84 4608 00 15 12 4606 00 00 20 4619 00 00 20 1313 00 00 48 1311 00 04 77 4620 00 00 20 1312 00 03 45 1310 00 00 39 1308 00 13 29 1307 00 00 32 1306 00 00 20 1305 00 09 53 1304 00 00 20 1303 00 07 94 1301 00 00 20 1300 00 00 20 1298 00 10 85 1297 00 00 20 1299 00 04 87 1296 00 05 23 4675 00 15 46 1295 00 00 20 4677 00 03 76 4678 00 02 64 4679 00 01 69 1294 00 00 52 4680 00 16 72 1138 00 04 08 931 00 09 33 934 00 00 204572 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 936 00 00 20
937 00 00 38 924 00 32 71 916 00 00 31 949 00 03 67 990 00 02 18 991 00 07 04 998 00 05 87 999 00 03 15 997 00 00 20 1000 00 04 17 1001 00 02 93 1008 00 03 61 1003 00 03 08 1007 00 07 71 1006 00 01 39 1015 00 00 20 10069336 00 06 73 1016 00 01 31 1027 00 03 38 1026 00 04 48 1028 00 00 20 1025 00 03 58 1017 00 00 20 1019 00 09 27 1023 00 00 20 1021 00 00 52 1020 00 06 83 576 00 03 68 575 00 05 73 574 00 00 20 515 00 04 11 516 00 07 47 512 00 00 20 518 00 01 58[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4573 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
520 00 04 67 488 00 03 95 489 00 06 06 487 00 00 20 486 00 13 05 485 00 00 60 484 00 05 99 480 00 10 64 458 00 00 20 459 00 06 93 467 00 00 20 460 00 00 20 464 00 00 89 463 00 12 10 462 00 01 39 97 jkLrk 00 03 15 1670 00 05 11 1668 00 06 42 1667 00 00 20 1672 00 03 64 1673 00 09 76 1674 00 02 37 1741 00 02 39 1740 00 06 78 1739 00 04 79 1745 00 00 65 1738 00 09 86 1746 00 00 71 1737 00 06 79 1736 00 00 20 1730 00 10 25 1765 00 00 20 1766 00 09 06
1767 00 04 724574 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1768 00 09 26 1760 00 00 20 1759 00 07 49 1758 00 01 31 1810 00 04 56 18109339 00 04 26 1809 00 13 97 1808 00 06 57 1807 00 00 20 1806 00 02 23 18069329 00 10 38 1804 00 00 20 1803 00 21 80 1802 00 02 67 1864 00 12 67 1865 00 00 65 1862 00 06 62 1880 00 15 53 1882 00 02 52 1883 00 11 43 1884 00 00 20 1886 00 02 98 1885 00 18 75 1888 00 15 54 1891 00 01 07 1939 00 14 89 1925 00 00 53 1926 00 02 38 1927 00 02 91 1928 00 02 90 1929 00 03 65 1930 00 03 36 1933 00 02 67 1931 00 03 20 1932 00 01 04[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4575 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1935 00 17 43 1922 00 09 90 1921 00 00 20 42 00 06 25 37 00 00 20 41 00 32 04 39 00 00 46 40 00 08 91 15 00 05 98 14 00 00 20
[पफा. सं. आर-25011/17/2013-ओआर-I]
पवन वुफमार, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 5th August, 2013
S.O. 1631.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited in Dist. East Champaran in the State of Bihar for 'Patna to Motihari and Baitalpur Pipeline' for the transportation of Petroleum Product;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land, to Shri Arun Kumar Jha B.A.S. & Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited. (Pipelines Division) P.O. Dhelwan, Sipara, Dist. Patna (Bihar.) Pin – 800020.
SCHEDULE
Dist.: Purba Champaran
State : Bihar Mouja / Village Survey/BlockNo. Sub-Div-No. Area
Hectare Are Sq.mtr. (1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6) BISHRAMPUR DUBAULIYA 700(river) 00 17 87 Thana No:-206 696 00 20 59
695 00 44 43
674 00 01 50
702 00 00 57
673 01 59 59 4576 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
698 00 11 39
665 01 69 45
672 00 09 91
634 00 12 63
633 00 00 20
472 00 02 36
471 00 00 20
473 00 01 93
721 00 01 86
719 00 03 97
474 00 09 37
750 00 01 84
489 00 00 20
488 00 07 05
487 00 03 25
490 00 17 71
440 00 26 05
443 00 00 20
439 00 06 97
438 00 08 69
437 00 05 77
402 00 00 20
413 (CART TRACK) 00 04 63
426 00 00 20
425 00 00 20
401 00 00 20
403 00 03 63
434 00 00 90
406 00 18 17
409 00 03 71
408 00 00 20
410 00 00 40
361 00 23 96
362 00 00 54
363 00 00 20
360 00 00 20
334(ROAD) 00 01 42
HUSENI 5950 00 07 43
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4577
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
5954 00 08 52
5945 00 00 20
5944 00 00 20
5943 00 00 93
5956 00 01 99
5957 00 00 20
5942 00 05 45
5941 00 03 58
5940 00 04 52
5937 00 00 20
5938 00 01 15
5939 00 03 52
5933 00 00 20
5915 (Cart track) 00 01 69
5934 00 01 83
5935 00 03 52
6039 00 00 20
6040 00 14 45
6038 00 00 20
5914(Road) 00 01 68
5913(Road) 00 01 96
5912(Road) 00 01 42
3113 00 08 42
3112 00 04 11
3106 00 00 20
3105 00 08 72
3108 00 09 57
3104 00 00 20
3103 00 00 47
3102 00 03 09
3109 00 03 30
3101 00 05 27
3100 00 00 20
3072 00 07 35
3073 00 04 44
3074 00 04 63
3075 00 04 84
3076 00 00 20
3088 00 04 02
3077 00 02 16
4578 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
3087 00 00 20
3080 00 04 11
3081 00 05 02
3082 00 13 01
3018 00 00 20
3083 00 00 20
2925 00 00 84
2992 00 00 48
2991 00 02 57
2990 00 03 94
2989 00 05 08
2994 00 00 28
2988 00 02 30
2926 00 00 20
2987 00 02 71
2986 00 01 74
2985 00 02 78
2996 00 00 20
2984 00 01 53
2999 00 01 93
2976 00 07 86
2975 00 03 08
2974 00 02 19
2973 00 01 94
3002 00 00 20
2972 00 00 91
2971 00 04 57
2970 00 04 33
2967 00 01 79
2966 00 00 18
2965 00 00 20
2960(Cart track) 00 01 77
666(Cart track) 00 00 20
667 00 00 20
2872 00 60 07
668(Cart track) 00 01 23
2870 00 08 22
648(Road) 00 03 40
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4579
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
755 00 07 47 753 00 00 65 752 00 00 20 754 00 03 85 771 00 01 22 772 00 03 01 773 00 00 20 750 00 14 59 749 00 04 72 775 00 03 63 440 00 01 88 445 00 00 20 441 00 00 20 439 00 04 97 437 00 00 47 438 00 09 59 436 00 01 80 425 00 08 55 435 00 00 20 424 00 00 78 430 00 01 57 427 00 02 71 426 00 00 20 418 00 01 73 417 00 00 55 428 00 07 66 429 00 00 20 320 00 04 44 321 00 00 20 319 00 07 41 801 00 00 20 318 00 02 36 316 00 00 20 803 00 14 91 802 00 00 51 804 00 02 02 811 00 02 11 810 00 04 374580 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
291(Road) 00 01 13 290(Road) 00 01 03 818 00 05 47 817 00 00 20 819 00 10 43 288(Nala) 00 10 47 244 00 01 57 233 00 07 78 232 00 12 28 235 00 00 20 231 00 09 96 230 00 05 71 226 00 06 97 222 00 00 20 223 00 02 51 224 00 09 88 225 00 00 20 213 00 02 06 212 00 09 56 210 00 00 20 1158(Road) 00 03 92 1013 00 01 99 1014 00 10 76 1015 00 06 29 1016 00 19 56 1020 00 00 20 1022 00 00 81 1023 00 08 64 1025 00 03 64 1026 00 00 20 1024 00 09 45 1032 00 09 92 1031 00 00 20 1033 00 00 20 1040 00 00 20 1039 00 01 10 1038 00 13 31 1037 00 07 55 1113 00 00 20[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4581 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1121 00 00 20
1119 00 05 27
1120 00 09 52
1118 00 00 20
1129 00 00 20
1128 00 07 23
1130 00 18 74
1157(Cart track) 00 02 28
1155 00 03 21
1154 00 00 20
1156 00 04 39
1158-Road 00 03 12
1417 00 08 28
1418 00 00 20
1419 00 00 20
1411 00 18 68
1412 00 00 63
1413 00 00 20
1410 00 00 20
1409 00 14 14
1431 00 04 46
1408 00 03 43
1407 00 00 20
1433 00 20 07
1400 00 00 20
1399 00 02 51
1398 00 00 20
1434(Cart track) 00 04 39
1441 00 27 97
1439 00 00 32
RAMPUR 3140 00 00 20
KHAJURIYA Thana No:-35 3141 00 02 05
3142 00 04 98
3143 00 00 20
SEMBHUAPUR 1424 00 17 07
Thana No:-36 1347 00 00 20
1346 00 02 83
1345 00 10 15
1344 00 10 84
4582 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1216 00 01 16 1213 00 13 75 1217 00 08 61 1219 00 04 92 1264 00 00 20 1220 00 19 67 1262 00 00 20 1261 00 01 85 1260 00 02 86 1259 00 05 16 1256 00 00 20 1258 00 03 84 1257 00 04 96 1252 00 01 80 1232 00 06 79 1233 00 05 98 1245 00 04 83 1246 00 01 38 1244 00 04 53 1247 00 00 20 1243 00 06 51 1242 00 02 98 1241 00 00 20 1497 00 02 10 1510 00 00 20 1506 00 19 46 1507 00 04 63 1505 00 00 21 1727 00 11 05 1730 00 26 85 1733 00 17 85 1734 00 01 78 1732 00 47 55 1735 00 00 62 1736 00 05 36 1737 00 08 84 1739 00 06 74 779 00 00 49 1740 00 07 90 1743 00 01 68[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4583 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1744 00 08 34
1763 00 01 46
1749 00 04 38
1750 00 06 29
1751 00 00 20
1752 00 00 90
1753 00 03 05
1754 00 02 71
1755 00 02 72
1756 00 02 04
1757 00 03 96
1758 00 01 02
1760 00 00 20
1759 00 06 17
BARHARWA KHURD 1295 00 09 02
Thana No:-34 1296 00 00 20
1294 00 05 89
1289 00 00 86
1291 00 01 42
1292 00 07 41
1293 00 06 80
1285 00 00 68
1284 00 05 50
1280 00 07 99
1185 00 00 27
1232 00 00 20
1279 00 08 63
1278 00 00 20
1234 00 08 20
1277 00 03 38
1275 00 03 68
1276 00 00 99
1274 00 03 34
1273 00 18 04
1236 00 01 44
1237 00 00 20
1239 00 04 17
1240 00 00 20
1272 00 02 87
1271 00 03 18
4584 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1245 00 05 39
1246 00 05 27
1247 00 03 30
1248 00 03 31
1249 00 06 32
1250 00 04 76
1251 00 00 31
1252 00 00 20
1254 00 00 20
1253 00 05 36
1256 00 04 47
1255 00 00 54
1260 00 07 88
1264/1659 00 09 91
1264 00 06 13
991 00 00 82
SAROTAR 8743(Cart Track) 00 01 33
Thana No:-33 8740 00 09 59
8742 00 00 45
8741 00 03 42
8736 00 02 56
8737 00 00 70
8738 00 01 95
8739 00 00 20
8735 00 01 88
8734 00 03 04
8732 00 02 57
8731 00 12 03
8730 00 00 20
8727 00 07 79
8724 00 00 20
8726 00 07 33
8415 00 00 20
8725 00 07 42
8714 00 04 00
8417 00 00 20
8418 00 06 59
8712 00 05 39
8420 00 09 99
8119 00 00 20
8422 00 07 47
8421 00 01 51
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4585
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
8118 00 00 20 8425 00 00 61 8426 00 03 52 8427 00 05 77 8431-Road 00 00 20 7971 00 00 20 7970 00 01 96 7969 00 04 00 7968 00 00 20 7945 00 10 82 7943 00 00 20 7946 00 03 51 7942 00 01 58 7947 00 02 32 7941 00 02 85 7948 00 02 70 7961 00 03 48 7949 00 01 24 7950 00 00 98 7953 00 00 20 7952 00 03 71 7951 00 03 45 7954 00 04 19 7955 00 06 10 7956 00 03 01 7931 00 03 94 7906 00 00 28 7907 00 00 20 7930 00 02 07 7929 00 02 63 7908 00 00 20 7928 00 05 42 7925 00 03 17 7922 00 03 76 7921 00 01 78 7909 00 00 20 7911 00 03 10 7919 00 01 59 7913 00 00 204586 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
7898 00 00 40 7899 00 05 74 7980 00 00 26 7894 00 01 29 4774 00 01 58 7880 00 00 20 8000 00 06 92 7999 00 00 20 8001 00 02 02 8002 00 05 57 8017 00 00 20 8018 00 08 49 8023 00 10 81 8022 00 00 20 4607 00 05 84 4608 00 15 12 4606 00 00 20 4619 00 00 20 1313 00 00 48 1311 00 04 77 4620 00 00 20 1312 00 03 45 1310 00 00 39 1308 00 13 29 1307 00 00 32 1306 00 00 20 1305 00 09 53 1304 00 00 20 1303 00 07 94 1301 00 00 20 1300 00 00 20 1298 00 10 85 1297 00 00 20 1299 00 04 87 1296 00 05 23 4675 00 15 46 1295 00 00 20 4677 00 03 76 4678 00 02 64[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4587 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1138 00 04 08 931 00 09 33 934 00 00 20 925 00 02 52 933 00 13 23 936 00 00 20 937 00 00 38 924 00 32 71 916 00 00 31 949 00 03 67 990 00 02 18 991 00 07 04 998 00 05 87 999 00 03 15 997 00 00 20 1000 00 04 17 1001 00 02 93 1008 00 03 61 1003 00 03 08 1007 00 07 71 1006 00 01 39 1015 00 00 20 1006/9336 00 06 73 1016 00 01 31 1027 00 03 38 1026 00 04 48 1028 00 00 20 1025 00 03 58 1017 00 00 20 1019 00 09 27 1023 00 00 20 1021 00 00 52 1020 00 06 83 576 00 03 68 575 00 05 73 574 00 00 20 515 00 04 11 516 00 07 47 512 00 00 204588 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
488 00 03 95 489 00 06 06 487 00 00 20 486 00 13 05 485 00 00 60 484 00 05 99 480 00 10 64 458 00 00 20 459 00 06 93 467 00 00 20 460 00 00 20 464 00 00 89 463 00 12 10 462 00 01 39 97-Road 00 03 15 1670 00 05 11 1668 00 06 42 1667 00 00 20 1672 00 03 64 1673 00 09 76 1674 00 02 37 1741 00 02 39 1740 00 06 78 1739 00 04 79 1745 00 00 65 1738 00 09 86 1746 00 00 71 1737 00 06 79 1736 00 00 20 1730 00 10 25 1765 00 00 20 1766 00 09 06 1729 00 03 76 1767 00 04 72 1768 00 09 26 1760 00 00 20 1759 00 07 49 1758 00 01 31
1808 00 06 57[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4589 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
1807 00 00 20 1806 00 02 23 1806/9329 00 10 38 1804 00 00 20 1803 00 21 80 1802 00 02 67 1864 00 12 67 1865 00 00 65 1862 00 06 62 1880 00 15 53 1882 00 02 52 1883 00 11 43 1884 00 00 20 1886 00 02 98 1885 00 18 75 1888 00 15 54 1891 00 01 07 1939 00 14 89 1925 00 00 53 1926 00 02 38 1927 00 02 91 1928 00 02 90 1929 00 03 65 1930 00 03 36 1933 00 02 67 1931 00 03 20 1932 00 01 04 1935 00 17 43 1922 00 09 90 1921 00 00 20 42 00 06 25 37 00 00 20 41 00 32 04 39 00 00 46 40 00 08 91 15 00 05 98 14 00 00 20
[F. No. R-25011/17/2013-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
4590 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]नई दिल्ली, 5 अगस्त, 2013
का.आ. 1632.—केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसा प्रतीत होता है कि लोक हित में यह आवश्यक है कि पटना से मोतिहारी और बेतालपुर तक पेट्रोलियम पदार्थों के परिवहन हेतु जिला पूर्व चंपारन, राज्य बिहार में इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ।
और केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में जिसके भीतर उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित है, उपयोग का अर्जन किया जाए;
अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, पैट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन्स (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उप-धारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उक्त भूमि में उपयोग के अध्ािंकार 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, भारत के राजपत्र में यथा-प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं, इक्कीस दिन के अन्दर, भूमि के भीतर पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने हेतु उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के लिए, श्री अरूण कुमार झा, बि.प्र.से. व सक्षम प्राधिकारी इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड (पाइपलाइन डिवीजन) पटना, पो.ओ. ढेलवा, सिपारा, जिला पटना, पिन : 800020, बिहार को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा।
अनुसूची
जिला : पूर्व चंपारन
राज्य : बिहार
मौजा/ग्राम सर्वे/ब्लाक/सं. ;प्लॉट सं.द्ध सब-डीव-सं. क्षेत्रापफल
हेक्टेयर आरे वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6
HkVkSyh;k 3749 00 30 75
Fkkuk uacj&193 3748 00 00 20
3750 00 10 55
3747 00 03 27
3746 00 00 20
3745 00 12 39
3744 00 00 20
ukSru 775 00 06 60
Fkkuk uacj&194 774 00 10 83
772 00 14 31
769 00 00 20
771 00 05 75
782 00 00 20
800 00 09 15
801 00 05 29
799 00 00 20
802 00 19 97
976 00 05 73
975 00 00 39
974 00 04 69
973 00 04 32
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4591
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
969 00 02 97 970 00 05 09 964 00 01 63 963 00 07 77 962 00 09 49 848 00 04 99 849 00 01 47 850 00 03 65 847/1179 00 01 15 842 00 00 60 841 00 05 31 840 00 05 00 837 00 00 20 838 00 07 75 835 00 04 28 836 00 00 20 831 00 08 98 833 00 00 20 830 00 02 36 833/1195 00 01 51 832 00 05 47 427 00 00 20 426 00 05 75 436 00 07 53 435 00 00 67 438 00 18 14 439 00 00 20 440 00 05 94 442 00 13 04 441 00 00 55 422 00 20 98 417 00 00 20 418 00 01 29 419 00 00 20 421 00 13 83 420 00 00 58 493 00 10 71 494 00 00 804592 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
365 00 00 47
364 00 02 77
363 00 03 40
497 00 00 36
498 00 00 20
355 00 11 39
356 00 00 20
354 00 01 76
353 00 09 56
345 00 02 03
346 00 02 85
347 00 06 16
340 00 14 14
341 00 00 20
342 00 01 74
338 00 11 87
337 00 06 40
339 00 08 21
317 00 02 65
316 00 00 20
cjok 1487 00 01 87
Fkkuk uacj&195 1488 00 00 20
1486 00 09 70
1456 00 29 94
1457 00 00 20
1458 00 00 93
1454 00 15 18
1453 00 00 20
1459 00 00 20
1455 00 00 20
1451रास्ता 00 02 43
1448 00 11 45
1449 00 04 92
1447 00 03 89
1445 00 00 85
1444 00 05 45
1443 00 00 20
1442 00 00 20
1441 00 03 09
1440 00 03 80
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4593
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1439 00 01 64 1436 00 09 18 1419 00 01 80 1417 00 06 81 1416 00 00 20 1413 00 13 58 1414 00 00 20 1412 00 00 20 1386 00 02 04 1384 00 02 27 1387 00 07 26 1383 00 06 48 1380 00 05 87 1381 00 00 20 1378 00 00 20 1379 00 07 84 1356 00 00 20 1376 00 00 20 1358 00 07 08 1359 00 00 20 1360 00 05 33 1361 00 01 14 1374 00 01 53 1364 00 00 20 1362 00 07 01 1363 00 03 51 1341 00 01 59 1343 00 00 20 1339 00 13 29 1338 00 03 77 1337 00 00 20 1336 00 03 22 1335 00 03 27 1334 00 11 73 413 रास्ता 00 02 62 195 00 01 42 196 00 10 11 197 00 00 20
190 00 22 544594 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
189 00 00 20
185 00 06 99
182 00 00 20
184 00 08 14
183 00 12 38
179 00 00 20
160 00 01 48
161 00 06 29
162 00 05 10
91 00 00 63
163 00 02 29
164 00 00 52
90 00 07 65
166 00 06 46
89 00 01 92
167 00 04 64
168 00 02 59
87 00 03 49
169 00 00 31
86 00 10 11
e/kqcuh 12553 00 00 83
Fkkuk uacj&176 12552 00 11 93
12551 00 00 51
12556 00 04 38
12549 00 01 08
12557 00 01 81
12562 00 00 25
12563 00 00 20
12564 00 00 20
12548 00 15 16
12547 00 00 63
12532 00 22 08
12533 00 00 20
12531 00 00 37
12527 00 00 20
12528 00 08 12
12529 00 03 59
12526 00 03 60
12525 00 01 91
12523 00 07 24
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4595
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
12519 00 08 96 12518 00 07 43 12516 00 00 20 12520 00 05 04 12716 00 01 33 12484 00 10 90 12718 00 00 20 12786 00 03 67 12785 00 06 72 12784 00 00 58 12783 00 09 41 12782 00 07 74 12757 00 00 20 12758 00 12 61 12759 00 00 20 12760 00 05 63 12755/15504 00 04 51 12761 00 09 44 12762 00 09 84 12764 00 00 20 12763 00 01 89 13460 00 10 57 13458 00 00 20 13459 00 05 43 13463 00 06 74 13465 00 09 87 13467 00 07 95 13470 00 00 99 13431 00 08 18 13430 00 06 01 13429 00 00 80 13428 00 04 64 13427 00 00 20 13415 00 10 00 13415/15550 00 00 20 13415/15552 00 07 89 13409 00 00 20 13416 00 03 89 13417 00 00 20 13408 00 09 744596 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
13411 00 00 20 13407 00 06 39 13406 00 00 20 13504 00 04 02 13660 00 13 42 13661 00 01 23 13669 00 00 70 13668 00 10 34 13667 00 03 57 13666 00 02 33 13665 00 04 90 13692 00 00 20 13693 00 09 37 13694 00 06 17 13695 00 00 40 13687 00 00 20 13686 00 07 03 13702 00 00 20 13685 00 00 40 13731 00 06 48 13684 00 00 20 13733 00 01 77 13732 00 01 74 13734 00 04 35 13730 00 01 49 13735 00 08 20 13736 00 00 20 13737 00 01 51 14970 00 00 49 14969 00 06 57 14971 00 01 99 14968 00 05 96 14966 00 07 61 14967 00 00 20 14964 00 02 24 14965 00 06 21 14963 00 00 20 5761 00 00 78 5763 00 01 78[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4597 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
5776 00 03 32
5764 00 08 16
5772/15469 00 03 83
5774 00 00 20
5773 00 02 79
5772 00 05 67
5771 00 04 82
5770 00 01 66
5775 00 04 90
5827 00 03 45
5826 00 09 16
5834 00 10 28
5832 00 00 20
5833 00 00 83
5840 00 09 53
5839 00 01 44
5841 00 07 11
5842 00 01 57
5843 00 06 51
5844 00 01 96
14907 00 00 20
14906 00 00 54
14902 00 04 53
14903 00 07 29
14904 00 03 09
13840 00 00 20
13841 00 15 86
14884 00 00 20
13842 00 00 82
13845 00 03 10
13844 00 01 66
13843 00 00 20
13846 रास्ता 00 02 37
14871 रास्ता 00 02 79
13884 00 00 77
14874 00 01 81
14858 00 03 10
14862 00 05 07
14861 00 06 68
4598 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
14864 00 09 61 14869 00 00 20 14865 00 00 20 14868 00 03 90 14867 00 08 74 14866 00 07 90 6792 00 11 10 6795 00 00 20 6793 00 10 67 6794 00 00 45 6789 रास्ता 00 04 34 6787 00 03 48 6786 00 00 44 6788 00 10 52 6407 00 14 92 6411 00 14 78 6416 00 00 28 6418 00 05 06 6417 00 08 75 6421 00 00 20 6430 00 11 95 6429 00 05 78 6431 00 03 70 6428 00 00 32 6432 00 09 62 6427 00 07 23 6456 00 07 12 6457 00 03 02 6455 00 04 75 6458 00 08 26 6462 00 00 20 6461 00 00 91 6459 00 04 32 6460 00 03 66 6478 00 11 92 6505 00 02 31 6506 00 11 81 6507 00 14 47 6511 00 00 95
6510 00 06 55[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4599 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
6509 00 04 78 6512 00 02 07 6524 रास्ता 00 04 07 6535 00 06 09 6534 00 04 50 6533 00 03 46 6532 00 01 71 6072 00 10 46 6073 00 00 20 6071 00 19 48 6079 00 00 20 6080 00 00 20 6082 00 03 15 6083 00 05 39 6070 00 00 40 6084 00 14 44 6068 00 19 91 6087 00 03 09 299 00 14 81 298 00 00 43 6089 00 00 20 296 00 00 97 297 00 14 76 6091 00 00 20 6092 00 01 15 295 00 02 02 291 00 00 20 290 00 13 60 289 00 00 32 282 00 06 05 287 00 00 20 286 00 00 20 285 00 00 20 284 00 00 46 283 00 04 83 272 00 02 77 278 00 01 32 273 00 02 034600 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
265 00 08 52
264 00 13 13
232 00 00 20
254 00 00 20
259 00 14 15
258 00 05 69
256 00 01 90
257 00 03 93
250 00 00 97
249 00 05 08
248 00 10 52
247 00 02 13
246 00 00 20
8617 00 29 58
8618 00 20 29
8782 00 62 18
8783 00 00 29
8784 00 04 74
8785 00 00 20
8787 00 13 42
8788 00 60 06
8789 फिल्ड चेनल 00 01 83
8790 00 35 92
8791 00 18 28
8792 नाला 00 02 04
8847 00 06 49
8848 नाला 00 04 58
8846 00 01 95
8849 00 06 47
8850 00 16 47
8851 00 00 87
47 00 05 41
46 00 00 20
48 00 07 30
49 00 04 30
50 00 00 20
51 00 00 20
52 00 09 67
54 00 03 55[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4601 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
59 00 14 13 60 00 12 01 63 00 11 44 64 00 07 41 65 00 09 88 66 00 14 98 67 00 00 20 93 नाला 00 06 09 235 00 20 10 236 00 00 20 240 00 00 90 241 00 21 68 238 00 00 20 239 00 00 30 242 00 08 73 266 रास्ता 00 01 94
[पफा. सं. आर-25011/17/2013-ओआर-I]
पवन वुफमार, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 5th August, 2013
S.O. 1632.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited in Dist. East Champaran in the State of Bihar for 'Patna to Motihari and Baitalpur Pipeline' for the transportation of Petroleum Product;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land, to Shri Arun Kumar Jha, B.A.S. & Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited. (Pipelines Division) P.O. Dhelwan, Sipara, Dist. Patna (Bihar) Pin – 800020.
SCHEDULE
Dist.: Purba Champaran
State : Bihar
Mouja / Village Survey/BlockNo. Sub-Div-No. Area
Hectare Are Sq.mtr. (1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
BHATAULIYA 3749 00 30 75 Thana No.-193 3748 00 00 20
3750 00 10 554602 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
3747 00 03 27
3746 00 00 20
3745 00 12 39
3744 00 00 20
NAUTAN 775 00 06 60
Thana No.-194 774 00 10 83
772 00 14 31
769 00 00 20
771 00 05 75
782 00 00 20
800 00 09 15
801 00 05 29
799 00 00 20
802 00 19 97
976 00 05 73
975 00 00 39
974 00 04 69
973 00 04 32
972 00 00 20
971 00 08 18
969 00 02 97
970 00 05 09
964 00 01 63
963 00 07 77
962 00 09 49
848 00 04 99
849 00 01 47
850 00 03 65
847/1179 00 01 15
842 00 00 60
841 00 05 31
840 00 05 00
837 00 00 20
838 00 07 75
835 00 04 28
836 00 00 20
831 00 08 98
833 00 00 20
830 00 02 36
833/1195 00 01 51
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4603
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
436 00 07 53
435 00 00 67
438 00 18 14
439 00 00 20
440 00 05 94
442 00 13 04
441 00 00 55
422 00 20 98
417 00 00 20
418 00 01 29
419 00 00 20
421 00 13 83
420 00 00 58
493 00 10 71
494 00 00 80
495 00 10 81
496 00 00 31
365 00 00 47
364 00 02 77
363 00 03 40
497 00 00 36
498 00 00 20
355 00 11 39
356 00 00 20
354 00 01 76
353 00 09 56
345 00 02 03
346 00 02 85
347 00 06 16
340 00 14 14
341 00 00 20
342 00 01 74
338 00 11 87
337 00 06 40
339 00 08 21
317 00 02 65
316 00 00 20
BARWA 1487 00 01 87
Thana No.-195 1488 00 00 20
1486 00 09 70
1456 00 29 94
4604 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1454 00 15 18
1453 00 00 20
1459 00 00 20
1455 00 00 20
1451 (ROAD) 00 02 43
1448 00 11 45
1449 00 04 92
1447 00 03 89
1445 00 00 85
1444 00 05 45
1443 00 00 20
1442 00 00 20
1441 00 03 09
1440 00 03 80
1439 00 01 64
1436 00 09 18
1419 00 01 80
1417 00 06 81
1416 00 00 20
1413 00 13 58
1414 00 00 20
1412 00 00 20
1386 00 02 04
1384 00 02 27
1387 00 07 26
1383 00 06 48
1380 00 05 87
1381 00 00 20
1378 00 00 20
1379 00 07 84
1356 00 00 20
1376 00 00 20
1358 00 07 08
1359 00 00 20
1360 00 05 33
1361 00 01 14
1374 00 01 53
1364 00 00 20
1362 00 07 01
1363 00 03 51
1341 00 01 59
1343 00 00 20
1339 00 13 29
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4605
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
1338 00 03 77
1337 00 00 20
1336 00 03 22
1335 00 03 27
1334 00 11 73
413 (ROAD) 00 02 62
195 00 01 42
196 00 10 11
197 00 00 20
194 00 01 38
198 00 00 20
190 00 22 54
189 00 00 20
185 00 06 99
182 00 00 20
184 00 08 14
183 00 12 38
179 00 00 20
160 00 01 48
161 00 06 29
162 00 05 10
91 00 00 63
163 00 02 29
164 00 00 52
90 00 07 65
166 00 06 46
89 00 01 92
167 00 04 64
168 00 02 59
87 00 03 49
169 00 00 31
86 00 10 11
MADHUBANI 12553 00 00 83
Thana No.-176 12552 00 11 93
12551 00 00 51
12556 00 04 38
12549 00 01 08
12557 00 01 81
12562 00 00 25
12563 00 00 20
12564 00 00 20
4606 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
12532 00 22 08 12533 00 00 20 12531 00 00 37 12527 00 00 20 12528 00 08 12 12529 00 03 59 12526 00 03 60 12525 00 01 91 12523 00 07 24 12519 00 08 96 12518 00 07 43 12516 00 00 20 12520 00 05 04 12716 00 01 33 12484 00 10 90 12718 00 00 20 12786 00 03 67 12785 00 06 72 12784 00 00 58 12783 00 09 41 12782 00 07 74 12757 00 00 20 12758 00 12 61 12759 00 00 20 12760 00 05 63 12755/15504 00 04 51 12761 00 09 44 12762 00 09 84 12764 00 00 20 12763 00 01 89 13460 00 10 57 13458 00 00 20 13459 00 05 43 13463 00 06 74 13465 00 09 87 13467 00 07 95 13470 00 00 99 13431 00 08 18 13430 00 06 01 13429 00 00 80[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4607 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
13415/15550 00 00 20 13415/15552 00 07 89 13409 00 00 20 13416 00 03 89 13417 00 00 20 13408 00 09 74 13411 00 00 20 13407 00 06 39 13406 00 00 20 13504 00 04 02 13660 00 13 42 13661 00 01 23 13669 00 00 70 13668 00 10 34 13667 00 03 57 13666 00 02 33 13665 00 04 90 13692 00 00 20 13693 00 09 37 13694 00 06 17 13695 00 00 40 13687 00 00 20 13686 00 07 03 13702 00 00 20 13685 00 00 40 13731 00 06 48 13684 00 00 20 13733 00 01 77 13732 00 01 74 13734 00 04 35 13730 00 01 49 13735 00 08 20 13736 00 00 20 13737 00 01 51 14970 00 00 49 14969 00 06 57 14971 00 01 99 14968 00 05 96 14966 00 07 61 14967 00 00 20 14964 00 02 24 14965 00 06 21 14963 00 00 20 5761 00 00 784608 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
5776 00 03 32 5764 00 08 16 5772/15469 00 03 83 5774 00 00 20 5773 00 02 79 5772 00 05 67 5771 00 04 82 5770 00 01 66 5775 00 04 90 5827 00 03 45 5826 00 09 16 5834 00 10 28 5832 00 00 20 5833 00 00 83 5840 00 09 53 5839 00 01 44 5841 00 07 11 5842 00 01 57 5843 00 06 51 5844 00 01 96 14907 00 00 20 14906 00 00 54 14902 00 04 53 14903 00 07 29 14904 00 03 09 13840 00 00 20 13841 00 15 86 14884 00 00 20 13842 00 00 82 13845 00 03 10 13844 00 01 66 13843 00 00 20 13846-Road 00 02 37 14871-Road 00 02 79 13884 00 00 77 14874 00 01 81 14858 00 03 10 14862 00 05 07 14861 00 06 68 14863 00 00 60 14860 00 00 20 14864 00 09 61 14869 00 00 20 14865 00 00 20 14868 00 03 90[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4609 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
14867 00 08 74 14866 00 07 90 6792 00 11 10 6795 00 00 20 6793 00 10 67 6794 00 00 45 6789-Road 00 04 34 6787 00 03 48 6786 00 00 44 6788 00 10 52 6407 00 14 92 6411 00 14 78 6416 00 00 28 6418 00 05 06 6417 00 08 75 6421 00 00 20 6430 00 11 95 6429 00 05 78 6431 00 03 70 6428 00 00 32 6432 00 09 62 6427 00 07 23 6456 00 07 12 6457 00 03 02 6455 00 04 75 6458 00 08 26 6462 00 00 20 6461 00 00 91 6459 00 04 32 6460 00 03 66 6478 00 11 92 6505 00 02 31 6506 00 11 81 6507 00 14 47 6511 00 00 95 6508 00 00 96 6510 00 06 55 6509 00 04 78 6512 00 02 07 6524-Road 00 04 07 6535 00 06 09 6534 00 04 50 6533 00 03 464610 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
6071 00 19 48 6079 00 00 20 6080 00 00 20 6082 00 03 15 6083 00 05 39 6070 00 00 40 6084 00 14 44 6068 00 19 91 6087 00 03 09 299 00 14 81 298 00 00 43 6089 00 00 20 296 00 00 97 297 00 14 76 6091 00 00 20 6092 00 01 15 295 00 02 02 291 00 00 20 290 00 13 60 289 00 00 32 282 00 06 05 287 00 00 20 286 00 00 20 285 00 00 20 284 00 00 46 283 00 04 83 272 00 02 77 278 00 01 32 273 00 02 03 274 00 02 20 275 00 02 17 276 00 02 23 265 00 08 52 264 00 13 13 232 00 00 20 254 00 00 20 259 00 14 15 258 00 05 69 256 00 01 90 257 00 03 93 250 00 00 97 249 00 05 08[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4611 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
8618 00 20 29 8782 00 62 18 8783 00 00 29 8784 00 04 74 8785 00 00 20 8787 00 13 42 8788 00 60 06 8789-F.C. 00 01 83 8790 00 35 92 8791 00 18 28 8792-Nala 00 02 04 8847 00 06 49 8848-Nala 00 04 58 8846 00 01 95 8849 00 06 47 8850 00 16 47 8851 00 00 87 47 00 05 41 46 00 00 20 48 00 07 30 49 00 04 30 50 00 00 20 51 00 00 20 52 00 09 67 53 00 09 43 54 00 03 55 59 00 14 13 60 00 12 01 63 00 11 44 64 00 07 41 65 00 09 88 66 00 14 98 67 00 00 20 93-Nala 00 06 09 235 00 20 10 236 00 00 20 240 00 00 90 241 00 21 68 238 00 00 20 239 00 00 30 242 00 08 73 266-Road 00 01 94
[F. No. R-25011/17/2013-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
4612 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]श्रम एवं रोजगार मंत्राालय
नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1633.— औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार सडीकेट बैंक के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय-1, दिल्ली के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 53/2011द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 01-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12012/09/95-आईआर ;बी-IIद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी Authority awarded punishment of dismissal to him. He approached Syndicate Bank Staff Union (in short the union) for redressed of his grievances. The union raised an industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer. Since the bank contested his claim, conciliation proceedings ended into a failure. On consideration of failure report, submitted by a conciliation Officer, the appropriate Government referred the dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication, vide order No. L-12012/9/95-IR(B-II), New Delhi dated 19-5-95, with following terms :
"Whether the action of the management of Syndicate Bank, New Delhi in dismissing Shri Brahmanand, Clerk, from service w.e.f. 30-10-1993 is legal and justified? If not, what relief is the said workman entitled to?"
MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT
New Delhi, the 5th July, 2013
S.O. 1633.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 53/2011) of the Central Government Labour Court No. 1, Delhi 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 01-07-2013.
[No. L- 12012/09/95-IR(B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer 2. Claim statement was filed by on behalf of the claimant, namely, Shri Brahmanand pleading that he was appointed as a clerk by the bank in 1974. He had unblemished record of service. A charge sheet was served upon him on 4-7-92, which was preceded by an order of suspension. During long period of his suspension, he was virtually driven to starvation since huge recovery was made by the bank from his subsistence allowance. Though he made representation against those recoveries, yet the bank passed an order dated 6-4-92 upholding illegal recoveries. Since a meagre sum of subsistence allowance was paid, he was unable to defend himself properly. His suspension was for prolonged for a period over 20 months without any cause or reason.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE DR. R. K. YADAV, PRESIDING
OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL NO. 1, KARKARDOOMA COURTS
COMPLEX, DELHI
I.D. No. 53/2011
The General Secretary, Syndicate Bank Staff Union, Mehra Chamber, Desh Bandhu Gupta Road, New Delhi.
. . .Claimant
Versus
The Asstt. General Manager, Syndicate Bank, Zonal Office No. 6, Bhagwan Dass Road, New Delhi-110001.
. . .Management 3. It has been pleaded that charge sheet contained false allegation, which lacked material particulars. Reasonable opportunities to defend was denied to him. The Enquiry Officer had disallowed vital questions, which were put to the witnesses during course of cross- examination. The enquiry was farce. Enquiry Officer submitted his report dated 15-7-93, which contained perverse findings. The Disciplinary Authority imposed punishment of dismissal. He preferred an appeal which was dismissed by a non speaking unreasonable order dated 7-5-94. It has been claimed that since the claimant raised a voice against his superior officers, he was made a scapegoat. The domestic action nowhere answers standards of principles of natural justice. It has been claimed that his dismissal may be declared illegal and he may be reinstated in service with continuity, full back wages and all consequential benefits.
AWARD
A clerk posted at Old Rajendar Nagar branch, New Dethi, Syndicate Bank (in short the bank) committed misconduct and acted preducial to the interest of the bank. He was charge sheeted on 4-7-92. A domestic enquiry was conducted against him. Enquiry Officer concluded that the charges stood established against him. The Disciplinary 4. Claim was demurred by the bank pleading that the claimant committed grave misconducts while posted at Rajendar Nagar branch of the bank, when he was entrusted with duties of a special assistant on temporary basis from time to time. Charge sheet dated 4-7-92 was served upon him. It has been pleaded that subsistence allowance was paid to the claimant, in accordance with rules. The claimant had taken advances and there was contract between the bank and the claimant to make recoveries of dues from him, hence those recoveries were effected from his subsistence[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4613 allowance. The recoveries where consonance with terms of the contract, entered into between the parties. The claimant cannot allege that those recoveries were not justified. Due opportunities were accorded to the claimant to defend himself before the Enquiry Officer. The Enquiry Officer observed principles of natural justice, during the conduct of the enquiry. All opportunities were accorded to the claimant to defend himself. He was represented by an office bearer of the union before the Enquiry Officer, who conducted his defence diligently. Charges stood proved before the Enquiry Officer and he submitted his report dated 15-7-93 to the Disciplinary Authority. The Disciplinary Authority concurred with the report of Enquiry Officer and proposed a punishment of dismissal. After giving a personal hearing to the claimant, punishment of dismissal was awarded to him, vide order dated 30-10-93. Appeal preferred by the claimant, also came to be dismissed. The bank pleads that punishment awarded to the claimant commensurate with his misconduct. The claimant is not entitled to any relief muchless the relief of reinstatement with continuity, full back wages and all consequential benefits.
5. On pleadings of the parties, following issues were
settled :
(i) Whether the domestic enquiry conducted against
the workman is fair and proper?
(ii) As in terms of reference.
6. The case was transferred to the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal No. 2, New Delhi, for adjudication by the appropriate Govt., vide order No. Z-22019/6/2007 IR (C-II), New Delhi dated 11-02-2008. Vide order No. Z-22019/ 6/2007 -IR(C-II), New Delhi dated 30-03-2011, the case was re-transferred by the appropriate Government to this Tribunal for adjudication.
7. On consideration of facts testified by the claimant and those detailed by Shri Laxmi Narain, Manager, the Tribunal answered the preliminary issue on the virus of enquiry in favour of the bank and against the claimant, vide order dated 20-6-2011.
8. Arguments were heard on proportionality of punishment. Shri M.A.Khan, authorized representatives, advanced arguments on behalf of the claimant. Shri Rajesh Mahendru, authorized representatives, raised his submissions on behalf of the bank. 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 :
Issue No. 2
9. Prior to introduction of section 11A of the Act, adjudicatory powers of the Tribunal were articulated in Buckingham & Carnatic Company [1951 (2) LLJ 314]. Four standards were delineated by the Labour Appellate Tribunal in the above case to render managerial right of taking disciplinary action vulnerable, namely, (i) where there is a want of bonafides or (ii) when it is a case of victimization or unfair labour practice or violation of the principles of natural justice; or (iii) when there is basic error of facts, or (iv) when there has been a perverse finding on the materials. This articulation was adopted by the Apex Court with slight modification in Indian Iron and Steel Company Limited [1958 (1) LLJ 260], without any acknowledgement to the precedent in Buckingham & Carnatic case (supra), wherein it was ruled that the power of the management to direct its own internal administration and discipline was not unlimited and liable to be interfered with by industrial adjudication when a dispute arises to see whether termination of services of a workman is justified and to give appropriate relief. However, it was announced that the jurisdiction of an Industrial Tribunal to interfere with the managerial prerogative of taking disciplinary action is not of appellate nature as the legislature has not chosen to confer such jurisdiction upon it. Hence Tribunal could not substitute its own judgement for that of the management. The Court laid down that in the following circumstances an industrial adjudicator can interfere with the disciplinary action taken by the employer : (1) when there is want of good faith, (2) when there was victimization or unfair labour practice, (3) when the management had been guilty of a basic error or violation of the principles of natural justice, or (4) when on the materials, the finding was completely baseless or perverse.
10. Enunciation (1) and (2), referred above, are addressed to the bona-fides of the employer in initiating the action and inflicting the punishment, while postulates (3) and (4) are addressed to domestic enquiry. Therefore, an employer is required to act bona-fide in initiating disciplinary action as well as in inflicting the punishment. In initiating the action, the alleged act of misconduct should not be a ruse for something else, such as the trade union activities of the workman or employers dislike of him for some personal reasons. The action should not be motivated by vindictiveness or ulterior purpose, so as to smack for victimization or unfair labour practice. Likewise in the matter of inflicting punishment, the employer should act fairly. In case punishment awarded is so shockingly dis- proportionate to the act of the misconduct, as no reasonable man would ever impose that itself may lead to an inference of malafides, victimization or unfair labour practice. In holding enquiry, the Enquiry Officer must comply with the rules of natural justice. He must not be a biased person and give reasonable opportunity to both sides for being heard. His findings should not be baseless or perverse.
11. In Ramswarth Sinha (1954 L.A.C. 697) the Labour Appellate Tribunal recognized the right of the management to ask for permission to adduce evidence before the Tribunal to justify its action in a "no enquiry" case. Following that proposition the Apex Court equated the cases of "defective4614 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] enquiry" with "no enquiry" cases and ruled that in either cases, the Tribunal have jurisdiction to go into the merits of the case on the basis of evidence adduced before it by the parties. Reference can be made to the precedent in Motipur Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd. [1965 (2) LLJ 162] where the employer had held no enquiry at all before the dismissal and, therefore, adduced evidence to justify its action before the Tribunal,which decision was upheld. The Apex Court discarded the plea on behalf of the workman that since no enquiry at all had been held by the employer, it had no right to adduce evidence to justify its stand before the Tribunal. In Ritz Theatre [1962 (II) LLJ 498] it was ruled by the Supreme Court that the Tribunal would be justified to go to the merits of the case and decide for itself on the basis of the evidence adduced whether the charges have indeed been made out. It announced that it would neither be fair to the management nor fair to the workman himself in such a case that the Tribunal should refuse to take the evidence and thereby drive the management to pass through the whole process of holding the enquiry all over again. Reference can also be made to the precedent in Bharat Sugar Mills Ltd. [1961 (11) LLJ 644].
12. In Delhi Cloth and General Mills Company [1972 (1) LLJ 180], Apex Court considered the catena of decisions over the subject and laid down the following principles :
"(1) If no domestic enquiry had been held by the management, or if the management makes it clear that it does not rely upon any domestic enquiry that may have been held by it, it is entitled to straightaway adduce evidence before the Tribunal justifying its action. The Tribunal is bound to consider that evidence so adduced before it, on merits, and give a decision thereon. In such a case, it is not necessary for the Tribunal to consider the validity of the domestic enquiry as the employer himself does not rely on it.
(2) If a domestic enquiry had been held, it is open to the management to rely upon the domestic enquiry held by it, in the first instance, and alternatively and without prejudice to its plea that the enquiry is proper and binding, simultaneously adduce additional evidence before the Tribunal justifying its action. In such a case no inference can be drawn, without anything more, that the management has given up the enquiry conducted by it.
(3) When the management relies on the enquiry conducted by it, and also simultaneously adduces evidence before the Tribunal, without prejudice to its plea that the enquiry proceedings are proper, it is the duty of the Tribunal, in the first instance, to consider whether the enquiry proceedings conducted by the management, are valid and proper. If the Tribunal is satisfied that the enquiry proceedings have been held properly and are valid, the question of considering the evidence adduced before it on merits, no longer survives. It is only when the holds that the enquiry proceedings have not been properly held, that it derives jurisdiction to deal with the merits of the dispute and in such a case it has to consider the evidence adduced before it by the management and decide the matter on the basis of such evidence.
(4) When the domestic enquiry has been held by the management and the management relies on the same, it is open to the latter to request the Tribunal to try the validity of the domestic enquiry as a preliminary issue and also ask for an opportunity to adduce evidence before the Tribunal, if the finding on the preliminary issue is against the management. However, elaborate and cumbersome the procedure may be, under such circumstances, it is open to the Tribunal to deal, in the first instance, as a preliminary issue the validity of the domestic enquiry. If its finding on the preliminary issue is in favour of the management, then no additional evidence need be cited by the management. But, if the finding on the preliminary issue is against the management, the Tribunal will have to give the employer an opportunity to cite additional evidence and also give a similar opportunity to the employee to lead evidence contra, as the request to adduce evidence had been made by the management to the Tribunal during the course of the proceedings and before the trial has come to an end. When the preliminary issue is decided against the management and the latter leads evidence before the Tribunal, the position, under such circumstances, will be, that the management is deprived of the benefit of having the finding of the domestic Tribunal being accepted as prima facie proof of the alleged misconduct. On the other hand, the management will have to prove, by adducing proper evidence, that the workman is guilty of misconduct and that the action taken by it is proper. It will not be just and fair either to the management or to the workman that the Tribunal should refuse to take evidence and thereby ask the management to take a further application, after holding a proper enquiry, and deprive the workman of the benefit of the Tribunal itself being satisfied, on evidence adduced before it, that he was or was not guilty of the alleged misconduct.
(5) The management has got a right to attempt to sustain its order by adducing independent evidence before the Tribunal. But the management should avail itself of the said opportunity by making a suitable request to the Tribunal before the proceedings are closed. If no such opportunity has been available of, or asked for by the management, before the proceedings are closed, the employer can make no[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4615 grievance that the Tribunal did not provide such an opportunity. The Tribunal will have before it only the enquiry proceedings and it has to decide whether the proceedings have been held properly and the findings recorded therein are also proper.
(6) If the employer relies only on the domestic enquiry and does not simultaneously lead additional evidence or ask for an opportunity during the pendency of the proceedings to adduce such evidence, the duty of the Tribunal is only to consider the validity of the domestic enquiry as well as the finding recorded therein and decide the matter. If the Tribunal decides that the domestic enquiry has not been held properly, it is not its function to invite suo moto the employer to adduce evidence before it to justify the action taken by it.
(7) The above principles apply to the proceedings before the Tribunal, which have come before it either on a reference under Section 10 or by way of an application under Section 33 of the Act.
13. Keeping in view the proposition laid by the Apex Court in Delhi Cloth and General Mills Company (supra), the Parliament inserted Section 11-A in the Act, which came into force w.e.f. 15th of December,1971. In the statement of objects and reasons for inserting Section 11-A, it was stated:
"In Indian Iron and Steel Company Limited and Another Vs. Their Workmen (AIR 1958 S.C. 130 at p.138), the Supreme Court, while considering the Tribunal's power to interfere with the management's decision to dismiss, discharge or terminate the services of a workman, has observed that in case of dismissal on misconduct, the Tribunal does not act as a court of appeal and substitute its own judgment for that of the management and that the Tribunal will interfere only when there is want of good faith, victimization, unfair labour practice, etc., on the part of the management.
2. The International Labour Organisation, in its recommendation (No.119) concerning 'Termination of employment at the initiative of the employer' adopted in June, 1963, has recommended that a worker aggrieved by the termination of his employment should be entitled to appeal against the termination among others, to a neutral body such as an arbitrator, a court, an arbitration committee or a similar body and that the neutral body concerned should be empowered to examine the reasons given in the termination of employment and the other circumstances relating to the case and to render a decision on the justification of the termination.
The International Labour Organisation has further recommended that the neutral body should be empowered (if it finds that the termination of employment was unjustified) to order that the worker concerned, unless reinstated with unpaid wages, should be paid adequate compensation or afforded some other relief.
3. In accordance with these recommendations, it is considered that theTribunal's power in an adjudication proceeding relating to discharge or dismissal of a workman should not be limited and that the Tribunal should have the power, in cases wherever necessary to set aside the order of discharge or dismissal and direct reinstatement of the workman on such terms and conditions, if any, as it thinks fit or give such other reliefs to the workman including the award of any lesser punishment in lieu of discharge or dismissal as the circumstances of the case may require. For this purpose, a new Section 11-A is proposed to be inserted in the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947......''.
14. After insertion of Section 11-A, the Apex Court summed up the law in the case of Firestone Tyre and Rubber Company [1973 (1) LLJ 278] in the following propositions :
"(1) The right to take disciplinary action and to decide upon the quantum of punishment are mainly managerial functions, but if a dispute is referred to a Tribunal, the latter has power to see if action of the employer is justified.
(2) Before imposing the punishment, as employer is expected to conduct a proper enquiry in accordance with the provisions of the Standing Orders, if applicable, and principles of natural justice. The enquiry should not be an empty formality.
(3) When a proper enquiry has been held by an employer, and the finding of misconduct is a plausible conclusion flowing from the evidence, adduced at the said enquiry, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to sit in judgement over the decision of the employer as an appellate body. The interference with the decision of the employer will be justified only when the findings arrived at in the enquiry are perverse or the management is guilty of victimization, unfair labour practice or mala fide.
(4) Even if no enquiry has been held by an employer or if the enquiry held by him is found to be defective, the Tribunal in order to satisfy itself about the legality and validity of the order, had to give an opportunity to the employer and employee to adduce evidence before it. It is open to the employer to adduce evidence for the first time justifying his action, and it is open to the employee to adduce evidence contra.
4616 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)](5) The effect of an employer not holding an enquiry is that the Tribunal would not have to consider only whether there was a prima facie case. On the other hand, the issue about the merits of the impugned order of dismissal or discharge is at large before the Tribunal and the latter, on the evidence adduced before it, has to decide for itself whether the misconduct alleged is proved. In such cases, the point about the exercise of managerial functions does not arise at all. A case of defective enquiry stands on the same footing as no enquiry. (6) The Tribunal gets jurisdiction to consider the evidence placed before it for the first time in justification of the action taken only, if no enquiry has been held or after the enquiry conducted by an employer is found to be defective. (7) It has never been recognized that the Tribunal should straightaway, without anything more, direct reinstatement of a dismissed or discharged employee, once it is found that no domestic enquiry has been held or the said enquiry is found to be defective. (8) An employer, who wants to avail himself of the opportunity of adducing evidence for the first time before the Tribunal to justify his action, should ask for it at the appropriate stage. If such an opportunity is asked for, the Tribunal has no power to refuse. The giving of an opportunity to an employer to adduce evidence for the first time before the Tribunal is in the interest of both the management and the employee and to enable the Tribunal itself to be satisfied about the alleged misconduct. (9) Once the misconduct is proved either in the enquiry conducted by an employer or by the evidence placed before a Tribunal for the first time, punishment imposed cannot, be interfered with by the Tribunal except in cases where the punishment is so harsh as to suggest victimization. (10) In a particular case, after setting aside the order of dismissal, whether a workman should be re- instated or paid compensation is, as held by this Court in The Management of Panitole Tea Estate Vs. The workmen, within the judicial decision of a Labour Court or Tribunal".
15. Jurisdiction to interfere with the punishment is also not confined to the case where punishment is shockingly disproportionate to the act of the misconduct. The Tribunal has power of substituting its own measure of punishment in place of managerial wisdom. Change in legal position, post introduction of Section 11A of the Act has been effectively summarized in the case of Ambassador Sky Chef (1996 Lab. I.C. 299) wherein High Court of Bombay observed that the section gives specifically two fold powers to an industrial adjudicator : firstly, it is a virtual power of
appeal against the findings of fact made by the Enquiry
Officer in his report with regard to the adequacy of the
evidence and conclusion on facts, and secondly, and far
more important, it is the power of re-appraisal of quantum
of punishment. Now no restriction lies on an industrial
adjudicator to interfere with the enquiry only on four
grounds, referred above. However, wide discretionary
powers with the adjudicator are to be exercised in judicial
and judicious manner before it interferes with the order of
misconduct or punishment.
16.With this prelude, now I would turn to facts of the
present controversy. As emerged out of the order dated
20-6-2011, the Tribunal had considered the factum of
service of charge-sheet on the claimant, calling upon him
to submit his statement of defence. It was also taken note
of that the chare-sheet was specific and unambiguous.
Enquiry Officer called upon the claimant to putforth his
case. Opportunities were accorded to the claimant to defend
himself in the enquiry. Therefore, it is evident that the issues
relating to bonafides of the bank and according opportunity
of being heard were addressed to and found against the
claimant. Issue relating to perversity of report of the Enquiry
Officer was also answered against him. Thus it is evident
that all issues, except issue relating to proportionality of
punishment, were adjudicated against the claimant.
17. As record projects, charge-sheet dated 04-07-1992
was served, wherein it is detailed that the claimant passed
for cheques on various dates pertaining to SB A/c 35835
even though he was not working in SB Dept. and not
empowered to pass those cheques independently. The
claimant unauthorisedly parted with an amount of Rs. 1.00
lakh on 15-3-92 out of a cash of Rs. 2,70,000 and paid that
amount unathorisedly to the bearer of cheque No. 077225,
at the service counter. The claimant had tampered with the
records of the branch on 15-3-92 and made a fictitious entry
in the SB Ledger folio of SB A/c 35835 with a malafied
intention of making available an amount of Rs.1.50 lakh to
the party, for which amount they were not entitled. The
claimant further debited a cheque, referred above, for
Rs.1.00 lakh and verified signatures of the party, for which
act he was not empowered to do so.
18. On these charges the Enquiry Officer recorded
his report dated 15-7-1993 wherein he concluded that all
charges stood proved against the claimant. It would be in
the fitness of things to extract conclusions arrived at by
the Enquiry Officer which are reproduced thus :—
"Findings :
"I therefore, hold the CSE guilty of :
(i) having passed a cheque without authority;
(ii) having inflated the balance in the account
No. 35835 with malafide motives.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4617(iii) passing a cheque against such inflated balance without having the authority/jurisdiction over the account.
(iv) having parted with the cash at the Extension
Counter without authonty.
Therefore, it is clearly established that the CSE is guilty of gross misconduct of doing acts prejudicial to the interest of the Bank under Clause No. 19.5 (j) of Bipartite Settlement- 1966".
19. During the course of arguments it was urged that punishment of dismissal from service was proposed on the claimant and show-cause notice was given. After giving personal hearing, punishment of dismissal was, awarded to the claimant vide order dated 30-10-1993. The bank presents that the punishment of dismissal commensurate to his misconduct. On the other hand claimant argues that no pecuniary loss was caused to the bank, since money was recovered from the party. He agitates that his long unblemished service was not taken into consideration and punishment is shockingly disproportionate to his misconduct.
20. After insertion of Section 11-A of the Act, the jurisdiction to interfere with the punishment is there with the Tribunal, who has to see whether punishment imposed by the employer commensurate with the gravity of the act of misconduct. If it comes to the conclusion that the misconduct is proved, it may still hold that the punishment is not justified because misconduct alleged and proved is such as it does not warrant punishment of discharge or dismissal and where necessary, set aside the order of discharge or dismissal and direct reinstatement with or without any terms or conditions as it thinks fit or give any other relief, including the award of lessor punishment, in lieu of discharge or dismissal, as the circumstance of the case may warrant. Reference can be made to a precedent in Sanatak Singh (1984 Lab. I.C. 817). The discretion to award punishment lesser than the punishment of discharge or dismissal has to be judiciously exercised and the Tribunal can interfere only when it is satisfied that the punishment imposed by the management is highly disproportionate to the decree of the guilt of the workman. Reference can be made to the precedent in Kachraji Motiji Parmar [1994 (II) LLJ 332]. Thus it is evident that the Tribunal has now jurisdiction and power of substituting its own measure of punishment in place of the managerial wisdom, once it is satisfied that the order of discharge or dismissal is not justified. On facts and in the circumstances of a case, section 11A of the Act specifically gives two folds powers to the Industrial Tribunal, first is virtually the power of appeal against findings of fact made by the Enquiry Officer in his report with regard to the adequacy of the evidence and the conclusion on facts and secondly of foremost importance, is the power of reappraisal of quantum of punishment.
21. Power to set aside order of discharge or dismissal and grant relief of reinstatement or lesser punishment is not untramaled power. This power has to be exercised only when Tribunal is satisfied that the order of discharge or dismissal was not justified. This satisfaction of the Tribunal is objective satisfaction and not subjective one. It involves application of the mind by the Tribunal to various circumstances like nature of delinquency committed by the workman, his past conduct, impact of delinquency on employer's business, besides length of service rendered by him. Furthermore, the Tribunal has to consider whether the decision taken by the employer is just or not. Only after taking into consideration these aspects, the Tribunal can upset the punishment imposed by the employer. The quantum of punishment cannot be interfered with without recording specific findings on points referred above. No indulgence is to be granted to a person, who is guilty of grave misconduct like cheating, fraud, misappropriation of employers fund, theft of public property etc. A reference can be made to the precedent in Bhagirath Mal Rainwa [1995 (1) LLJ 960].
22. An employer would expect loyalty towards him from his employee. In other words, the employee is expected to promote interest of his employer in connection with the job for which he has been engaged. Contract of an employment engrafts a stipulation that the employee should serve his master with good faith and fidelity. When an employee makes a false record or document with a view to deceive his employer, he commits an act of dishonesty or fraud. When false entries are made in official records, certifying an amount existing in the account of a party more than what it has, in fact the employee forges the record, deceives his employer and commits serious acts of dishonesty and fraud. As detailed above, the claimant recorded false entry in saving bank account No. 35835 maintained by Smt. Manju Goyal and projected that an amount of Rs. 150571.78 was lying therein, while in fact there was a balance of Rs. 571.78 only in that account as on 15-3-92. The claimant committed a very grave misconduct. He also passed cheque of Rs. 26000 without any authority. Chque of Rs. 1 lakh was passed by him against the inflected balance in the account of Smt. Manju Goyal, without an authority. He parted with the cash of Rs.1 lakh at the extension counter without any authority. All these facts make it clear that misconduct committed by the claimant was of alasming nature, justifying penalty of dismissal. Punishment awarded to the claimant cannot be termed as disproportionate to his misconduct. By no stretch of imagination the punishment can be termed as arbitrary, an act of unfair labour practice an victimization. I conclude that punishment awarded to the claimant is reasonable and justified. He is not entitled to any relief much less the relief of reinstatement in service with continuity, full back wages and all consequential benefits. His claim is discarded. An award is passed in favour of the bank and against the4618 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] claimant/union. It be sent to the appropriate Govt. for publication.
Dr. R. K.YADAV, Presiding Officer
Dated : 29-11-2012
नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1634.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार ओरियण्टल बैंक ऑपफ कॉमर्स के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय-1, दिल्ली के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 282/2011द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 01-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12012/59/2005-आईआर ;बी-IIद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 5th July, 2013
S.O. 1634.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 282/ 2011) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court No. 1, Delhi now as shown in the Annexure in the industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Oriental Bank of Commerce and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 01-07-2013.
[No. L- 12012/59/2005-IR(B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer Haryana, Oriental Bank of Commerce (in short the bank). The personal driver used to drive vehicle No.HR-05J-0841, which vehicle was owned by the bank. He served the Deputy General Manager till 6-2-04, the date when the latter was transferred from Karnal to some other place. His services came to an end, at that juncture. Since the personal driver belaboured under a belief that he was an employee of the bank, he raised a demand on the bank for reinstatement of his services. Since his demand was not conceded to, he raised an industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer. The bank contested his claim and as such conciliation proceedings ended into a failure. On consideration of failure report, submitted by Conciliation Officer, the appropriate Govt. referred the dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication, vide order No. L 12012/59/2005- IR(B-II), New Delhi, dated 09-08-2005 with following terms:
"Whether the action of the management of Oriental Bank of Commerce in terminating the services of Hari Om S/o Sh.Chanda Ram, Driver w.e.f. 6-2-2004 is just and legal? If not, what relief the concerned workman is entitled to?"
ANNEXURE
BEFORE DR. R. K. YADAV, PRESIDING
OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL NO. 1, KARKARDOOMA COURTS
COMPLEX, DELHI
I.D. No. 282/2011
Shri Hari Om S/o Sh.Chanda Ram, H. No.507-L, Model Town, Balmiki Basti, Badi Market, Karnal, Haryana ....Workman 2. Claim statement was filed by the personal driver, namely, Shri Hari Om pleading that he was employed by the bank at its regional office Karnal on the post of a driver w.e.f. 1st May, 2001. Fixed salary of Rs.2700 per month was paid to him. Duties of driving vehicle No. HR- 05J-0841 were assigned to him. He was performing his duties under the directions of the Deputy General Manager of the bank. Log book was usually got signed from him by the officer, who used that vehicle. He also use to sign various vouchers/bills, issued by the agencies at the time of repair/service of the vehicle. He continuously served the bank till 5-2-2004. His services were terminated abruptly without any notice on pay in lieu thereof. Retrenchment of his service was illegal, since retrenchment compensation was not paid to him. Action of the bank was violative of provisions of sections 25-F, 25-G and 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the Act). He served a legal notice on the bank, but it was not responded to. Some other driver was appointed by the bank in his place. He seeks reinstatement in service with continuity and full back wages.
Versus
The Deputy General Manager, Oriental Bank of Commerce, Regional Office, Karnal, Haryana ....Management
AWARD
A personal driver was employed by the Deputy General Manager, posted at Regional Office, Karnal, 3. Claim was contested by the bank pleading that the claimant was never appointed by the bank. Since there was no relationship of employer of the employee between the parties, there was no industrial dispute which would be referred for adjudication. The bank presents that the claimant was working as personal driver of Shri A. K.Tangri, Deputy General Manager, Regional Office, Karnal. Shri Tangri used to pay his wages. The bank reimbursed the wages paid by Shri Tangri to the claimant, subject to ceiling amount. fixed by the bank. The bank does not dispute that the vehicle driven by the claimant belong to it. Since the claimant was not an employee of[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4619 the bank, there was no question of terminating his services. There was no occasion for the bank to give notice or pay in lieu thereof and retrenchment compensation. Claim put forward by Shri Hari Om is misconceived, hence it may be dismissed, pleads the bank.
4. On pleadings of the parties, following issues were
settled by my ld. predecessor.
(i) Whether there existed relationship of employer and employee between the parties? If so its effect?
(ii) Whether the workmen was personal driver of Shri A.K. Tangri, Deputy General Manager, Regional Office, Karnal?
(iii) As in terms of reference.
5. Vide order No. Z-22019/6/2007 -IR(C-II), New Delhi, dated 11-02-2008, appropriate Government transferred the case to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.II, New Delhi, for adjudication. Vide order No. Z-22019/6/2007- IR(C-II), New Delhi, dated 30-03-2011, the case was re- transferred by the appropriate Government to this Tribunal for adjudication.
6. Claimant has examined himself in support of his claim. Shri Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Senior Manager, was examined by the bank. No other witness was examined by either of the parties.
7. Arguments were heard at the bar. Shri Bhagwan Das, authorized representative, presented facts on behalf of the claimant. Shri Rajat Arora, authorized representative, raised his submission on behalf of the bank. I have given my careful considerations to the arguments advanced at the bar and cautiously perused the records. My findings on issues involved in the controversy are as follows :
Manager, Regional Office, Karnal. He was paid his wages by Shri Tangri. The bank used to reimburse wages paid by Shri Tangri to the claimant, subject to ceiling amount fixed in that regard. Vide letter dated 23-6-97, the Govt. of India has ordered that no personal drivers shall be absorbed in the bank on regular basis. The claimant never worked with the bank.
10. When facts unfolded by the claimant and those detailed by Shri Rakesh Kumar Gupta are appreciated it came to light that the bank never engaged the claimant in its service. No appointment letter was ever issued by the bank in favour of the claimant. His wages were paid by Shri Tangri. Documents Ex.WW1/1 to Ex.WW1/14 go to re affirm that Shri Tangri used to pay wages to the claimant. Copies of log book, which are Ex.WW1/15 to Ex.WW1/47 and those relied by the bank and are Ex.MW1/3 to Ex.MW1/26, nowhere got to establish that the claimant was ever engaged by the bank. Entries in the log book are recorded by the driver with a view to ascertain whether the vehicle was used by the officer for official purpose or for private use. It would not matter that these entries are recorded by a personal driver. When bank permits an officer to use official vehicle by obtaining services of a personal driver, in that situation personal driver would not become an employee of the bank. Therefore entries in these by book nowhere espouse the cause of the claimant. Copies of the vouchers, proved by the bank, are Ex.MW1/ 27 to Ex.MW1/54. These documents clinch the issue to the effect that the claimant never served the bank nor his wages were paid to him by the bank.
Issue Nos.1 & 2
8. In affidavit Ex.WW1/A, tendered as evidence, claimant swears that he was engaged as a driver by the bank on 1-5-01. His monthly wages were Rs. 2700. He was driving vehicle No. HR-05J-0841. He used to drive the vehicle under the instructions of the Deputy General Manager. Log book of the vehicle was signed by him, besides the officer using the vehicle. His wages were paid by the bank through vouchers. He served the bank upto 5-2-04. During the cause of his cross examination he presents that no appointment letter was issued in his favour. He admits that in Feb. 2004 Shri Tangri was transferred from Karnal to some other station.
9. Shri Rakesh Kumar Gupta, unfolds in his affidavit Ex.MW1/A, tendered as evidence, that relationship of employer and employee never existed between the parties. The claimant was never appointed by the bank. He was personal driver of Shri A.K. Tangri, Deputy General 11. Whether relationship of employer and employee existed between the parties? For an answer to this proposition, it is to be appreciated as to how a contract of service is entered into. The relationship of employer and employee is constituted by a contract, express or implied between employer and employee. A contract of service is one in which a person undertakes to serve another and to obey his reasonable orders within the scope of the duty undertaken. A contract of employment may be inferred from the conduct which goes to show that such a contract was intended although never expressed and when there has, in fact, been employment of the kind usually performed by the employees. Any such inference, however, is open to rebuttal as by showing that the relation between the parties concerned was on a charitable footing or the parties were relations or partners or were directors of a limited company which employed no staff. While the employee, at the time, when his services were engaged, need not have known the identity of his employer, there must have been some act or contract by which the parties recognized one another as master or servant.
12. To establish the fact that he was ever engaged by the bank in its service, the claimant presses his ocular testimony in service. Ocular facts detailed by the claimant4620 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] are self serving words, which do not get support from any evidence, direct or circumstantial. His testimony stands discredited by the documentary evidence produced by the claimant himself, which are Ex.WW1/1 to Ex.WW1/14. These documents are vouchers as well as receipt which go to establish that the claimant was paid his wages by Shri Tangri. The wages paid by him to the claimant were reimbursed to him by the bank. Documents, which are Ex.MW1/27 to Ex.MW1/54, go it establish that fact. All these facts make it apparent that wages of the claimant were being paid by Shri Tangri. Admittedly no appointment letter was issued by the bank in favour of claimant. He was never on the roll of the bank. These facts coupled with the factum of wages being paid by Shri Tangri to the claimant make it clear that he was an employee of Shri Tangri and not of the bank. The claimant has failed to show that relationship of employer and employee ever existed between him and the bank. Issues are, therefore, answered in favour of the bank and against the claimant.
to the facts and circumstances of the case. The court may, depending on the facts of a case, direct payment of full wages under section 17-B of the Act only by the employer of the workman. The question whether the workman is entitled to the full wages last drawn or full salary, which he would be entitled to in the event of reinstatement while the award is under challenge in the High Court or Apex Court, depends upon the terms of the orders passed by the court, which has to be determined on the interpretation of the order granting relief.
Issue No. 3
13. The claimant was engaged as personal driver by Shri Tangri. Expenses incurred on his wages were being reimbursed by the bank to Tangri up to the prescribed limit. The mere fact that the claimant used to drive vehicle of the bank for Tangri would not establish any relationship of employer and employee between the claimant and the bank. With such a proposition, the Apex Court was confronted in Gulam Dastgir (AIR 1978 SC 481). In that case the Area Manager of a nationalized bank was being given personal allowance by the bank to enable him to employ personal driver of his own. The jeep which was being driven by the driver belonged to the bank. Its petrol and oil requirements and maintenance were within the financial responsibility of the bank. There was no evidence to the effect that the driver was employed by the bank or under its directions and control. There was also no evidence that the salary of the driver was paid by the bank. Considering all these aspects, Apex Court ruled that there was no case of camouflage and sham contract. When the driver was engaged by the Area Manager, there existed no control and supervision over the driver by the bank, which fact negatived existence of relationship of employer and employee between the parties. Nothing unusual was noticed by the Apex Court when the bank gave allowance to its officer for engaging services of a personal driver. The said precedent is squarely applicable to the present controversy.
14. Claimant may seek reliance on a precedent in Ghanshyam (JT 2001 (Suppl.l) SC 229) wherein the Apex Court was concerned with the powers contained in section 17-B of the Act. It was ruled therein that section 17-B of the Act does not preclude the High Courts or the Apex Court under articles 226 and 136 of the Constitution from passing appropriate interlocatory orders, having regard 15. In that matter Ghanshyam was engaged as personal driver by the Regional Manager of the Dena Bank at Lucknow. At the end of tenure of the Regional Manager, services of Ghanshyam were terminated w.e.f. August,90. He raised an industrial dispute and the industrial adjudicator passed an award holding that Ghanshyam was driver of the bank, termination of his services was uncalled for, hence he was ordered to be reinstated with back wages. The correctness of the award was assailed before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. Vide order dated 4-5-2000 High Court directed that Ghanshyam be paid wages in regular pay scale w.e.f. December 6, 1996, within one month from the date of production of the certified copy of that order, failing which the appellant was directed to appear before the court on 4-7-2001. The said order was under challenge before the Apex Court. The Apex Court ruled that by the interim order High Court did not grant relief in terms of section 17-B, may there is reference to that section in the order. Therefore, question of payment of "full wages last drawn" to Ghanshyam does not arise. Consequently it is evident that the precedent relied in Ghanshyam would not espouse the case of the claimant.
16. Ghomarbhai Harjibhai Rabari (2005 (2) LLJ 475) presents a situation when a personal driver engaged by the Executive of Bank of Baroda was held to be an employee of the bank. In that case, the driver produced three vouchers which showed that he had been paid certain sums of money towards his wages and the said amount has been debited to the account of the bank. The bank could not rebut those vouchers. Signatures of the driver were also there on the register maintained by the bank. These facts led the Apex Court to conclude that relationship of employer and employee existed between the driver and the bank.
17. Here in the present controversy, the claimant could not show that his wages were paid by the bank or his name appeared in attendance register or payment scroll maintained by the bank. On the other hand, it has been established that he was personal driver of Tangri. Consequently, the precedent in Gulam Dastgir (supra) rules the field, as far as facts of the present controversy are concerned. Relying the said precedent and on consideration of the facts of the present controversy, it is[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4621 concluded that the claimant was working as a personal driver of the Deputy General Manager. There was no occasion for the bank to deal with the claimant at all.
The Asst. General Manager, Syndicate Bank, 6-Bhagwan Dass Road, Sarojini House, New Delhi-11 0001. ....Management
AWARD
18. Since there existed no relationship of employer and employee between the claimant and the bank, termination of services of the claimant by the Deputy General Manager, in the event of his transfer to some other station nowhere violates provisions of the Act. It cannot be said that the claimant was an industrial employee and a workman within the meaning of clause (s) of section 2 of the Act. It cannot be said that dispensation of his services amounted to retrenchment within the meaning of clause (oo) of section 2 of the Act. Under these circumstances provisions of sections 25-F, 25 G and 25-H of the Act nowhere come for rescue of the claimant. He is not entitled to any relief from the bank. An award is passed in favour of the bank and against the claimant. It be sent to the . appropriate Government for publication.
Dr. R. K.YADAV, Presiding Officer
Dated : 12-12-2012
नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1635.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार सडिकेट बैंक के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संबं( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय-1 दिल्ली के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 35/2011द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 01-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12012/28/2000-आईआर ;बी-IIद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 5th July, 2013
S.O. 1635.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 35/2011) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, No. 1, Delhi 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 01-07-2013.
[No. L- 12012/28/2000-IR(B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer While working as clerk in Foreign Exchange Branch, New Delhi, Syndicate Bank (in short the bank) Shri K.Periaswami opened saving bank account No. 3785, 4116 and 4410 in his own name saving bank account No. 4503 in the name of his wife Smt.Meena with his own introduction and carried out instructions involving turnover running into crores of rupees which were beyond the scope of his employment. Transactions in these accounts were done almost on regular basis either through demand drafts or through clearing and the amounts, so credited, were withdrawn on the same date. The demand drafts were drawn/issued by various branches of the bank or other banks at Tamilnadu and Pondicherry. It led to the authorities that the claimant and his wife were having assets disproportionate to their known source of income. The claimant was arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation on 25.9.97. The bank issued a charge sheet to the claimant on 28.1.98 and domestic enquiry was conducted. The Enquiry Officer recorded findings against Shri K.Periaswami. The Disciplinary Authority concurred with the Enquiry Officer and awarded punishment of dismissal to him. Aggrieved by the punishment awarded to him, Shri K.Periaswami raised a demand of reinstatement in service. When his demand was not conceded to, he raised an industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer. The bank contested his claims and as such conciliation proceedings ended into a failure. On consideration of failure report, submitted by Conciliation Officer, the appropriate Govt. referred the dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication, vide order No.L-12012/28/2000-IR(B-II) New Delhi, dated 13-06-2000 with following terms:
"Whether the dismissal of Shri K.Periaswami, workman from service by the management of Syndicate Bank is legal and justified? If not, what relief is the workman concerned entitled to?"
ANNEXURE
BEFORE DR. R. K. YADAV, PRESIDING
OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL NO. 1, KARKARDOOMA COURTS
COMPLEX, DELHI
I.D. No. 35/2011
Shri K. Periaswami, C/o No.6, Mahadev Road, New Delhi - 110001. ....Workman 2. Claim statement was filed by Shri K.Periaswami pleading therein that he was a regular employee of the bank since 1-1-1980. He rendered service for 20 years, which remained satisfactory throughout. On 28.01.98 a charge sheet was served upon him,which was preceded by his suspension. He gave a reply to the charge sheet. However the bank constituted a domestic enquiry. He participated in enquiry and claimed that no misconduct was committed by him. The Enquiry Officer submitted a report dated 21-12-98 holding him guilty of charges. There was no evidence against him, showing that he committed a misconduct. He had explained the transactions before the authorities. According to him, his friends and relatives,
Versus
4622 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]besides other known persons, while coming to Delhi, brought drafts instead of cash with them, with a view to avoid risk of loosing the money in transit. He deposited those drafts in his accounts or account of his wife, withdrew the money representing the drafts and handed it over to the persons, who had brought the draft. According to him no business was carried out by him, outside scope of his employment. The Disciplinary Authority awarded punishment of dismissal to him. His appeal was also dismissed by the Appellate Authority. The action of the bank, in dismissing him from service is arbitrary and uncalled for. He has not committed any act prejudicial to the interest of the bank. He claims that he may be reinstated in service with continuity and full back wages.
(ii) Whether punishment awarded to the claimant
was proportionate to his misconduct?
(iii) As in terms of reference.
(iv) Relief.
6. On consideration of evidence adduced by the claimant and documents produced by the bank, the issue relating to virus of enquiry, which was treated as preliminary issue, was answered in favour of the bank and against the claimant, vide order dated 23-09-2011.
7. Arguments on proportionality of punishment were heard. Shri R.K.Patra, authorized representative, advanced arguments on behalf of the claimant Shri Rajesh Mahendru, authorized representative, presented facts on behalf of the bank. I have given my careful consideration, to the arguments advanced at the bar and cautiously perused the record. My findings on issues involved in the controversy are as follows:
Issue Nos. 2 & 3
3. The bank demurs the claim pleading that while posted as clerk at Foreign Exchange Branch New Delhi, the claimed opened saving bank accounts No. 3785, 4116 and 4410 his own name and account No.4503 in the name of his wife Smt.Meena, with his own introduction. He carried out instructions involving huge turnover running into crores of rupees, which were beyond the scope of his employment. There were regular credits to these accounts. He used to withdraw the amount on the date of credit entry. His activities led the authorities to suspicion that he was doing business outside the scope of his employment. He was arrested by the CBI, for which a wide publicity was given in the press. The bank received a jolt to its fair image in the eyes of the public. A charge sheet was served upon him on 28.9.98. Reply, submitted by the claimant, was not found satisfactory. A domestic enquiry was constituted. Due opportunities were given by the Enquiry Officer to the claimant to defend himself. The Enquiry Officer recorded findings against the claimant. The Disciplinary Authority concurred with the Enquiry Officer and proposed punishment of dismissal from service. After giving him an opportunity of being heard, the claimant was dismissed from service on 27-02-1999. The Appellate Authority also gave him an opportunity of being head and dismissed his appeal. It is wrong to assert that the claimant explained those transactions. However he admitted heavy transactions in his accounts, referred above. Punishment awarded to the claimant commensurate to his misconduct. He is not entitled to any relief. His claim deserves dismissal, hence it may be dismissed, pleads the bank.
4. Vide order No.Z-22019/6/2007-IR(C-II), New Delhi, dated 11-02-2008, appropriate Government transferred the case to Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. II, New Delhi, for adjudication. Vide order No.Z-22019/6/2007-IR (C-II), New Delhi, dated 30-03-2011, the case was re- transferred by the appropriate Government to this Tribunal for adjudication.
On pleadings of the parties following issues were
settled :
(i) Whether enquiry conducted by the management
was just, fair and proper?
8. Prior to introduction of Section 11A of the Act, adjudicatory powers of the Tribunal were articulated in Buckingham & Carnatak Company [1951 (2) LLJ 314]. Four standards were delineated by the Labour Appellate Tribunal in the above case to render managerial right of taking disciplinary action vulnerable, namely, (i) where there is a want of bonafides or (ii) when it is a case of victimization or unfair labour practice or violation of the principles of natural justice, or (iii) when there is basic error of facts, or (iv) when there has been a perverse finding on the materials. This articulation was adopted by the Apex Court with slight modification in Indian Iron and Steel Company Limited [1958 (1) LLJ 260], without any acknowledgement to the precedent in Buckingham & Carnatic case (supra), wherein it was ruled that the power of the management to direct its own internal administration and discipline was not unlimited and liable to be interfered with by industrial adjudication when a dispute arises to see whether termination of services of a workman is justified and to give appropriate relief. However, it was announced that the jurisdiction of an Industrial Tribunal to interfere with the managerial prerogative of taking disciplinary action is not of appellate nature as the legislature has not chosen to confer such jurisdiction upon it. Hence Tribunal could not substitute its own judgement for that of the management. The Court laid down that in the following circumstances an industrial adjudicator can interfere with the disciplinary action taken by the employer : (1) when there is want of good faith, (2) when there was victimization or unfair labour practice, (3) when the management had been guilty of a basic error or violation of the principles of natural justice, or (4) when on the materials, the finding was completely baseless or perverse.
9. Enunciation (1) and (2), referred above, are addressed to the bona fides of the employer in initiating[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4623 the action and inflicting the punishment, while postulates (3) and (4) are addressed to domestic enquiry. Therefore, an employer is required to act bona fide in initiating disciplinary action as well as in inflicting the punishment. In initiating the action the alleged act of misconduct should not be a ruse for something else, such as the trade union activities of the workman or employers dislike of him for some personal reasons. The action should not be motivated by vindictiveness or ulterior purpose, so as to smack for victimization or unfair labour practice. Likewise in the matter of inflicting punishment, the employer should act fairly. In case punishment awarded is so shockingly disproportionate to the act of the misconduct, as no reasonable man would ever impose that itself may lead to an inference of malafides, victimization or unfair labour practice. In holding enquiry, the Enquiry Officer must comply with the rules of natural justice. He must not be a biased person and give reasonable opportunity to both sides for being heard. His findings should not be baseless or perverse.
10. In Ramswarth Sinha (1954 L.A.C. 697) the Labour Appellate Tribunal recognized the right of the management to ask for permission to adduce evidence before the Tribunal to justify its action in a "no enquiry" case. Following that proposition the Apex Court equated the cases of "defective enquiry" with "no enquiry" cases and ruled that in either cases, the Tribunal have jurisdiction to go into the merits of the case on the basis of evidence adduced before it by the parties. Reference can be made to the precedent in Motipur Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd. [1965 (2) LLJ 162] where the empoyer had held no enquiry at all before the dismissal and, therefore, adduced evidence to justify its action before the Tribunal, which decision was upheld. The Apex Court discarded the plea on behalf of the workman that since no enquiry at all had been held by the employer, it had no right to adduce evidence to justify its stand before the Tribunal. In Ritz Theatre [1962 (II) LLJ 498] it was ruled by the Supreme Court that the Tribunal would be justified to go to the merits of the case and decide for itself on the basis of the evidence adduced whether the charges have indeed been made out. It announced that it would neither be fair to the management nor fair to the workman himself in such a case that the Tribunal should refuse to take the evidence and thereby drive the management to pass through the whole process of holding the enquiry all over again. Reference can also be made to the precedent in Bharat Sugar Mills Ltd. [1961 (11) LLJ 644].
11. In Delhi Cloth and General Mills Company [1972 (1) LLJ 180], Apex Court considered the catena of decisions over the subject and laid down the following principles :
"(1) If no domestic enquiry had been held by the management, or if the management makes it clear that it does not rely upon any domestic enquiry that may have been held by it, it is entitled to straightaway adduce evidence before the Tribunal justifying its action. The Tribunal is bound to consider that evidence so adduced before it, on merits, and give a decision thereon. In such a case, it is not necessary for the Tribunal to consider the validity of the domestic enquiry as the employer himself does not rely on it.
(2) If a domestic enquiry had been held, it is open to the management to rely upon the domestic enquiry held by it, in the first instance, and alternatively and without prejudice to its plea that the enquiry is proper and binding, simultaneously adduce additional evidence before the Tribunal justifying its action. In such a case no inference can be drawn, without anything more, that the management has given up the enquiry conducted by it.
(3) When the management relies on the enquiry conducted by it, and also simultaneously adduces evidence before the Tribunal, without prejudice to its plea that the enquiry proceedings are proper, it is the duty of the Tribunal, in the first instance, to consider whether the enquiry proceedings conducted by the management, are valid and proper. If the Tribunal is satisfied that the enquiry proceedings have been held properly and are valid, the question of considering the evidence adduced before it on merits, no longer survives. It is only when the holds that the enquiry proceedings have not been properly held, that it derives jurisdiction to deal with the merits of the dispute and in such a case it has to consider the evidence adduced before it by the management and decide the matter on the basis of such evidence.
(4) When the domestic enquiry has been held by the management and the management relies on the same, it is open to the latter to request the Tribunal to try the validity of the domestic enquiry as a preliminary issue and also ask for an opportunity to adduce evidence before the Tribunal, if the finding on the preliminary issue is against the management. However, elaborate and cumbersome the procedure may be, under such circumstances, it is open to the Tribunal to deal, in the first instance, as a preliminary issue the validity of the domestic enquiry. If its finding on the preliminary issue is in favour of the management, then no additional evidence need be cited by the management. But, if the finding on the preliminary issue is against the management, the Tribunal will have to give the employer an opportunity to cite additional evidence and also give a similar opportunity to the employee to lead evidence contra, as the request to adduce evidence4624 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] had been made by the management to the Tribunal during the course of the proceedings and before the trial has come to an end. When the preliminary issue is decided against the management and the latter leads evidence before the Tribunal, the position, under such circumstances, will be, that the management is deprived of the benefit of having the finding of the domestic tribunal being accepted as prima facie proof of the alleged misconduct. On the other hand, the management will have to prove, by adducing proper evidence, that the workman is guilty of misconduct and that the action taken by it is proper. It will not be just and fair either to the management or to the workman that the Tribunal should refuse to take evidence and thereby ask the management to take a further application, after holding a proper enquiry, and deprive the workman of the benefit of the Tribunal itself being satisfied, on evidence adduced before it, that he was or was not guilty of the alleged misconduct.
(5) The management has got a right to attempt to sustain its order by adducing independent evidence before the Tribunal. But the management should avail itself of the said opportunity by making a suitable request to the Tribunal before the proceedings are closed. If no such opportunity has been available of, or asked for by the management, before the proceedings are closed, the employer can make no grievance that the Tribunal did not provide such an opportunity. The Tribunal will have before it only the enquiry proceedings and it has to decide whether the proceedings have been held properly and the findings recorded therein are also proper. (6) If the employer relies only on the domestic enquiry and does not simultaneously lead additional evidence or ask for an opportunity during the pendency of the proceedings to adduce such evidence, the duty of the Tribunal is only to consider the validity of the domestic enquiry as well as the finding recorded therein and decide the matter. If the Tribunal decides that the domestic enquiry has not been held properly, it is not its function to invite suo moto the employer to adduce evidence before it to justify the action taken by it.
(7) The above principles apply to the proceedings before the Tribunal, which have come before it either on a reference under Section 10 or by way of an application under Section 33 of the Act".
12. Keeping in view the proposition laid by the Apex Court in Delhi Cloth and General Mills Company (supra), the Parliament inserted Section 11-A in the Act, which came into force w.e.f. 15th of December, 1971. In the statement of objects and reasons for inserting Section 11-A, it was stated:
"(1) In Indian Iron and Steel Company Limited and Another Vs. Their Workmen (AIR 1958 S.C. 130 at p.138), the Supreme Court, while considering the Tribunal's power to interfere with the management's decision to dismiss, discharge or terminate the services of a workman, has observed that in case of dismissal on misconduct, the Tribunal does not act as a court of appeal and substitute its own judgment for that of the management and that the Tribunal will interfere only when there is want of good faith, victimization, unfair labour practice, etc., on the part of the management.
(2) The International Labour Organisation, in its recommendation (No.119) concerning 'Termination of employment at the initiative of the employer' adopted in June 1963, has recommended that a worker aggrieved by the termination of his employment should be entitled to appeal against the termination among others, to a neutral body such as an arbitrator, a court, an arbitration committee or a similar body and that the neutral body concerned should be empowered to examine the reasons given in the termination of employment and the other circumstances relating to the case and to render a decision on the justification of the termination. The International Labour Organisation has further recommended that the neutral body should be empowered (if it finds that the termination of employment was unjustified) to order that the worker concerned, unless reinstated with unpaid wages, should be paid adequate compensation or afforded some other relief.
(3) In accordance with these recommendations, it is considered that the Tribunal's power in an adjudication proceeding relating to discharge or dismissal of a workman should not be limited and that the Tribunal should have the power, in cases wherever necessary to set aside the order of discharge or dismissal and direct reinstatement of the workman on such terms and conditions, if any, as it thinks fit or give such other reliefs to the workman including the award of any lesser punishment in lieu of discharge or dismissal as the circumstances of the case may require. For this purpose, a new Section 11-A is proposed to be inserted in the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947..."
13. After insertion of Section 11-A, the Apex Court summed up the law in the case of Firestone Tyre and Rubber Company [1973 (1) LLJ 278] in the following propositions:
''(1) The right to take disciplinary action and to decide upon the quantum of punishment are mainly[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4625 managerial functions, but if a dispute is referred to a Tribunal, the latter has power to see if action of the employer is justified.
(2) Before imposing the punishment, as employer is expected to conduct a proper enquiry in accordance with the provisions of the 4 Standing Orders, if applicable, and principles of natural justice. The enquiry should not be an empty formality.
(3) When a proper enquiry has been held by an employer, and the finding of misconduct is a plausible conclusion flowing from the evidence, adduced at the said enquiry, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to sit in judgement over the decision of the employer as an appellate body. The interference with the decision of the employer will be justified only when the findings arrived at in the enquiry are perverse or the management is guilty of victimization, unfair labour practice or mala fide.
(4) Even if no enquiry has been held by an employer or if the enquiry held by him is found to be defective, the Tribunal in order to satisfy itself about the legality and validity of the order, had to give an opportunity to the employer and employee to adduce evidence before it. It is open to the employer to adduce evidence for the first time justifying his action, and it is open to the employee to adduce evidence contra.
(5) The effect of an employer not holding an enquiry is that the Tribunal would not have to consider only whether there was a prima facie case. On the other hand, the issue about the merits of the impugned order of dismissal or discharge is at large before the Tribunal and the latter, on the evidence adduced before it, has to decide for itself whether the misconduct alleged is proved. In such cases, the point about the exercise of managerial functions does not arise at all. A case of defective enquiry stands on the same footing as no enquiry.
for it at the appropriate stage. If such an opportunity is asked for, the Tribunal has no power to refuse. The giving of an opportunity to an employer to adduce evidence for the first time before the Tribunal is in the interest of both the management and the employee and to enable the Tribunal itself to be satisfied about the alleged misconduct.
(9) Once the misconduct is proved either in the enquiry conducted by an employer or by the evidence placed before a Tribunal for the first time, punishment imposed cannot, be interfered with by the Tribunal except in cases where the punishment is so harsh as to suggest victimization.
(10) In a particular case, after setting aside the order of dismissal, whether a workman should be reinstated or paid compensation is, as held by this Court in The Management of Panitole Tea Estate Vs. The workmen, within the judicial decision of a Labour Court or Tribunal".
14. Jurisdiction to interfere with the punishment is also not confined to the case where punishment is shockingly disproportionate to the act of the mis-conduct. The Tribunal has power of substituting its own measure of punishment in place of managerial wisdom. Change in legal position, post introduction of Section 11A of the Act has been effectively summarized in the case of Ambassador Sky Chef (1996 Lab. I.C. 299) wherein High Court of Bombay observed that the section gives specifically two fold powers to an industrial adjudicator: firstly, it is a virtual power of appeal against the findings of fact made by the Enquiry Officer in his report with regard to the adequacy of the evidence and conclusion on facts, and secondly, and far more important, it is the power of re- appraisal of quantum of punishment. Now no restriction lies on an industrial adjudicator to interfere with the enquiry only on four grounds, referred above. However, wide discretionary powers with the adjudicator are to be exercised in judicial and judicious manner before it interferes with the order of mis-conduct or punishment.
(6) The Tribunal gets jurisdiction to consider the evidence placed before it for the first time in justification of the action taken only, if no enquiry has been held or after the enquiry conducted by an employer is found to be defective.
(7) It has never been recognized that the Tribunal should straightaway without anything more, direct reinstatement of a dismissed or discharged employee, once it is found that no domestic enquiry has been held or the said enquiry is found to be defective.
(8) An employer, who wants to avail himself of the opportunity of adducing evidence for the first time before the Tribunal to justify his action, should ask 15.With this prelude in mind, I would revert to factual matrix of the controversy. Claimant projects that case registered against him, was closed by the CBI since there was no material warranting his trial. It has been agitated on his behalf that order dated 05-02-04, passed by Special Judge, CBI, go to establish that he had not committed any offence. Perusal of that order make it clear that the Special Judge, C.B.I. accepted the closure report, since there was no material warranting trial of the claimant. Trial commences when material is collected to project that a cognizable offence is committed by some one. Therefore the order of the Special Judge projects a situation that there was no material for trial of the claimant for an offence of possessing asserts dis proportionate to known sources of his income. Question for consideration would be as to whether4626 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] misconduct is synonymous with a crime. For an answer to this proposition it would be appropriate to know as to what term 'misconduct' means, The concept of misconduct is a general concept and is not related to relationship of master and servant only. The dictionary meaning of the word 'misconduct' are: "improper behaviour, intentional wrong doing or deliberate violation of a rule of standard of behaviour. "Misconduct is a transgression of some established and definite rule of action, where no discretion is left except what necessity may demand: it is violation of definite law, a forbidden act and differs from carelessness. It comprises of positive acts and not mere neglect or failure.
16. Under Indian Penal Code and other special and local laws some acts or omissions are offences for which a person can be punished by the sovereign power of the State. These offences or acts are considered to be prejudicial to the interest of the society in general and, therefore, they are prohibited by law. There are, however, various other organizations such as professional bodies, educational institutions, clubs,corporations etc. and anyone who wants to be admitted to such bodies, by being member or otherwise, is also required to act under certain rules arid remain subject to certain discipline. If he does anything in violation of rules, regulations, or any law inconsistent with his position as a member of that society, then he is liable to lose advantage and facilities of the association with that society or organization. Any such act is, therefore, generally called misconduct. Primary meaning of the word 'misconduct' is bad management, mis- management and malfeasance or culpable neglect of an official in regard to his office. Both in law and in ordinary parlance, the term misconduct usually implies an act done willfully with a wrong intention and as applied to professional acts, even though such acts are not inherently wrongful, it means also dereliction of or deviation from duty. Even assuming that a particular act is negligence and not misconduct, such a negligence which amounts to dereliction of or deviation from duty cannot be excused. See In re:-Mehboob Alikhan (AIR 1958 AP 116).
17. In N.M. Roshan Umar Karim and Co.(AIR 1936 Mad. 508) following three different meaning of the word 'misconduct' were given :
''(a) Misconduct is not established by proving even culpable negligence. It is something opposed to accident or negligence and is doing of something which the doer knows to be wrong or which he does recklessly not careing what the result would be.
(b) Misconduct is distinguished from accident and is not far from negligence-not only gross and culpable negligence and involves that a person misconducts himself when it is wrong conduct on his part, in the existing circumstances to do or to fail or omit to do a particular thing or to persist in the act, failure or omission or acting with carelessness. It is incorrect that a misconduct only refers to acts of gross or culpable negligence and nor mere negligence.
(c) Misconduct does not ordinarily covers acts of negligence. The test of misconduct is not what a reasonable man would have done in the circumstances. It means that servant is guilty of something which was inconsistent with the conduct expected of him by the rules of the company''. Above three meanings were quoted by the Apex Court with approval in Shiv Nath AIR 1965 SC 1666).
18. Whether mere negligence is a misconduct or not will depend upon the nature of negligence and the requirement of care which the employee was obliged to use on the nature of services he was expected to perform. Misconduct could be of three kinds :
(i) technical misconduct which leaves no trail of
indiscipline,
(ii) misconduct resulting in damage to the employer's property which might be compensated by forfeiture of gratuity or part thereof, and
(ii) serious misconduct such as acts of violence against the management or other employee or riotous of disorderly behaviour in or near the place .of employment, which though not directly causing damage, is conductive to grave indiscipline.
19. In Ram Singh (1992 Lab. IC 2391) the Apex Court observed that though the expression "misconduct" is "not capable of precise definition, its dereliction receives its connotation from the context, the delinquency in its performance and its effect on the discipline and the nature of duty. It may involve moral turpitude, it must be improper or wrong behaviour, unlawful behaviour, willful in character, forbidden act, a transgression of established and definite rule of action or code of conduct but not mere error of judgement, carelessness or negligence in performance of duty, the act complained of bears forbidden quality or character. Its ambit has to be construed with reference to the subject matter and the context wherein the term occurs, regard being had to the scope of the statue and the public purpose it seeks to serve."
20. In industrial law, the word 'misconduct' has acquired a specific connotation. In Shalimar Rope Works Ltd. (1953 L.A.C. 584) the Labour Appellate Tribunal laid down the criteria for determination as to whether an act would be misconduct, viz. the act (i) is inconsistent with the fulfillment of the express or implied conditions of service, or (ii) is directly linked with the general relationship of employer and employee or (iii) has a direct connection with the contentment or comfort of the men at work, or[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4627 (iv) has a material bearing, on the smooth and efficient working of the concern. If the answer to any of these criteria is in affirmative, the action in question would amount to an act of misconduct. In industrial law, there two kinds of misconduct, namely; (I) gross or major misconduct which justify punishment of dismissal or discharge, and (II) minor misconduct which do not justify punishment of dismissal or discharge but may call for lesser punishment. See also Caltex India Ltd. (1966 (2) LLJ 137).
21. An act done willfully with a wrong intention would amount to misconduct. Intention can be said to consciously or willfully or deliberately doing an act which it is known or foreseen or appreciated or realized, will as a probable, perhaps highly probable, perhaps morally certain, consequence, expose the victim to the risk of peril of death or grievous bodily harm, even though the actor may not wish or desire the result to ensue, may be certain that it will ensue, or may have wanton disregard or indifference as to whether it will nor not. Intention involves foresight or knowledge of the probable or likely consequences of injury, plus the desire or purpose or object or end to do an act which will bring those consequences about. Foresight or knowledge of the probable or likely consequences does not or may not, itself suffice to constitute intention, but it is naturally very strong evidence of such an intention. Foresight or knowledge is the best basis to find the requisite intention proved and this must normally be expected to follow.
22. "Good faith' plays an important part in law of crimes and its presence is ordinarily a sufficient answer to a charge of criminality in many cases. Good faith is defined in positive aspect by section 3(22) of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which definition is extracted thus:
"3.(22) A thing shall be deemed to be done in 'good faith' where it is in fact done honestly, whether it is done negligently or not",
Element of honesty, introduced by the above definition, is not present in the definition given in the Penal Code. Negative definition of the phrase is given in section 52 of the Penal Code, which runs thus:
"52. Nothing is said to be done or believed in 'good faith' which is done or believed without care and attention".
23. As defined by the Penal Code, definition of phrase 'good faith' has no reference to the moral element of honesty and right motive which are involved in popular significance of 'good faith', defined by General Clauses Act. To establish good faith under the penal law, it is necessary to prove that the person pleading good faith acted with due care and attention and an honest blunder cannot be protected, without establishing the exercise of due care and attention. The plea of good faith may be negatived on the ground of recklessness indicative of want of due care and attention if the imputation in question, have been made as categorical statements of facts. However law does not exact the same degree of care and attention from all persons. It varies with the position they occupy. In this sense, the question of 'good faith' is always question of fact to be determined in accordance with the proved facts and circumstances of each case.
24. The 'due' care required must depend upon the nature of the act, its magnitude and importance and the facility a person has for the exercise of care and attention. It does not constitute 'good faith' necessarily because the person making the imputation believed it to be true. Due care and attention imply a genuine effort to reach the truth, and not the ready acceptance of an ill natured belief. A surgeon working in his surgery would be judged by a different standard from that applicable to a surgeon in the field. But where a quack unskilled in surgery performs an operation which even a trained surgeon seldom dares, he cannot be accredited with good faith, if his patient trusting him succumbs to his operation.
25. The circumstances that operate on the exercise of care and attention are so varied and variable that it is not possible to fix a general standard by which the presence or absence of 'good faith' may, in any case, be tested. But at the same time, in such cases, it is always permissible to argue ex post facto; that is to say, it may be shown that there was a want of good faith' because there was absence of the requisite care and caution. On the other hand, a person relying upon ''load faith' may show that he had taken the necessary care and caution, and that, therefore, his act was done in good faith. As observed by the Law Commission in its First Report : 'He will be required to prove that his conduct was such as to lead fairly to the inference that he acted in good faith as alleged. It is true that he cannot prove directly what was in his mind, but he may be able to prove facts by which this may be sufficiently manifested". To satisfy the Court of his good faith, he must show at least that he acted advisedly and that he had reasonable ground prima facie for believing that he ought to do what he did.
26. In order to establish belief in good faith, a person's simple belief in good faith that circumstances are such and such, ought not to be sufficient: there ought to be sufficiently strong and just ground for his belief. Belief must have a foundation and that must be shown. Where a person acts with thoughtless precipitancy, without making sufficient inquiries and jumping to a conclusion upon materials wholly unjustifiable, it cannot be said that he had exercised good faith.
27. As a person, acting in good faith, is excepted from criminality, presence of good faith in each case must depend upon the circumstances which alone entitle a person to exemption from criminal responsibility. The burden lies on the delinquent to prove that he acted with4628 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] good faith. The question of good faith must be considered with reference to the position of the delinquent and the circumstances under which he acted. The law does not expect the same care and attention from all persons regardless of the position they occupy.
trial of the claimant for an offence of possessing assets disproportionate to known sources of his income. However it is clear that commercial angle of such acts cannot be ruled out. The claimant was moved with an idea to gain out of those acts, which were done by him beyond the scope of his employment. Further more he put reputation of his employer to stake and tarnished fair image of the bank. These facts, compled with his more than 20 years unblemished service, motive me to comment that punishment of dismissal from service can neither be called proportionate nor appropriate to his misconduct. This punishment is excessive to the acts of his misconduct. Considering all facts and circumstances projected by the claimant, I am of the view that indulgence by the Tribunal is called for. Therefore the Tribunal holds that punishment lesser than dismissal is to be awarded to the claimant, without making the bank to retain him in service. Hence punishment of discharge simpleciter from service would meet the ends of justice. This punishment would relive the bank from retaining the claimant in service and the claimant would receive his retrial benefits. This issues are, therefore, answered accordingly.
Relief
28. As projected above, order of the Special Judge accepting the closure report and forming an opinion that there was no material to warrant trial of the claimant would not espouse his cause. As brought over the record, claimant opened saving bank accounts No. 3785 on 31-7-91, account number 4116 on 29-6-92 and account No. 4410 on 4-3-94. Saving bank account No.4503 was opened in the name of his wife on 20-07-94, with his introduction. Thus it has come over the record that various accounts were opened by the claimant in his name as well as in the name of his wife, with a view to route transactions involving huge turnover, which fact is sufficient to conclude that he was involved in business beyond the scope of his employment. The claimant indulged in such activities, without permission of his employer. When turnover worth crores took place in those accounts, authorities concerned with law and order became suspicious and arrested the claimant. His arrest got wide publicity in the media and image of the bank was tarnished. Claimant could not refute that his dealings in the aforesaid accounts put his employer's name to disregard.
29. An employee is expected to promote interest of his employer in connection with the job for which he was engaged. Contract of an employment engrafts a stipulation that the employee should serve his mater with good faith and fidelity. Thus it was expected of the claimed to inform his employer in respect of the bank drafts, which he routed through the aforesaid four accounts. He opted not to inform his employer in that regard. Since there were heavy turnovers in the aforesaid accounts, wherein crores of rupees were involved, this proposition is conclusive of the fact that of the claimant indulged in business beyond the scope of his employment. For business activities he never took his employer in confidence, nor obtained permission in that regard. Further more activities of the claimant had tarnished the image of his employer. His acts and conduct proved detrimental to fair image of the bank. Consequently it is clear that through his aforesaid acts the claimant acted prejudicial to the interest of his employer and committed gross misconduct. Financial loss is not only criteria to be taken into account, while awarding punishment for a misconduct. The misconduct committed by the claimants, is serious one and penalty for such misconduct should be harsher one. Such an employee cannot be retained in service.
30. Question would arise as to whether punishment of dismissal is the only appropriate penalty for the misconduct. As detailed above, Special Judge, CBI, recorded as opinion that there was no material warranting 31. In view of the aforesaid discussion it is crystal clear that the claimant cannot seek reinstatement in the service of the bank. Relief of lesser punishment than are awarded to him is granted. Consequently punishment of discharge simpleciter from service is awarded to the claimant, which will entitle him to claim retrial benefits. An award is accordingly passed. It be sent to the appropriate Govt. for publication
Dr. R. K.YADAV, Presiding Officer
Dated: 12-12-2012
नई दिल्ली, 8 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1636.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑपफ इण्डिया के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी/एलसी/आर/नं. 84/89द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-06-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12012/736/88-डी-2;एद्ध-आई आर ;बी-IIद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 8th July, 2013
S.O. 1636.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (CGIT/LC/R/No. 84/89) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure in the[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4629 Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Bank of India and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 27-6-2013.
[No. L- 12012/736/88-D-2(A)-IR (B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/R/84/89
SHRI R.B.PATLE, Presiding Officer
Assistant General Secretary, Madhya Pradesh Bank Employees Association, Singhal Bhawan, IInd Floor, Gwalior . . . Workman/Union
Versus
Regional Manager, Bank of India,E-2, 71, Arera Colony, Gwalior . . . Management
AWARD
Passed on this 11th day of June, 2013
1. As per letter dated 2-5-89 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L-12012/ 736/88/D-2(A)-IR (B-II). The dispute under reference relates to:
"Whether the order No. GWL/PERS dated 14-10-86 issued by the Manager, Bank of India to Shri V.K.Bahal advising him to take over the charge of Head cashier of the Branch in place of Shri J.K.Sharma promoted as Officer can be treated as an order for his permanent charge of Head Cashier? Whether the action of the Branch Manager, Gwalior Branch in verbally withdrawing the charge of Head Cashiers post from Shri V.K.Bahal w.e.f. 14-1-87 can be treated as valid and correct? Further whether the action of the management in awarding the punishment of stoppage of two increments vide order No. RB/PERS/IL/114 dated 27-2-87 in pending chargesheet for more than for and half years old during the course of pendency of conciliation proceedings can be treated as unfair labour practice? If the action of the management of Bank of India is found to be unjustified to what benefits Shri V.K.Bahal is entitled?"
2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. Ist party workman submitted statement of claim. I find that the statement of claim submitted by Ist party is full of repetition. The substance of the contentions of Ist party is that he was appointed as cashier cum clerk from 14-8-1973, He was transferred to Shivpuri on 6-12-1975 and then to Gwalior and other places. He was active member of Union at different level. That Head Cashier J.K.Sharma was promoted. His post is vacant. The charge of cashier was temporary assigned to him. According to the Ist party workman, the charge of cashier remained with Senior most cashier as per the rules and regulations. He was not given charge of Head cashier permanently. The said act of the management is alleged to be illegal. That he had made correspondence with the higher authorities in that regard. Despite of it, the charge of Head cashier was not given to him. He further alleged that the chargesheet was issued to him despite of the conciliation proceedings were pending. Punishment withholding increment was imposed against him. The said act of the management was illegal is in contravention of Section 33(1) and (3) of I.D.Act. He submits that the enquiry conducted against him was in violation of principles of natural justice. The allegations could not be proved against him. The Enquiry Officer was partial, bias, the findings were perverse. Principles of natural justice were not followed. Prior permission was not taken from ALC as provided under Section 33(1) & (3) of I.D.Act. On above contentions, the workman prays that the order dated 14-10-86 issued by management is illegal. Direction be issued to give permanent charge of Head Cashier to him. That punishment of imposing two punishments be set aside.
3. IInd party submitted Written Statement and additional Written Statement denying the contentions of the Ist party workman at Page 30/1 to 30/7. It is contented that no permanent charge of Head cashier can be handed over as claimed by Ist party. The chargesheet was legally issued to the workman Enquiry was conducted following principles of natural justice. The Disciplinary Authority found charges against workman are proved. The punishment withholding two increments is imposed. IInd party prayed for rejection of reliefs prayed by workman.
4. Ist party filed rejoinder to the reply filed by the
IInd party and reiterated his earlier contentions.
5. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below :—
(i) Whether the order dated In Negative
14-10-86 issued by the Manager, Bank of India to Shri V.K.Bahal advising him to take over the charge of Head cashier of the Branch in place of Shri J.K. Sharma promoted as Officer can be treated as an order for his permanent charge of Head Cashier?
4630 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)](ii) Whether the action of the In
Branch Manager, Gwalior Affirmative Branch in verbally withdrawing the charge of Head Cashiers post from Shri V.K. Bahal w.e.f. 14-1-87 is legal?
(iii) Whether the action of the Not proved
management in awarding the punishment of stoppage of two increments during the course of pendency of conciliation proceedings can be treated as unfair labour practice?
(iv) If not, what relief the workman Relief
is entitled to?" prayed by
workman are rejected.
management's witness remained unchallenged. Workman failed to adduce evidence. For above reasons, claim of workman is not substantiated by evidence. Therefore his claim cannot be upheld. For the above reasons I answer Point No. l in Negative, Point No. 2 in Affirmative and Point No. 3 in Negative.
8. In the result, award is passed as under:—
(i) The order dated 14-10-86 issued by the Manager, Bank of India to Shri V.K. Bahal advising him to take over the charge of Head Cashier of the Branch in place of Shri J.K. Sharma promoted as Officer cannot be treated as an order for his permanent charge of Head Cashier.
(ii) Order dated 14-1-1987 in withdrawing charge of
Head Cashier is valid.
(iii) Punishment of withholding of two increments is
legal.
(iv) Reliefs prayed by workman are rejected.
REASONS
6. The dispute under reference relates to three questions— Ist— Whether the order dated 14-10-86 issued by the Manager amounts to permanent charge of Head Cashier, IInd—Whether the withdrawal of said charge as per order dated 14-1-87 is illegal?, IIIrd—Whether the punishment of withholding 2 increments is illegal. All those questions are referred by this reference. Though elaborate pleadings submitted in statement of claim and rejoinder and various applications, the workman has failed to adduce any evidence. In absence of evidence on behalf of the workman, his claim is not substantiated. The management has filed affidavit of evidence of witness Shri P.C. Saxena. To be precise, the management's witness Shri P.C. Saxena has stated on oath that Manager allowed charge of Head Cashier temporarily to Shri V.K. Bahal in view of his security at branch. Manager of Bank could not have assigned such duties on permanent basis to anybody because he was not competent to do so. That the order dated 14-10-86 assigning duties on temporary basis and not on permanent basis. That Shri Bahal was to be assigned the temporary duties of special Assistant. That Shri Bahal did not accept the duties of Special Assistant, the Manager had to assign the said duties to some one else. He has further stated that disciplinary action for gross misconduct was pending against Shri Bahal as per chargesheet dated 12-7-1982. As such Shri Bahal was not eligible for assignment of Head Cashier's duties on permanent basis. The evidence of management's witness remained unchallenged.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 8 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1637.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार इंडियन ओवरसीज बैंक के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, हैदराबाद के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 113/2004द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 3-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12012/76/2004-आई आर ;बी-IIद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 8th July, 2013
S.O. 1637.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (I.D. No. 113/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Hyderabad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Indian Overseas Bank and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 3-7-2013.
[No. L- 12012/76/2004-IR (B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM -LABOUR COURT
AT HYDERABAD
PRESENT:
7. The witness of management has further stated on oath that chargesheet dated 30-8-83 contains three charges against Mr. Bahal. He was given benefit of doubt with regard to Charge No. 2. Charge No.1 is proved. The witness denied that any prejudice is caused to Mr. Bahal. Principles of natural justice was followed. The evidence of Smt. M. Vijaya Lakshmi, Presiding Officer[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4631 Dated the 5th day of June, 2013
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 113/2004
BETWEEN
Sri K.V. Venu, R/o H.No. 2-5-57, Old Gadi Road, Kamareddy, Nizamabad. ….Petitioner
AND
The Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Kamareddy Branch, Nizamabad.
….Respondent omission which are prejudicial to the interest of the bank. Charge-sheet was issued with him and Petitioner submitted his explanation denying allegations levelled against him, requesting that he should be exonerated from the charges. An enquiry was conducted which is to be vitiated due to non-observances of principles of natural justice. Hence, this petition.
3. Respondent management has filed counter statement stating therein that Petitioner Sri K.V. Venu while working as Clerk/Shroff/Godown Keeper at Kamareddy branch had misappropriated various remittances tendered to him on various dates by SB account holders of the branch, amount totalling to Rs. 98,250/-. Petitioner was suspended from service on 8.7.98 and a charge sheet was served on him dated 15.9.1998.
APPEARANCES :
For the Petitioner : M/s. M. Venkataswamy, T. Hanumantha Reddy and Madhusudhan Reddy, Advocates
For the Respondent : M/s. A. Krishnam Raju, G.D. Kumar, G.V.N. Babu, N.P. Rao, A.B.S. Reddy, N.V. Kumar and T. Singaiah, Advocates.
AWA RD
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour by its order No. L- 12012/76/2004-IR (B-II) dated 18.8.2004 referred the following dispute under section 10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 for adjudication to this Tribunal between the management of Indian Overseas Bank and their workman Sri K.V. Venu. The term of reference is,
4. It is further submitted that Petitioner submitted his explanation denying the charges. Enquiry was held, management examined two witnesses and 31 documents were marked. Though opportunity was provided Petitioner had not examined witnesses on his behalf and produced only one document as defence exhibit. He was extended the benefit of interpreter by appointing Sri Nagaprasada Rao, Special cadre Assistant as his interpreter as he stated that he did not know English. Petitioner has chosen not to cross examine the management witnesses. There was no violation of principles of natural justice. Petitioner has not submitted his written brief denying the charges and also not submitted his comments to the written brief submitted by the Presenting Officer. Enquiry proceeding were conducted in a proper and fair manner holding the principles of natural justice. Therefore, Petitioner was rightly discharged from bank's service as such, Petition is liable to be dismissed.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the General Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Central Office, Chennai in imposing the punishment of discharge from service on Shri K.V. Venu, Ex-Clerk/Shroff/Godown Keeper w.e.f. 10-9-1999 is justified or not? If not, what relief terminated worker is entitled for ?"
The reference is numbered in this Tribunal as I.D.
No. 113/2004 and notices were issued to the parties.
2. Petitioner has filed claim statement stating therein that he was appointed as messenger at Nizamabad Branch of Respondent on 25.3.1983 and subsequently promoted as Clerk/Shop/Godown Keeper in Nizamabad District. While he was working as Cashier at Kamareddy Branch, Respondent bank placed the Petitioner under suspension pending enquiry vide proceedings dated 8-7-1998 alleging that he had committed certain acts of commission and 5. Both parties have filed their respective documents. Order has been passed on 15.11.2011 holding domestic enquiry conducted in this case as valid.
6. Case stands posted for arguments. Petitioner as well as Respondent are called absent. No representation for either party. Inspite of giving fair opportunity they are not showing any interest in the proceedings. No evidence is also adduced on record either by way of marking documents.
7. In the circumstances, taking that Petitioner is not
interested in the proceedings, petition is dismissed.
Award passed accordingly. Transmit.
Dictated to Smt. P. Phani Gowri, Personal Assistant transcribed by her and corrected by me on this the 5th day of June, 2013.
M. VIJAYA LAKSHMI , Presiding Officer4632 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Appendix of evidence
AWARD
Witnesses examined for Witnesses examined for the the Petitioner Respondent
NIL NIL
Passed on this 17th day of June, 2013
Documents marked for the Petitioner
NIL
Documents marked for the Respondent
NIL
नई दिल्ली, 8 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1638.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार यूको बैंक के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी/एलसी/आर/ 22/99द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 3-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12012/86/98-आई आर ;बी-IIद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 8th July, 2013
S.O. 1638.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (CGIT/LC/R/No. 22/99) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of UCO Bank and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 3-7-2013.
[No. L- 12012/86/98-IR-(B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer 1. As per letter dated 4-12-1998 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section 10 of I.D. Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L- 12012/86/98-IR(B-II). The dispute under reference relates to:
"Whether the action of the management of Asstt. General Manager, UCO Bank in terminating the services of Shri Chakradari Parate w.e.f. 26-4-97 is justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?"
2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. 1st party workman did not appear and file Statement of claim.
ANNEXURE
3. Management filed exparte Written Statement. It is submitted that 1st party workman Chakradhary Parate was served with chargesheet dated 21-1-94 under Clause 19.5(j) and 19.5(d) of the Bipartite Settlement dated 19-10-66. That the 1st party workman working as clerk/officiating Teller in the Bank at Budhwara Extention counter attached to Marwari Road, Bhopal Branch mis-utilised Banks funds causing wrongful loss to the Bank and other charges. He has committed serious irregularities. The charges were substantiated by documentary evidence. The delinquent did not appear in the Departmental Enquiry. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report that the charges were proved. Considering the report of Enquiry Officer, letter dated 12-4-97 was issued proposing to impose punishment. 1st party workman remained absent. Considering gravity of charges, 1st party workman was dismissed. The workman was also prosecuted by CBI. He was convicted for different offences including Section 13(2)r/w13(1)(d) imposed 1 year RI and find of Rs.1000 in each count and in default of payment of find further 3 months RI in each count. IInd party prayed for rejection of relief claimed by workman.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/22/99
Presiding Officer : SHRI R.B.PATLE
Shri Chakradari Parate, 387, Vaibhav Gaikwad House, Ganesh Nagar, Nagpur
. . . Workman
Versus
The Asstt. General Manager, UCO Bank, Zonal Officer, E-5, Arera Colony, Bhopal
. . . Management 4. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below :—
(i) Whether the action of the In Affirmative
management of Asstt. General Manager, UCO Bank in terminating the services of Shri Chakradari Parate w.e.f. 26-4-97 is legal?
(ii) If so, to what relief the Relief prayed by
workman is entitled to? workman is
rejected.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4633REASONS
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/3/89
Presiding Officer : SHRI R.B.PATLE
Shri Santosh Kumar Malviya, Ex.Clerk-cum-cashier, Bank of India, PO Karhi, Tehsil Maheshwar, Pin- 450220 . . .Workman
Versus
Regional Manager, Bank of India, Khandwa Region, 12, Anand Nagar, Khandwa . . . Management
AWARD
5. Though 1st party workman challenged his termination of his service, he has failed to file Statement of Claim. He has not participated in the reference, no evidence is adduced by him to substantiate in any of the ground to establish that his termination from service is illegal. The management's witness Satish Kumar in his affidavit of evidence has stated that Departmental Enquiry was conducted and charges about mis-appropriation of the amount causing loss to the Bank were proved. That Ist party workman was also convicted for offence under Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of PC Act. The copy of final order is produced. The evidence of witness remained unchallenged. I do not find reason to disbelieve the evidence of management's witness. From evidence discussed above, it is clear that the termination of service of Ist party workman Shri Ganesh was as per the report received from Enquiry Officer. The charges were proved. The termination cannot be said illegal. Therefore I record my finding on Point No.1 in Affirmative.
6. In the result, award is passed as under:-
(1) The action of the management of Asstt. General Manager, UCO Bank in terminating the services of Shri Chakradari Parate w.e.f . 26-4-97 is legal.
(2) Relief prayed by 1st party workman are rejected.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 8 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1639.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑपफ इण्डिया के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी/एलसी/आर/3/89द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-04-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12012/428/88-डी-2;एद्ध-आई आर ;बी-IIद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 8th July, 2013
S.O. 1639.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (CGIT/LC/R/ 3/89) of the Central Government Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Bank of India and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 26-4-2013.
[No. L- 12012/428/88-D-2(A)-IR (B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer Passed on this 8th day of April 2013
1. As per letter dated 3-1-89 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section -10 of I.D. Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-12012/ 428/88/-D-2(A). The dispute under reference relates to:
" Whether the action of the management of Bank of India in dismissing from service Shri S.K.Malviya is justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?"
2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. Ist party workman submitted statement of claim at page 2/1 to 2/7. The case of workman is that he was appointed as clerk-cum-cashier on 8-12-71. He was confirmed on the said post on 8-6-72 after completion of minimum period of probation. He was working as clerk- cum-cashier at the time of his dismissal from service. He claims to be workman under I.D.Act. That he was performing his duty sincerely and honestly. On 28-6-82, there was a shortage of Rs.15,000 cash. It put him in hardship and inconvenience. On the day when he returned after lunch break about 3 to 4 PM alongwith other staff members, he found shortage of cash of Rs, 15,000. He tried to tally cash and reported the matter to the Branch Manager, Karhi. The shortage of cash was confirmed by Branch Manager. On advise of Branch Manager, he arranged shortage amount. He closed the cash as per the advise of the Manager filling up denominations. The matter ended with loss of Rs.15,000.
3. That after about 5 months, he received letter from Regional Manager Khandwa suspending him from service and informing him that Deptt. enquiry was to follow. Chargesheet was issued to him on 29-10-82 alleging charges4634 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] against him "that he had misappropriated Bank's Fund amounting Rs.15,000''. That the workman misused his position in borrowing money from the customers of the Bank. He retreats that he had deposited shortage amount on advise of Bank Manager. The charge of misappropriation was not consistent. He has narrated about details of his duties. On 1-7-82, he was intending to proceed on leave. The Branch Manager wanted the applicant to write a letter that he should be careful in future to see that shortage should not occur. That shortage of cash cannot be said misappropriation.
4. He further contends that he received showcause notice dated 7-7-1983 but without report of Enquiry Officer. That the punishment of dismissal was imposed against him on 3-9-83. He submits that he had borrowed money to make good the shortage and even that action was treated as charge by the Bank though no prejudice was caused to the Bank. The findings of the Enquiry Officer are perverse. There is no proof of misappropriation . Only there is shortage and some negligence which cannot be termed as misconduct. The dismissal is not proper and reasonable. It is imposed without considering his clean service record. He challenged his dismissal filing appeal. The appeal was dismissed. Ist party prayed for reinstatement with back wages.
suffered any loss. On advise of Branch Manager, he had borrowed amount and made good the loss alleged. As the incident was of shortage of amount, there was no question of lodging FIR. If the matter would have been of mis- appropriation, the Manager should have been bound to lodge FIR. It is denied that report of Enquiry Officer was supplied to him before imposing penalty. He reitreates that punishment is harsh and improper. He also alleges victimization on the basis of some extraneous consideration.
8. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below :—
(i) Whether the Deptt. Enquiry This issue is
conducted by management already decided against the workman is on 16-4-1996 that legal and proper? If not, action of mgt. whether the management is legal. is entitled to prove the misconduct of workman.
(ii) To what relief, if any, the Workman is not
workman is entitled to?" entitled to any
relief.
Preliminary issue as to whether enquiry is conducted proper and legal is decided by my predecessor. Enquiry was conducted proper. There was no breach of natural justice.
9. Learned predecessor has framed issues on 25-7-06. Issue No.1 is already decided and enquiry is held proper. There is no question of management proving misconduct of workman by adducing evidence. The 2nd issue is to what relief, if any is the workman entitled? Though said issue is not clearly worded, it implies whether the punishment imposed against Ist party workman is proper and justified. My finding on the said issue is that punishment of dismissal is proper for the reasons given hereinafter.
REASONS
5. The IInd party management filed Written Statement at Page 3/1 to 3/5. The contentions of Ist party are denied. It is not disputed that shortage of cash of Rs. 15,000 was found on 20-6-82. It is submitted that shortage of cash was found after surprise inspection was taken by Branch Manager. That Ist party workman had deposited the said amount. He was handling the cash. Loss of Rs.15,000 was caused to the Bank because of the shortage. The cash of Rs.15,000 shortage was confirmed by workman. The departmental proceeding indicate Ist party workman was on duty. It is denied that he was burdened with heavy work. The Enquiry Officer recorded his finding. Charge No.1 was proved, Charge No.2 not proved. Competent Authority issued showcause notice. Ist party workman misappropriated Bank's funds of Rs.15,000. It is serious misconduct therefore the punishment of dismissal imposed by competent authority cannot be said illegal and improper. The punishment of dismissal is legal and justified.
6. IInd party further contended that punishment of dismissal is confirmed by Appellate Authority. The reference is not maintainable. It is submitted that if it is found that Departmental Enquiry was not properly held, the IInd party management be permitted to lead evidence to substantiate the charges. IInd party prayed for rejection of the claim of Ist party.
7. Ist party filed rejoinder at Page 4/1 to 4/2. It is denied that shortage of cash was found after surprise checking of the Branch Manager. He denies that the Bank 10. Learned counsel for Ist party workman Shri Pandey submits that there was shortage of cash of Rs.15,000 on 28-6-82. On advise of Branch Manager, workman immediately deposited the said amount. Ist party workman had borrowed amount from staff members, his brother and other persons. According to Shri Pandey, the shortage of amount cannot be said to be gross misconduct under clause 19-5(J) . That clause 43(1) or bipartite agreement was also brought to my notice. He finally emphasized that dismissal of workman is harsh and he prayed for his reinstatement with full back wages. Learned counsel for IInd party Mr. Shashi submits that Ist party workman was working as cashier-cum-clerk, shortage of[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4635 Rs.15,000 was informed to Branch Manager and the amount was deposited. The shortage of amount was not detected by Branch Manager on his surprise inspection. The chargesheet was issued to workman for dishonestly misappropriated the amount. The amount was borrowed by the workman. The evidence was adduced . Learned counsel emphasized that misconduct or misappropriation is proved against Ist party. Punishment of dismissal from service is just and proper. Learned counsel relies on Ratio held in several cases. I would deal with the ratio held in the cases at later part of the judgment.
11. The record of enquiry proceeding is produced. Ist Bipartite Settlement is produced on record. Clause 19.5(j) provides :—
" doing any act prejudicial to the interest of the bank of gross negligence or negligence involving or likely to involve the bank in serious loss;"
The charge No. 1 against workman under Clause 19.5(j) doesnot include the Act of misappropriation, rather it deals with negligence in duties prejudicial with the interest of the Bank and likely to cause serious loss. The misappropriation of Bank amount contemplates dishonestly receiving the amount with intention to cause wrongful loss to the Bank or wrongful gain to the employee. The evidence of management's witness Shri V.K.Arora, Branch Manager is at page 17/8 of the record of Enquiry Proceedings. He says on 28-6-82, while checking cash, at the close of the business he found that Rs.15,000 were less than shown in cash Balance Book. That when he asked cash from workman Mr.Malviya, he agreed that he had taken away Rs.15,000 and he promised to bring the same. However he has given in writing also and he brought Rs.6500 in cash, a cheque of Rs.7000 and three withdrawals of Saving Bank from three staff members aggregating Rs.1500. The cheque and withdrawals were shown as late payment on 28-6-82. On his evidence, letter was marked as Exhibit M-2. In his cross- examination, he confirms that cash payment shows total payment made on 28-6-82 as Rs.16779.96. The receipt book of the day shown total receipt of Rs. 4639.58. The entries bear his signatures. The total payment of Rs. 16779.96 bears his signature. He admits that he had obtained Exhibit M-3 to M-6 from Mr. Malviya on 28-6-10. The charges alleged against workman is at page 17/3. Charge No. 1 reads—
" On 28-6-82 at about 5.30 PM, the Branch cash was checked and it was found that there was a shortage of Rs.15,000. On enquiring, you admitted that the said cash has been taken away by you. You have, therefore, dishonestly misappropriated the Bank's Funds amounting to Rs.15,000".
12. The evidence of Branch Manager B.K.Arora is clear that on his enquiry when he found the cash was short, Malviya workman agreed that he had taken away Rs.15,000 and promised to bring the same. So far as evidence of management's witness No.2 Shri R.C.Juhariya, in his evidence, he says that on 20-6-82, he, Branch Manager Arora and workman were present. The staff members left for lunch. Workman told Branch Manager Arora that cash is balanced and is to be kept inside. Mr.Arora went inside the cash cabin and started checking the cash and found Rs.15,000 short. It was told that one packet of Rs.100 denomination and one of Rs.50 denomination was found less. Workman had deposited the said amount collecting from staff members and other persons. His evidence in cross-examination shows on 28-6-82, he had not seen Shri Malviya taking out cash during working hours. No personal search of Shri Malviya was taken in his presence for shortage of cash was brought to his notice. In his statement before Enquiry Officer, Ist party workman has admitted that there was shortage of cash of Rs.15,000. He had borrowed Rs. 7000 from M/s. Sudarshan Oil & chemicals Industries, Karhi, Rs.11,000 from Shri Fathulal Madhavji Patidar. The evidence of management's witness about shortage of amount and Ist party workman had admitted that he had taken amount of Rs.15000 cash is not shattered in cross-examination.
13. Learned counsel for IInd party Shri Shashi relied on ratio held in case of Union of India Versus B.K.Srivastava in AIR1998 SC-300. In Para-7 of the judgment, their Lordship of the Apex Court held that-
" The Tribunal couldnot sit in appeal against the orders of the Disciplinary and Appellate Authorities in exercise of its powers of judicial review."
Though the observations are made in respect of the matter decided by CAT, the principles laid down by their lordship squarely covers the powers of this Tribunal also.
Further reliance is placed in case of Bank of India versus D.Padmanabhadu and another in 1995 I LLJ P-235. Their Lordship held—
"The order of dismissal was set aside by the Labour Court on the grounds that the amount of misappropriation has been paid back to the customer, the workman belonged to Scheduled Tribe, the workman should be given an opportunity to reform himself. Their Lordship held intentional temporary retention of money which doesnot belong to a person is also misappropriation. Mere repayment will act absorve the liability or misconduct of the respondent workman. The Bank is the custodian of the money of the customers and the cashier is a person who deals with money and he must be more diligent and honest and justify the trust reposed in him by the bank and the customers. If once the customers lose confidence in the dealings, the entire organization suffers and confidence of the customers is the basis on which the edifice of the banking system as well."4636 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] Reliance is also placed on ratio held in case of Union Versus State Bank of India in Miscellaneous Petition No. 18 of 1987. His Lordship considering the shortage of cash of Rs. 9009 detected on 27-8-79. After enquiry, punishment of dismissal was imposed.
which was received by the Central Government on 04-7-2013
[ No. L- 12011/04/2005-IR(B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/R/47/05
Their Lordship in Para-15 of the judgment observed that there was no justification for the Tribunal to hold that the confessional statement was made in order to help the other co-employee, officer-in-charge Shri C.B.Shankar. The said defence was not accepted by the disciplinary authority and the appellate authority. In any case, keeping in view all other circumstances existing on record, the Tribunal couldnot have substituted its own view on the evidence adduced in the enquiry.
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R. B. PATLE
General Secretary, Allahabad Bank Employees Union, T.T.Nagar, Bhopal
...Workman/Union
Versus
In the present case, considering the evidence on record discussed above, I donot find reason to substitute the punishment of dismissal against Ist party workman. For above reasons I record my finding in Point No.2 in Negative.
14. In the result, award is passed as under:-
(1) The action of the management of IInd party Bank in dismissing Ist party workman Shri S.K.Malviya from services is just and legal.
(2) Reliefs prayed by workman for his reinstatement The Asstt. General Manager, Allahabad Bank, Near Chetak Bridge, 6, Gautam Nagar, Bhopal
...Management
AWARD
with back wages is rejected.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 8 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1640.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार इलाहाबाद बैंक के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संबं( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी/एलसी/आर/47/05द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 12011/04/2005-आई आर ;बी-IIद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 8th July, 2013
S.O. 1640.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/47/05) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Allahabad Bank and Their workman Passed on this 18th day of June, 2013
1. As per letter dated 26-5-2005 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section -10 of I. D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L-12011/4/2005 IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to :
'' Whether the action of the management of Allahabad Bank in imposing the punishment of reduction by two stages in the scale of pay of Shri A. M. Khan, Cash Clerk is legal and justified? If not to what relief the concerned workman is entitled ?''
After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. 1st party workman failed to submit statement of claim. He is proceeded exparte on 27-10-09.
3. The management submitted Written Statement. The case as submitted by IInd party management is that workman A.M. Khan was working as cash clerk in Allahabad Bank, Bhopal. On 30-7-99, he had received amount of Rs. 1 Lakh from customer Santosh Jain for exchange of currency notes of Rs. l 00 denomination to notes of 500 denomination. The amount of Rs. 1 Lakh was missing from cash receipt counter of the branch. It amounts to gross misconduct on part of workman. The chargesheet was issued to workman on 29-5-00 for negligence in duty,[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4637 The details of charges are given in the para-5 of the Written Statement. The Departmental Enquiry was initiated against him. Shri S.G.Vaidya was appointed as Enquiry officer, Mr. Vijay Dhok was Presenting Officer. Departmental Enquiry was conducted giving full opportunity to the delinquent workman. The enquiry was completed, charges were proved. Disciplinary Authority issued notice, punishment of reduction of basic pay by 2 stages was imposed against workman. IInd party management prayed for rejection of relief prayed by workman.
4. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below:
"(i) Whether the action of the In Affirmative management of Allahabad Bank in imposing the punishment of reduction by two stages in the scale of pay of Shri A. M. Khan, Cash Clerk is legal?
(ii) If so, to what relief the Relief prayed by workman workman is entitled to?" is rejected.
पफार्म मशीनरी टे्रनिंग एण्ड टेस्टिंग इन्स्टीट्यूट के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी/एलसी/आर/157/97द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-6-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 42012/54/1996-आई आर ;डीयूद्ध]
सोम नाथ, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 9th July, 2013
S.O. 1641.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/157/97 of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of The Director, Farm Machinery Training and Testing Institute and their workman which was received by the Central Government on 28-6-2013.
[ No. L- 42012/54/1996-IR(DU)]
SOM NATH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
REASONS
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/R/157/97
5. Though the legality of punishment of reduction of pay by two stages is referred for adjudication, the workman has not filed statement of claim neither he has adduced any evidence. The Written Statement filed by management and affidavit of evidence of witness Shri Anil Tondon shows that punishment of reduction of pay was imposed holding enquiry of the charges that amount of Rs. 1 Lakh was missing from cash counter while the delinquent workman was working as cash clerk. The evidence of witness of management remained unchallenged. The copy of charge sheet and documents of Enquiry Proceedings are produced on record. The evidence of management's witness remained unchallenged. I do not find any reason to disbelieve his evidence. For above reasons, I record my finding on Point No.1 in affirmative.
6. In the result, award is passed as under :
Presiding Officer : SHRI R. B. P A TLE
Smt. Aktari, W/o Shri Jafer Khan, Behind Railway Station, Godi Mohalla, PO Budni, Distt. Sehore (MP)
...Workman
Versus The Director, Farm Machinery Training and Testing Institute, Tractor Nagar, Budhni, Distt. Sehore
...Management
AWARD
(1) Action of the management of Allahabad Bank in imposing the punishment of reduction by two stages in the, scale of pay of shri A.M.Khan, Cash Clerk is legal.
(2) Relief prayed by ,workman is rejected.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 9 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1641.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार डाइरेकटर, Passed on this 18th day of March, 2013
1. As per letter dated 30-5-97 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section-10 of I.D. Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L-42012/54/96-IR(DU) . The dispute under reference relates to :
4638 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]''Whether the action of the management of Central Farm Machinery Training and Test Institute, Budni in terminating the services of Smt.Aktari, W/o Shri Jafer Khan is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?''
2. After receipt of reference and notice to parties, 1st party submitted statement of claim at Page 8/1 to 8/2. The case of 1st party workman is that she was employed on daily wages as casual labour in the year 1987 by IInd party. She rendered continuous service till her termination in the year 1994. That she had completed 240 days working in each of the calendar year. That IInd party with ulterior motive adopted pick and choose policy. The services of 24 employees were regularized. Three of them namely Gulab, Sivlal and Narmada Prasad were regularized though they were above 70 years of age. Hiralal, Ashok Kumar and Suresh who were engaged after 1st party were also regularized. Services of 1st party were terminated without notice or paying retrenchment compensation. On above grounds, 1st party prays for her reinstatement with back wages.
3. Despite of notices send by different modes to IInd party including notice under Certificate of posting, IInd party .failed to give appearance. IInd party was proceeded exparte on 15-6-07.
4. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below :—
(i) Whether the termination of In Negative services of 1st party/workman by IInd party management of Central Farm Machinery Training and Testing Institute, Budhni is just and legal?
(ii) If not, what relief the Ist party is entitled to workman is entitled to?" compensation
Rs. 40,000 and other relief as per final order.
6. The evidence of 1st party/workman remained unchallenged. IInd party is proceeded exparte, therefore I find no reason to disbelieve her evidence. 1st party is out of employment since 1994. She was not served with notice, no retrenchment compensation was paid. 1st party is a rustic lady. Considering those facts, in my considered view instead of reinstatement, compensation Rs. 40,000 would be appropriate. In addition, 1st party is entitled to one months wages in lieu of notice and retrenchment compensation for 7 years service i.e. wages for 105 days. For above reasons, I record my finding on Point No.1 in Negative and Point No. 2 accordingly.
7. In the result, award is passed as under:
''1.Termination of services of 1st party Smt. Kamlabai by IInd party is illegal.
2. IInd party is directed to pay compensation Rs. 40,000 to 1st party, one month wages in lieu of notice and 105 days wages towards retrenchment compensation.''
The above amount shall be calculated at the rate of last wage paid to the 1st party. Amount as per above order be paid within 30 days from the date of award. In case of default, the amount shall carry 9 % interest from the date of award till its realization.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 9 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1642.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार डाइरेक्टर, पफार्म मशीनरी टे्रनिंग एण्ड टेस्टिंग इन्स्टीट्यूट के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संबं( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी/एलसी/आर/153/97द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-6-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 42012/56/1996-आई आर ;डीयूद्ध]
सोमनाथ, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 9th July, 2013
REASONS
5. 1st party/workman is challenging termination of his services by IInd party. 1st party filed affidavit of evidence at Page 10/1 to 10/2. 1st party in her affidavit has stated that she was working with IInd party from 1987 to 1994. She had completed 240 days continuous service during each of calendar year. That as per the scheme for regularization of temporary employees in 1993, her services were not regularized, other junior persons were regularized. The persons who were overage such as Gulab, Sivlal, Narmada Prasad were also regularized. She prays for reinstatement with back wages.
S.O. 1642.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/153/97 of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of The Director, Farm Machinery Training and Testing Institute and their workman which was received by the Central Government on 28-6-2013
[ No. L- 42012/56/1996-IR(DU)]
SOM NATH, Section Officer[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4639
ANNEXURE
Ilnd party failed to give appearance. Ilnd party was proceeded exparte on 15-6-07.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/153/97
Presiding Officer : SHRI R. B. PATLE
Smt. Kamlabai, W/o Shri Shivaprasad, Behind Railway Station, Godi Mohalla, Budni, Sehore, Distt. (MP)
...Workman
Versus
4. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below:
(i) Whether the termination of In Negative services of 1st party/workman by Ilnd party management of Central Farm Machinery Training and Testing Institute, Budhni is just and legal ?
(ii) If not, what relief the Ist party is entitled to workman is entitled to? compensation
Rs. 40,000 and other relief as per final order.
REASONS
The Director, Farm Machinery Training and Testing Institute, Tractor Nagar, Budhni, Distt. Sehore
...Management
AWARD
Passed on this 18th day of March, 2013
1. As per letter dated 30-5-97 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section -10 of I. D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L-42012/56/96-IR(DU) . The dispute under reference relates to:
''Whether the action of the management of Central Farm Machinery Training and Testing Institute, Budni in terminating the services of Smt. Kamlabai W/o Shri Shivaprasad is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?''
2. After receipt of reference and notice to parties, 1st party submitted statement of claim at Page 5/1 to 5/2. The case of 1st party workman is that she was employed on daily wages as casual labour in the year 1987 by IInd party. She rendered continuous service till her termination in the year 1994. That she had completed 240 days working in each of the calendar year. That IInd party with ulterior motive adopted pick and choose policy. The services of 24 employees were regularized. Three of them namely Gulab, Sivlal and Narmada Prasad were regularized though they were above 70 years of age. Hiralal, Ashok Kumar and Suresh who were engaged after 1st party were also regularized. Services of 1st party were terminated without notice or paying retrenchment compensation. On above grounds, 1st party prays for her reinstatement with back wages.
3. Despite of notices send by different modes to Ilnd party including notice under Certificate of posting, 5. 1st party/workman is challenging termination of his services by Ilnd party. 1st party filed affidavit of evidence at Page 8/1 to 8/2. 1st party in her affidavit has stated that she was working with Ilnd party from 1987 to 1994. She had completed 240 days continuous service during each of calendar year. That as per the scheme for regularization of temporary employees in 1993, her services were not regularized, other junior persons were regularized. The persons who were overage such as Gulab, Sivlal, Narmada Prasad were also regularized. She prays for reinstatement with back wages.
6. The evidence of 1st party/workman remained unchallenged. IInd party is proceeded exparte, therefore I find no reason to disbelieve her evidence. 1st party is out of employment since 1994. She was not served with notice, no retrenchment compensation was paid. 1st party is an illiterate lady. Considering those facts, in my considered view instead of reinstatement, compensation Rs. 40,000 would be appropriate. In addition, 1st party is entitled to one months wages in lieu of notice and retrenchment compensation for 7 years service i.e. wages for 105 days. For above reasons, I record my finding on Point No.1 in Negative and Point No. 2 accordingly.
7. In the result, award is passed as under :
''1. Termination of services of 1st party Smt. Kamlabai by IInd party is illegal.
2. IInd party is directed to pay compensation Rs. 40,000 to 1st party, one month wages in lieu of notice and 105 days wages towards retrenchment compensation.''
The above amount shall be calculated at the rate of last wage paid to the 1st party. Amount as per above order be paid within 30 days from the date of award. In case of4640 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] default, the amount shall carry 9 % interest from the date of award till its realization.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 9 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1643. औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार यूको बैंक के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी/एलसी/आर/26/94द्ध प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-4-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12012/254/93-आई आर ;बी-IIद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 9th July, 2013
S.O. 1643.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/26/94) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Uco Bank and Their workman which was received by the Central Government on 26-4-2013
[ No. L- 12012/254/93-IR(B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-12012/ 254/93-IR(B-2) . The dispute under reference relates to:
''Whether the action of the management of UCO Bank, Bhopal in terminating the services of Shri Sunil Kumar Negi, Peon with effect from 1-1-1993 is justified? If not, what relief is the workman entitled to?''
2. After receipt of reference, notices were issued to the parties. 1st party workman filed his statement of claim at page 3/1 to 3/7. The case of workman is that he was working on daily wages @ Rs.15 with UCO Bank from 1-11-98. That he was performing work of the peon in 1989, he was paid wages Rs. 25 per day, in 1990 Rs. 43 per day. He was paid bonus of the year 1990-91, 1991-92. That he was in continuous service of the IInd party. He had worked more than 240 days every year. That as per circular dated 19-10-89, he had submitted application on 29-11-89 for appointment on permanent post. The said application was forwarded to IInd party. His application was placed before the Panel. Thereafter he was paid wages Rs.43 per day trom July, 1990. Other employee Om Prakash was also paid wages Rs. 43 per day.
3. He submits that his services were illegally terminated without notice from 1-1-93. He was not paid compensation. He filed conciliation proceedings and dispute has been referred. He has reitreated that his services are terminated in violation of Section 25-F & G of LD.Act. He prays for his reinstatement with back wages.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/26/94
Presiding Officer : SHRI R. B. P A TLE
Shri Sunil Kumar Negi, C/o Shri Satish Govila, 10, Kanti Nagar, Gwalior
...Workman
Versus
Zonal Manager, UCO Bank, 269/270, M.P.Nagar, Zone-II, Bhopal
...Management
AWARD
Passed on this 9th day of April, 2013
1. As per letter dated 2-3-94 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under 4. IInd party submitted Written Statement at Page 8/1 to 8/3. IInd party raised preliminary objection that the petition is filed against officials of the Bank which is not tenable. That 1st party workman was engaged as casual worker by UCO Bank, Gwalior Branch. He was not engaged as a peon against permanent post. Therefore he is not entitled to reliefs as claimed by him. That settlement has arrived between management Bank and the Union on 12-10-89 whereby a scheme was formulated to observe those eligible casual workers who has worked for a period of 240 days or more between 12-10-86 to 11-10-89. The scheme was circulated. The casual workers having minimum age of 18 and maximum 26 years on date of initial engagement were eligible for absorption. That the 1st party workman was not fulfilling eligibility conditions therefore he could not be observed. It is further submitted that the 1st party workman was engaged on daily wages, he had not completed 240 days services. The wages were paid Rs.18, 20, 24 and 25. From July 90, wages paid Rs.43 to the 1st party workman. The IInd party denied that 1st party was its employee. Workman had not completed 240 days continuous service. Therefore there was no question of termination of his services. All other contention of workman are denied. That notice was not required to be given to the workman. That Om Prakash Shakya found eligible for absorption. It is denied that workman had[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4641 acquired right to be absorbed in regular employment. Management prayed for rejection of claim of 1st party workman.
5. 1st party workman filed rejoinder at Page 9/1 to 9/2. The contentions raised in the Written Statement of IInd party are denied. The workman contended that he had completed 240 days continuous service. He had acquired status of permanent employee as he was not a casual labour. It is denied that he is not working as peon. That in September 1990, Divisional Manager had told that he was included in the panel for absorption and wages Rs. 43 per day were paid to him. He claims that he had completed 18 years of age at the time of appointment as such he is entitled to absorption in service.
6. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below:
(i) Whether the action of the In Negative management of UCO Bank, Bhopal in terminating the services of Shri Sunil Kumar Negi, Peon with effect from 1-1-1993 is legal?
(ii) If so, to what relief the 1st party workman is workman is entitled to?" entitled to compensation
Rs.40,000, notice pay equal to 30 days wages, retrenchment compen- sation equal to 60 days wages at the rate of Rs. 43 per day.
wages were paid under voucher. He was working in the Bank from 1986 to 1993. That Bank had not given any certificate. There was settlement between Bank and the Union for absorption of daily wage employees. He had submitted application Exhibit W-l. In Exhibit W-l, his date of birth is shown as 15-8-1971. His date of engagement is shown as 1-11-88. His evidence is not consistent with said document. If Document Exhibit W -1 is accepted, he had not completed 18 years of age at the time of his initial engagement. Document Exhibit W -4 certificate of passing school examination shows his date of birth as 15-8-71. The document Exhibit W -10 shows that 1st party workman was engaged as casual worker. The scheme for absorption was formulated. The age of absorption is minimum 18 years and maximum 26 years. It is clear from the evidence that the workman did not fulfill the conditions for appointment. The copy of the scheme is produced at Exhibit W -2. The eligibility criteria for absorption is working of 240 days with or without break for a period of 3 year and age between 18 to 26 years. The scheme for absorption of the workman is beyond the terms of reference. Besides it, the workman doesnot fulfill the age criteria as per the scheme for absorption. Therefore said claim of the 1st paprty cannot be accepted.
REASONS
In his statement of claim, 1st party workman claims that he is entitled to absorption with the Bank as per settlement between the Union and the Bank dated 19-10-89. Reference does not include said part of the claim of the 1st party workman. The contentions of the workman in that regard are beyond the scope of reference. The reference is made only about legality of the termination of the services of Ist party workman and secondly reliefs. In his rejoinder, workman states that he had completed 18 years age at the time of appointment. As per the statement of claim, he was engaged on 1-11-88, he was paid wages at different rates. Even he was paid bonus for year 1990 91 and 1991-92. 1st party workman has filed affidavit of his evidence covering all his material contentions in statement of claim. In his cross-examination, he says that he was engaged on work in Bank in November 1986 by management, appointment order was not given to him. He had not submitted application in writing. That he was doing all the works in the Bank. He was not signing the muster register. He was engaged on daily wage basis. His 8. Ist party workman claims that he had completed 240 days continuous service during each of the year. His services are terminated without issuing notice or payment of compensation etc. IInd party management has contended that workman had not completed 240 days service. He was working as casual labour as per exigencies. There was no need to give notice. The controversy revolves around whether the workman completed 240 days continuous service. In the affidavit of evidence, workman says that he was continuously working in the Bank from 1-11-88 to 1-1-93. However in his cross-examination he says that he was working in the Bank from November 86. The contrary suggestions are denied by the 1st party workman. Learned counsel for IInd party Mr. Bhattacharjee submits that the burden lies on workman to prove that he was working for 240 days preceding his termination.
"Reliance is placed in ratio held in case of Range Forest Officer Versus S.T.Hadimani in 2002 Supreme Court Cases (L&S) 367. Their Lordship of the apex court dealing with onus and manner of proof for completion of length of continuous service held - where the workman claims that he had worked for 240 days in the year preceding his termination was denied by the employer, it was for the claimant to lead evidence to that effect. It was held that workman' s affidavit was not sufficient evidence for that purpose."
"Similar view was held in case of Surendranagar District Panchayat Versus Dahyabhai Amarsingh in 2006 Supreme Court Cases (L&S) 38. In said case, Lordship of the Apex Court held that burden of proof lies on the4642 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] workman. It is for the workman to adduce evidence apart from examining himself or filing an affidavit to prove the said factum. Such evidence may be in form of receipt of salary or wages for 240 days or record of his appointment or engagement for that year to show that he has worked with the employer for 240 days or examination of a co-worker."
9. Management's witness Shri S.C.Jain has stated that workman had not completed 240 days continuous service preceding his termination. In his cross-examination, management's witness says that the workman was paid bonus for 1 to 2 years. At fag end of his cross examination, management witness says that bonus of 2 year was paid to the workman. The documents about payment of bonus paid to the 1st party workman is produced by management as Exhibit M-2. The bonus of Rs. 1307.49 was paid for 365 days at the rate of Rs.43 per day. It corroborates evidence of 1st party that he was working for more than 240 days in the IInd party management.
10. 1st party workman is discontinued without issuing notice or paying compensation. As workman has completed 240 days continuous service, his evidence is corroborated by document Exhibit M-2, the termination of services of 1st party workman is in violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act.
11.The question is to what relief the workman is entitled. From cross examination of workman, it is clear that he was not appointed following proper procedure. He is also not entitled for absorption as per the scheme between the management and the Union as he did not fulfill eligibility for absorptions his age was less than 18 years at the time of his initial appointment.
12. Learned counsel for management Shri Bhattacharjee relies on ratio held in case of Himanshu Kumar Vidyarthi and others versus State of Bihar and others reported in 1997 Supreme Court Cases (L&S) 1079.
"Their Lordship held the main grievance of petitioner is that termination of their service under violation of Section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947. The question for consideration therefore is whether the petitioner can be said workman within the meaning of Section 25-F of I.D. Act. That every department of Government cannot be treated as industry dispensing with services of persons engaged on daily wages in a government department therefore is not a retrenchment."
The ratio held in the case has no bearing to controversy between parties. No evidence is adduced by management that it is not covered as an industry. Considering oral and documentary evidence on record as 1st party workman was not appointed following prescribed procedure, he doesnot fulfill eligibility for absorption. 1st party workman is not entitled for reinstatement with full back wages. Instead compensation would meet the ends of justice. In my considered view, 1st party workman working with IInd party management from November 88 to 1-1-93 had completed 4 years service is entitled to retrenchment compensation for period of 4 years completed service i.e. equal to 60 days wages. One month wages in lieu of notice and compensation Rs.40,000 in lieu of reinstatement. For above reasons, I record my finding on Point No.I in Negative.
13. Point No. 2 :— 1st party workman is entitled to
compensation Rs. 40,000 etc.
14. In the result, award is passed as under:
(1) The action of the IInd party management in terminating the services of Ist party workman Shri Sunil Kumar Negi w.e.f. 1-1-93 is illegal.
(2) IInd party shall pay compensation Rs.40,000, notice pay equal to 30 days wages, retrenchment compensation equal to 60 days wages at the rate of Rs. 43 per day.
Amount as per above shall be paid within 30 days from the date of award. In case of default, amount shall carry interest 9% per annum till its realization.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 9 जुलार्ई, 2013
का.आ. 1644.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सडिकेट बैंक के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, लखनउफ के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 147/2001द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 04-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 12011/113/2001-आई आर ;बी-IIद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 9th July, 2013
S.O. 1644.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 147/ 2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Lucknow now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Syndicate Bank and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 04-07-2013.
[No. L-12011/113/2001-IR(B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4643
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
LUCKNOW
PRESENT : Dr. MANJU NIGAM, Presiding Officer
I.D. No. 147/2001
on the basis of findings of the Enquiry Officer, issued a Show Cause Notice dated 15-02-2000 to the workman and proposed the punishment of 'Dismissal from the service of the Bank without notice' and after granting an opportunity for personal hearing inflicted the said punishment vide his order dated 20-04-2000. The aggrieved workman preferred an appeal, which was rejected by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 15-09-2000.
Ref. No. L-12011/113/2001-IR (B-II) dated:
7-09-2001
BETWEEN
The State Secretary,
Syndicate Bank Empls. Union, U.P. State Committee 211, Vinay Place, Ashok Marg, Lucknow (U.P.) -226001 (Espousing cause of Shri Ashok Kumar)
AND
The Dy. General Manager
Syndicate Bank Zonal Office, Meerut Wing Bhawani Puram University Meerut (U.P.)
4. It has been alleged by the workman's union that there was flagrant denial of natural justice to the workman in course of the enquiry, in as much as he was not provided certain documents, requested by him during the course of enquiry which cause prejudice to him; therefore, the domestic enquiry is liable to be vitiated and the action of Syndicate Bank in dismissing the workman from the service of the Bank vide order dated 20-04-2000 be declared unjust, unfair and illegal and the workman be reinstated with full back wages and other consequential benefits.
ORDER
1. By order No. L-12011/113/2001-IR (B-II) dated : 07-09-2001 and its subsequent corrigendum dated 21-01- 2002 the Central Government in Ministry of Labour, New Delhi in exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) referred this industrial dispute between the State Secretary, Syndicate Bank Empls. Union U.P. State committee, 211, Vinay Place, Ashok Marg, Lucknow (U.P.) and the Dy. General Manager, Syndicate Bank, Zonal Office, Meerut Wing, Bhawani Puram University, Meerut (U.P.) for adjudication.
2. The reference under adjudiaction is :
"Whether the Action of Syndicate Bank in dismissing Sh. Ashok Kumar from services vide order dated 20-04-2000 is just, fair and legal? If not, what relief he is entitled to ?"
3. It is admitted case of the parties that the workman, Ashok Kumar was working as Clerk in the Alipur Branch of the Bank when he was placed under suspension vide order dated 11-01-95 and subsequently, was issued a major penalty charge sheet dated 01-05-98 for alleged gross misconduct. Initially Shri Prem Raj and later on Shri R.K. Garg was appointed as Enquiry Officer, who submitted his enquiry report dated 30-11-99 before the disciplinary authority with finding that the charges leveled against the workman were found proved. The Disciplinary Authority, 5. The management of the Bank in its written statement has denied the allegations of the workman's union and has defended its domestic proceedings with submission that the workman had been afforded all opportunity given under rules the principles of natural justice were fully complied with; hence, there is no anomaly with it; and accordingly, has prayed that domestic enquiry proceedings conducted by it may be upheld and the action of the Bank vide order dated 20-04-2000 be declared just, fair and legal without any benefit to the workman concerned.
6. After completion of the pleadings of the parties, following preliminary issues were framed in the presence of the parties vide order dated 10-02-2009.
(i) Kya vibhagiya jaanch naisargik nayay ke niyamon ke anuroop the athwa nahi/trutipurn hai athwa nahi?
(ii) Kya jaanch adhikaari dwara di gai aakhya durahgrahpurna (perverse) hai? Athva nahi?
The parties were called upon to adduce their evidence on preliminary issues. The parties filed documents in support of their respective case and adduced oral evidence. The workman examined himself; whereas the management examined Shri Prem Raj and Shri R.K. Garg, the Enquiry Officers in support of their case. The parties availed opportunity to cross-examine each other witnesses. Both the parties forwarded oral arguments on preliminary issues.
7. After hearing the parties' authorized representatives of the parties and going through entire material available on record, following orders were passed on preliminary issues vide order dated 21-08-2012:
"The disciplinary enquiry was conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice and the workman was afforded all reasonable opportunity4644 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] to defend himself; and also, the findings of the Enquiry Officer does not appear to be perverse. As such, both the issues are decided in favour of the management. The parties are called upon to forward their argument regarding quantum of punishment vide impugned order dated 20-04-2000 on 05-10-2012".
8. On the date fixed for arguments the workman remained absent. However, he was present along with his authorized representative, the management was represented by Shri P.K. Jha, Manager (HR/SR). The parties forwarded their oral argument on the point of quantum of punishment under Section 11 A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
9. Heard, parties and perused entire material
available on record.
10. It has been contended by the authorized representative of the workman that the Labour has ample power under section 11-A of the I.D. Act to substitute a lesser punishment, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case. It was submitted that principle of proportionality calls for interference of this Court into the punishment imposed by the management i.e. of dismissal. It has relied on Joseph Solomon vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, U.P., Dehradun & another 2012 (134) FLR 424.
11. Per contra, the management has argued that the Court cannot sit in appeal or it cannot re-appreciate the evidence relied before Inquiry Officer; in as much as it cannot alter the order or punishment. It was submitted that the scope of invoking the powers given under Section 11 A of the Act, by the Labour Court is confined to the condition that the Court should interfere with the order of punishment when it is disproportionate with respect to the misconduct committed or it is harsh. It has further been argued that in the instant case the workman was given charge sheet for committing misconduct of 'doing acts prejudicial to the interest of the bank' i.e. misappropriation of the Bank's money; and was penalized with dismissal after conducting a thorough inquiry and this Tribunal vide its order dated 21-08-2012 has found that "the disciplinary enquiry was conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice and the workman was afforded all reasonable opportunity to defend himself; and also, the findings of the Enquiry Officer do not appear to be perverse"; hence there is no scope for this Tribunal to interfere with the quantum of punishment order as the same is well proportionate order, as the workman was punished for proved gross misconduct i.e. misappropriation. It has submitted that the misappropriation of Bank's money speaks ill of the honesty and integrity of the workman concerned. This is definitely an act prejudicial to the interest of the Bank. Such employees cannot be kept on the rolls of the Bank. It has relied on Bank of India vs Vishwa Mohan (1998) Lab IC 2514.
The bank management has further submitted that the Bank being a financial institution dealing with the public money and the employees of the Bank are required to exhibit utmost honesty and integrity in day to day transaction/functioning. The act of dishonesty or fraud or misappropriation constitute misconduct of serious nature warranting penalty of dismissal. As the charges leveled against the workman were of serious/grave in nature, which were duly proved in the inquiry, therefore, the action of the management is justified. It has been argued by the bank that the aforesaid act of the workman has shaken the confidence of the bank in him and he is not fit to be kept in the services of the Bank, therefore deserves no' interference into the quantum of punishment by this Tribunal. It has relied on Municipal Committee, Bandugarh vs. Kishan Baha and others 1996 Lab IC 1050.
12. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions of the authorized representatives of the parties and perused case laws relied on by them.
13. In the instant case the workman was charge sheeted with the allegation of 'doing acts prejudicial to the interest of bank vide clause No. 19.5 (j) of Bipartite Settlement; and during Disciplinary Proceedings, it has come out that the workman misappropriated an amount of Rs. 50,000. The inquiry and its findings were upheld by this Tribunal vide order dated 21-08-2012, holding that the disciplinary enquiry was conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice and the workman was afforded all reasonable opportunity to defend himself; and also, that the findings of the Enquiry Officer does not appear to be perverse'. Hence, after decision of the preliminary issues in the favour of the management, the workman has pleaded that the punishment imposed upon him is disproportionate and this Tribunal should interfere into it within the provisions providing under Section 11 A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
14. Hon'ble Apex Court in B. C. Chayurvedi v. Union of India, (1995) 6 SCC 749 while discussing about the scope of judicial review, in disciplinary matters, has observed as under:
"The High Court/Tribunal, while exercising the power of judicial review, cannot normally substitute its won conclusion on penalty and impose some other penalty. If the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority or the appellate authority shocks the conscience of the High Court/Tribunal, it would appropriately mould the relief, either directing the disciplinary/appellate authority to reconsider the penalty imposed, or to shorten the litigation, it may itself, in exceptional and rare cases, imposed appropriate punishment with cogent reasons in support thereof. "[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4645 In DG, RPF Vs. Sai Babu (2003) 4 SCC 331, Hon'ble
Apex Court has observed that :
"6 ............. Normally, the punishment imposed by a disciplinary authority should not be disturbed by the High Court or a tribunal except in appropriate cases that too only after reaching a conclusion that the punishment imposed is grossly or shockingly disproportionate, after examining all the relevant factors including the nature of charges proved against, the past conduct, penalty imposed earlier, the nature of duties assigned having due regard to their sensitiveness, exactness expected of an discipline required to be maintained, and the department/establishment which the delinquent person concerned works."
In United Commercial Bank vs. P. C. Kakkar (2003) 4 SCC 364 Hon'ble Apex Court on review of a long line of cases and the principles of judicial review of administrative action under English law summarized the legal position in the following words :
"11. The common thread running through in all these decisions is that the court should not interfere with the administrators' decision unless it was illogical or suffers from procedural impropriety or was shocking to the conscience of the court, in the sense that it was in defiance of logic or moral standards. In view of what has been stated in Wednesbury case the court would not go into the correctness of the choice made by the administrator open to him and the court should not substitute its decision to that of the administrator. The scope of judicial review is limited to the deficiency in decision-making process and not the decision.
12. To put it differently, unless the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority or the appellate authority shocks the conscience of the court/ tribunal, there is no scope for interference. Further, to shorten litigation it may, in exceptional and rare cases, impose appropriate punishment by recording cogent reasons in support thereof."
In Union of India vs. S. S. Ahluwalia (2007) 7 SCC 257 Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterated the legal position as follows:
"8 ............ The scope of judicial review in the matter of imposition of penalty as a result of disciplinary proceedings is very limited. The court can interfere with the punishment only if it finds the same to be shockingly disproportionate to the charges found to be proved."
In State of Meghalaya v. Mecken Singh N. Marak
(2008) 7 SCC 580 Hon'ble Supreme Court stated that :
"The punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority or the appellate authority unless shocking to the conscience of the court, cannot be subjected to judicial review.
15. Hon'ble Apex Court in Administrator, Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli vs. Gulbhia M. Lad (2010) 2 SCC (L&S) 101 has observed that
"The legal position is fairly well settled that while exercising the power of judicial review, the High Court or a Tribunal cannot interfere with the discretion exercised by the disciplinary authority, and/or on appeal the appellate authority with regard to the imposition of punishment unless such discretion suffers from illegality or material procedural irregularity or that would shock the conscience of the court/tribunal. The exercise of discretion in imposition of punishment by the disciplinary authority or appellate authority is dependent on host of factors such as gravity of misconduct, past conduct, the nature of duties assigned to the delinquent, responsibility of the position that the delinquent holds, previous penalty, if any, and the discipline required to be maintained in the department or establishment he works. Ordinarily the court or the tribunal would not substitute its opinion on reappraisal of facts."
16. In the instant case the workman, was deputed to bring inward case remittance of Rs. 50,000 from Sardhana Branch and was required to deposit the inward cash remittance with Alipur Branch on 11-10-1994. After having taken the case remittance of Rs. 50,000 from Sardhana Branch the workman did not deposit the cash with Alipur Branch, instead, he falsely reported that on his way back to Alipur Branch while he was travelling in a Truck, the cash was looted/robbed from him. Whereas subsequent investigation/findings by the Police Authorities revealed that no evidence was found which could lead to show that incidence of loot etc. had taken place as stated by the workman. Thereafter, it was construed that the workman misappropriated a sum of Rs. 50,000 received by him from Sardhana Branch.
The Bank management has argued that the misappropriation of the Bank's money speaks ill of the honesty and integrity of the workman concerned. This is definitely an act prejudicial to the interest of the Bank, which leads to loss of faith in the workman. In Air India Corporation Bombay vs. V. A. Ravellow 1972 (25) FLR 319 (SC) it has been observed that :
"Once the employer has lost the confidence in the employee and the bona fide loss of confidence is affirmed, the order of punishment must be considered to be immune from challenge, for the reason that discharging the office of trust and confidence requires absolute integrity, and in a case4646 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] of loss of confidence, reinstatement cannot be directed."
In Knhaiyalal Agarwal and Others vs. Factory Manager, Gwaliar Sugar Co. Ltd. AIR 2001 SC 3645 Hon'ble Apex court laid down the test for loss of confidence to find out as to whether there was bona fide loss of confidence in the employee, observing that:
"(i) the workman is holding the position of trust and confidence; (ii) by abusing such position, be commits act which results in forfeiting the same; and (iii) to continue him in service/establishment would be embarrassing. the inconvenient to the employee, or would be detrimental to the discipline or security of the establishment. Loss of confidence cannot be subjective, based upon the mind of the management. Objective facts which would lead to a definite inference of apprehension in the mind of the management, regarding trust worthiness or reliability of the employee, must be alleged and proved."
In State Bank of India and Another v. Bela Bagchi and Others AIR 2005 SC 3272, repelled the contention that even if by the misconduct of the employee the employer does not suffer any financial loss, he can be removed frorn service in a case of loss of confidence. Further in A.P. SRTC v. Raghuda Shiva Sankar Prasad AIR 2007 SC 152 Hon'ble Apex court has observed that in case of theft, the quantum of theft is not import and what is important is the loss of confidence of employer in employee.
17. Thus, the Bank being a financial institution dealing with the public money, the employees of the Bank are required to exhibit utmost honesty and integrity in day to day transaction/functioning. The act of dishonesty or fraud or misappropriation lowers down the reputation of Bank in public. The public loose their confidence in Bank, which affects Bank's business and finally the national economy.
18. Hon'ble Apex Court in (2011) 1 Supreme Court
Cases (L&S) 721 has observed that:
"7. It is now well settled that the courts will not act as an appellate court and reassess the evidence led in the domestic enquiry, nor interfere on the ground that another view is possible on the material on record. If the inquiry has been fairly and properly held and the findings are based on evidence, the question of adequacy of the evidence or the reliable nature of the evidence will not be grounds for interfering with the findings in departmental enquiries. Therefore the courts will not interfere with findings of fact recorded in departmental inquiries, except where such findings are based on no evidence or where they are clearly perverse. The test to find out perversity is to see whether a tribunal acting reasonably could have arrived at such conclusion or findings, on the material on record. The courts will however interfere with the findings in disciplinary matters, if principles of natural justice or statutory regulations have been violated or if the order is found to be arbitrary, capricious, mala fide or based on extraneous considerations."
19. In the instant case the charge of misappropriation of the Bank's money was found to be proved and principles of natural justice were properly observed while conducting the departmental inquiry; and also the findings of the Inquiry Officer were not found to be perverse. Therefore, under the facts and the circumstances and considering the laws, there is no justification in interfering with the punishment imposed upon the workman by the Disciplinary Authority for proved gross misconduct of 'misappropriation'. Accordingly, the workman is not entitled for any relief.
20. Award as above.
LUCKNOW, 20th June, 2013.
Dr. MANJU NIGAM, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 9 जुलार्ई, 2013
का.आ. 1645.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑपफ इंडिया के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी/एलसी/आर/2/92द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-6-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 12012/345/91-आईआर ;बी-IIद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 9th July, 2013
S.O. 1645.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (No. CGIT/LC/R/ 2/92) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Bank of India and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 27-6-2013.
[No. L-12012/345/91-IR (B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4647
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/R/2/92
Presiding Officer : SHRI R. B. P ATLE
Shri Munnalal Batham, S/o Shri Narayan Prasad Batham, 1/173, Sardarpura, Behind Kamal Talkies, Ujjain .....Workman
Versus
Regional Manager, Bank of India, 18, Shanku Marg, Freeganj, Ujjain ....Management 3. IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 9/1 to 9/6. According to IInd party, Ist party workman was working as a Badli Sepoy, his name was included in panel of Badli Sepoy after it was sponsored by the Employment Exchange. That the management of Bank used to keep panels of badly employees. They can be engaged for temporary period as and when required in leave vacancy of permanent employee. That workman was knowing about the same. He had worked in the Bank for few days during the year March 1982 to June 84 as Badli Peon. It is further contented that the workman was not interested to work as badly employee. The management cannot give regular employment as he has not completed requisite number of days for regularization of his services. Instead of coming to the Bank as Badli employee, he stopped coming to the work. After proceeding before the ALC, W.P. No. 62/87 was filed. Said Writ petition was dismissed. Since June 1984, the workman was not reporting to work as Badli employee.
AWARD
Passed on this 11th day of June, 2013
1. As per letter dated 31.12.1991 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this tribunal under Section 10 of I.D. Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L-12012/345/91-IR (B-II). The dispute under reference relates to :
" Whether the action of the management of Bank of India, Ujjain in terminating the services of Shri Munnalal Batham, S/o Shri Narayan Prasad is justified? If not, what relief is the workman entitled to?"
4. IInd party denies that workman was engaged on the post of peon. Rather it is submitted that he was engaged as Badli Sepoy. The workman was not satisfied with his working as Badli Sepoy in leave vacancy. The regular employment could not be provided to him. The workman himself stopped coming to work as Badli sepoy. His name was in the panel. Violation of Regulation 507 of Sastry Award or violation of Section 25-F of I.D. Act is denied. 2nd party prayed for rejection of claim of Ist party .
5. Ist party filed rejoinder at page 13/1 to 13/2 and reiterated his contentions that he was working on the post of peon from 1984. He further submits that Naval Kishore Raikwar, Vijay Kumar Jain, Mahendra Naagar, Ramdas Chowdhary junior to him were working with the IInd party. His services were illegally terminated.
6. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below:—
(i) Whether the action of the Services of workman
management of Bank of are not terminated, he India, Ujjain in terminating was working as Badli the services of Shri Munnalal peon. Batham, S/o Shri Narayan Prasad is legal?
(ii) If so, to what relief the Relief prayed by
workman is entitled to? workman is rejected.
REASONS
2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. 1st party workman filed Statement of claim at Page 2/1 to 2/3. The case of 1st party workman is that he was appointed as peon on 12-2-80. He belong to Schedule Caste. Account was opened from 3-3-1980. His wages were deposited in said account. He had submitted medical certificate about his fitness of the Bank. He was paid wages Rs. 13.50 per day. He further submits that he had acquired eligibility for appointment on regular basis. He should have been given appointment in 1983-84. That his services were terminated from 26-6-84. That termination of his services is against principles of natural justice. He was not paid retrenchment compensation. 3 months notice was not given to him for terminating services. He was not paid notice pay, retrenchment compensation was not paid. Principles of last come 1st go was not followed. He submits that termination of his service is in violation of Article 16(4), 335 and 46 of the Constitution. That Regulation 507 of Sastry Award is violated. On such contentions, 1st party workman prays for his reinstatement with consequential benefits.
7. Workman is challenging termination from service by Bank of India, Ujjain. In his statement of claim, he has contented that he was not issued notice, retrenchment compensation was not paid, notice pay was not paid. Those contentions of workman are denied by the management. The management contends that the workman4648 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] was working as Badli peon, his name was sponsored from Employment Exchange. The workman was not interested in working as Badli peon. The Bank could not regularize his services as required number of working days were not completed.
8. Workman filed affidavit of his evidence at Page 20/1 to 20/3. He has stated on oath that he was selected by Committee on 12-2-1980. He was appointed as peon. He was paid wages at Rs.13.50 per day. The wages were deposited in account opened in the Bank. He was not given increment in 1983-84. That his services were terminated without notice, no retrenchment compensation was paid, permission was also not obtained. In his cross- examination, the workman has stated that he was working as Badli employee in the Bank. The Bank had approved him as Badli employee. He has stated that his services were terminated from 26-6-84. He has admitted his signatures on documents R-4/17, 18, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 39. It did not recollect the month of 1982 he was working in the Bank. He has stated that he was working for 10-15 days in the Bank in leave vacancy. He also admits that he was not in continuous service of the bank. He was not happy with the working as Badli employee in the bank. In his further cross- examination, he admits that his wages were deposited in Bank Account. From his evidence, it is clear that workman was engaged as Badli peon in Bank.
9. Learned counsel for Ist party tried to emphasize that other Badli employee junior to the workman working in the bank were appointed on regular basis. The evidence of cross-examination of management's witness Shri Joshi was brought to my notice. In para-18 of his cross- examination Mr. Joshi has stated that juniors to the workman were made permanent as they had worked for more days. That the list is not corrected . The witness was unable to till the name of Ist party workman was removed from panel of Badli employee. He admits that in Exhibit M-1 Vijendra and Naagar were permanently appointed. They were junior. The evidence of management's witness Gopal Verma and Joshi is on point that Ist party workman was working as Badli. He was not appointed on regular basis. That name of the workman was also continued on panel of Badly peon till August, 1984. From evidence on record, it is clear that workman was not appointed on regular basis. The terms of reference are whether the termination of services of Ist party workman is justified. The terms of reference does not include that other junior Badli employees were on regular appointment and the Ist party workman was illegally terminated.
10. Learned counsel for IInd party Mr. Shashi relies
on ratio held in
"Case of Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Versus S. G. Kotturappa and another in 2005-3-Supreme Court Cases 409. Their Lordship held that casual employment/labour Badli worker held so long as worker remains Badli worker, he does not enjoy a status and his services may be discontinued like that of a probationer if he is not found suitable for the job for which his services were utilised as Badli. A dispute as regards purported wrongful termination of services can be raised only if such termination takes place in violation of mandatory provisions of the statute or terms of contract governing the services of the Badli worker concerned."
11. From evidence of Ist party workman, it is not established that he had not completed 240 days continuous service prior to the alleged termination, evidence of the workman in cross-examination shows that he was working for 10-15 days in a month during leave vacancy. His evidence is not clear for how many days he was working prior to the termination. Therefore violation of Section 25-F of I.D. Act cannot be established.
12. Learned counsel for Ist party Mr. Gehlod relied
on ratio held in-
"Case of Samishta Dube versus City Board Etawah and another in 1999 (81) FLR 746. The above cited case was in respect of violation of 6-P, 6-N of U.P. lndustrial Disputes Act is provided ordinarily employees are retrenched employees following principles of last come 1st go."
Reliance is also placed by Shri Gehlod in ratio held in case or Regional Manager, SBI versus Rakesh Kumar Tewari reported in 2006-108-FLR-733. Their Lordship held provisions of Section 25-G, B and H does not require continuous employment of workman within meaning of Section 25-B before he could have been retrenched.
The ratio cannot be applied to present case at hand as workman was not working as regular employee with the IInd party Bank. He was working as Badli peon after his name was sponsored from Employment Exchange. As per ratio held in case of State Road Transport Corporation Versus S.G. Kotturappa and another in 2005-3-Supreme Court Cases 409 discussed above, the status and right of Badli worker is as that of a probationer. Therefore the ratio held in the above cited case cannot be applied to case at hand. As the workman was not working regular employee as Badli peon, the protection under Section 25-F, G and H cannot be invoked by the workman. For the above reasons, I record my finding on Point No.1 in Affirmative.
13. In the result, award is passed as under:—
"1. The action of the IInd party management in terminating the services of Shri Munnalal Batham, S/o Shri Narayan Prasad is legal.
2. Relief prayed by workman is rejected."
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4649 नई दिल्ली, 9 जुलार्ई, 2013
का.आ. 1646.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाब नेशनल बैंक के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी/एलसी/आर/62/2001द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27.6.2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 12012/192/2000-आई आर;बी-IIद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 9th July, 2013
S.O. 1646.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/62/2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Punjab National Bank and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 27-6-2013.
[No. L-12012/192/2000-IR(B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer ''Whether the action of the Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Seoni in stopping the services of Shri Narendra Chourasia, Casual Labour w.e.f. 8-3-91 and not regularizing him on completion of 240 days as peon is justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?''
2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. Statement of claim is filed by workman at page 4/1 to 4/4. The case of Ist party workman is that he was appointed on post of Daftary-cum-Peon from July, 1989 at Seoni with approval of the Regional Manager. He was working as Daftary cum peon since his appointment. He was entrusted work to arrange vouchers and prepare bundles etc. He was also entrusted to distribute bills and all other work of peon such as to care the registers and ledgers of the Bank. That IInd party is Industry. His services are terminated from 8-3-91 without assigning any reasons. Mandatory provisions of I.D. Act were not followed before terminating his services. Principles of natural justice was not followed. He was not served with notice or chargesheet. His salary in lieu of notice was not paid to him. He was not given opportunity for his defence.
ANNEXURE
3. Workman submitted that he had completed 240 days continuous service as daftary-cum-peon as provided under Section 25(B) of I.D.Act. They have acquired status of permanent employee. His services are terminated without notice. He is not gainfully employed. On above contentions, he prays for his reinstatement with back wages .
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/R/62/2001
Presiding Officer : SHRI R. B. P ATLE
Shri Narendra Chourasia, S/o Tejilal Chourasia, Near Chandsi Dava Khana, Nehru Road, Seoni(MP)
. . . Workman
Versus
The Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Seoni Branch, Distt. Seoni (MP) . . . Management
AWARD
Passed on the 13th day of June, 2013
1. As per letter dated 22-3-2001 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L-120121192/2000-IR(B-II). The dispute under reference relates to :
IInd party submitted Written Statement at Page 6/1 to 6/9. IInd party submits that the reference is not tenable. The reference is misconceived. That the workman was never engaged as peon on daily wages. He was intermittently engaged to perform certain casual work for cleaning or removing the stationery bodes for which he was paid necessary paid at the agreed rates.· That the service conditions of workmen staff in the Banking Industry are governed by the provisions of the Sastri Award, Desai Award and various bipartite settlements. As per Para 16.9 of the Desai Award the service conditions of the workman employed in the Banks are not applicable to the provisions who are casual employees or who are employed to do the job work. The reference is not tenable. That the workman had intermittently worked for 106 days from July, 89 to Feb, 1991. He had not completed 240 days continuous service. That the workman was engaged as daily wage for certain work. His services came to end at the end of the day. His dis-continuance of servicedoesnot amount to retrenchment under Section 2(oo )(bb) of the LD.Act but it is covered under Section 2( oo )(bb) of I.D.Act. On such grounds, IInd party prays for rejection of claim of workman.
5. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as4650 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below :—
(i) Whether the action of the In Negative
Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Seoni in stopping the services of Shri Narendra Chourasia, Casual Labour w.e.f. 8-3-91 and not regularizing him on completion of 240 days as peon is legal?
(i i) If so, to what relief the Relief prayed by workman is entitled to ?'' workman are New Delhi, the 9th July, 2013
S.O. 1647.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 184/ 2011) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, I, New Delhi now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Life Insurance Corporation of India and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 4-7-2013.
[No. L-17012/70/96-IR(B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
rejected.
REASONS
BEFORE DR. R. K. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER,
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL
NO.I, KARKARDOOMA COURTS COMPLEX, DELHI
I.D.No.184/2011
Shri S.M. Sawhney, Through the General Secretary Delhi Division Insurance Workers Organization 5230 Ajmeri Gate, Delhi -110 006 . . . Workman
Versus
6. That workman is challenging his termination contending that he was continuously working from 1989 to 1991. His services were illegally terminated without notice in violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. Workman has not adduced any evidence. He is proceeded exparte on 9-3-2011. Management has filed affidavit of witness Shri D. M. Dwivedi. Management witness has stated that workman was engaged as casual labour from July ,1989 to February, 1991—total 106 days. His evidence remained unchallenged. I donot find reason to disbelieve his evidence. The evidence on record doesnot establish that the services of workman are illegally terminated in violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. For above reasons, I record my finding in Point No.1 in Negative.
7. In the result, award is passed as under :—
The Senior Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Delhi Division No.1, 25, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi- 110 001 . . . Management
AWARD
(i) The action of the Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Seoni in stopping the services of Shri Narendra Chourasia, Casual Labour w.e.f. 8-3-91 and not regularizing him on completion of 240 days as peon is legal.
(ii) Relief prayed by workman are-rejected.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 9 जुलार्ई, 2013
का.आ. 1647.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय जीवन बीमा निगम के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय-I, दिल्ली के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 184/2011द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 17012/70/96-आई आर;बी-IIद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी During the period 1980—89, Life Insurance Corporation of India (in short the Corporation) was defrauded to the tune of Rs.834759.00 by its employees, by way issuance of cheques on the strength of bogus payment vouchers favouring non-existent persons, viz. Gauri Shankar and Daya Ram. Matter was referred by the Corporation to CBI for investigation. CBI conducted a preliminary enquiry and registered RC No.1(s)/90/DLI on 31-01-1990. During the course of investigation, name of Shri Surender Mohan Sawhney, the claimant, also figured as an accused, besides others. In its report dated 30-04- 1992, CBI took steps for prosecution of Shri D.S. Pulsule, retired Assistant of the Corporation for offences punishable under Section 420, 468, 471, of the Penal Code and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Regular Departmental action for minor penalty was recommended against S/Shri S.M. Jain, Surender Kumar, Jagdish Mitter Sawhney, Joginder Lal Sharma and Smt. Nalini M. Ratnam, while regular departmental action for major penalty was recommended against the claimant,[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4651 besides 9 other employees. Show cause notice was served on the claimant by the Corporation on 18-02-1994. Without conducting an enquiry, punishment of Censure was awarded to the claimant by the Disciplinary Authority. His appeal also came to be dismissed.
2. Claimant had received two stagnation increments. His third stagnation increment was deferred for one year by the Corporation, since punishment of Censure was awarded to him. Later on, his stagnation increment was released with effect from 01-08-1995. Claimant superannuated from service on 31-07-1996. After his superannuation, he allegedly approached the Delhi Division Insurance Workers' Organization (in short the union) for redressal of his grievances. It was claimed that the union raised a dispute before the Conciliation Officer. Since the Corporation contested the claim, conciliation proceedings ended into a failure. On consideration of failure report, submitted by the Conciliation Officer, appropriate Government referred the dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication, vide order No.L-17012/70/96-IR(B-II), New Delhi dated 06- 01-1998, with following terms :
"Whether action of the management of LIC of India in imposing penalty of Censure and deferring the stagnation increment for one year with effect from 01-08-1984 on Shri S.M. Sawhney, Higher Grade Assistant, Serial No.102142, is legal and justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled to and from which date?"
3. Claim statement was filed on behalf of the claimant pleading therein that he was working as Higher Grade Assistant at Delhi Divisional Office of the Corporation prior to his superannuation on 31-07-1996. Preparation, maintenance and custody of transaction/cash book is the sole responsibility of accounts department of the Corporation. All payment vouchers are allotted serial numbers in continuous order for each financial year. As per normal practice, first copy of payment voucher is to be retained in accounts department for future reference. Authorized signatory is only required to verify the entry made in the transaction/cash book with accompanied cheque and payment voucher and then makes necessary endorsements in the cash book. A number of financial irregularities came to light during the course of special audit of accounts department of the Corporation. Huge financial loss was caused to the Corporation. Matter was referred for investigation to CBI. Unfortunately, the Corporation sought to enact a massive cover up operation and found a few convenient scape-goats to whom relatively minor or insignificant punishments were awarded. Show cause notice dated 28-02-1994 was served on the claimant after more than five years of issuance of cheques No.159033 and 157702 dated 16-03-1989 and 28-03-1989 respectively. Claimant sought copies of transaction/cash book, cheques and relevant payment vouchers vide letters dated 04-03-1994, 07-07-1994, 22-07-1994, 30-12-1994 and 11-02-1995. In complete violation of principles of natural justice, these documents were not supplied to him. Regional Manager wrote that payment vouchers were not necessary for the purpose. Those documents were never supplied to him. On the other hand, punishment of Censure was awarded to him vide letter dated 07-12-1995. Claimant preferred an appeal, which was rejected on 15-05-1996, without passing speaking orders on the issues raised by him.
4. Claimant had already received two stagnation increments when aforesaid show cause notice was served upon him. His third stagnation increment was due in 1990, which in fact was not granted to him in spite of wage agreement in the year 1995. He was informed vide letters dated 09-04-1996 and 11-05-1996 that consideration of his stagnation increment has been postponed by one year since punishment of Censure was awarded to him. It has been claimed that awarding of punishment of Censure was against principles of natural justice and fair play. Shri Sawhney is entitled for getting punishment of Censure quashed and grant of third stagnation increment from due date.
5. Claim was demurred by the Corporation pleading that on his superannuation, Shri Sawhney ceased to be a workman on 31-07-1996. Claim was raised on 31-03-1998, which is an individual dispute. Corporation claims that the dispute is liable to be rejected on this count alone. However, his stagnation increment was deferred for a period of one year upto 01-08-1995. Stagnation increment was released in his favour with effect from 01-08-1995 and as such, claim is liable to be dismissed.
6. Corporation projects that the claimant was working as Higher Grade Assistant at Delhi Divisional Office till the date of his retirement. His duties were to pass/sign cheques on behalf of the Corporation, after verifying the transaction from payment voucher, besides verification of facts that it was properly and correctly recorded in the transaction/cash book. Verification of record of transaction before passing the cheque is a sort of internal check to avoid frauds. Claimant signed and passed two cheques, referred in his claim statement, without verifying that necessary entries in cash book was recorded in that regard from relevant payment voucher. When the claimant signed and passed, above referred two cheques, various columns in the cash book were lying incomplete. On account of these lapses, payment of Rs.70,930.00 was made to fictitious non-existent persons in fraudulent manner. Claimant committed breach of Regulation No.21 and 24 of LIC Staff Regulations (in short the Regulations). Show cause notice was served on the claimant, who in his reply dated 11-02-1995 admits signing of those two cheques. He had not commented upon factum of correct recording of entries in cash book, in his reply. This has led to fraudulent4652 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] payment of the amount, referred above. Though the claimant deserves major penalty, yet only minor penalty under the Regulations was levied, since he was at the fag end of his service. Vouchers, demanded by the claimant, were not required for proving his negligence. Since penalty of Censure was awarded to him under Regulation 39, his stagnation increment was deferred for a period of one year, which was subsequently released. It has been projected that there is no case in favour of the claimant. His claim statement may be dismissed.
7. In rejoinder, facts pleaded in the claim statement,
have been reiterated.
8. 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. It was retransferred to this Tribunal for adjudication vide order No. Z-22019/6/2007-IR(C-II), New Delhi dated 30-03-2011 by the appropriate Government.
9. Claimant has examined himself in support of his claim. Shri N.S. Verma, Manager (Admn.) was examined by the Corporation. No other witness was examined by either of the parties.
10.Arguments were heard at the bar. Claimant had advanced arguments in person. Shri S.M. Bhatnagar, authorised representative, presented facts on behalf of the Corporation. Written submissions have been filed on behalf of the parties. I have given my careful considerations to the arguments advanced at the bar and cautiously perused the record. My findings on issues involved in the controversy are as follows :
11.First and foremost contention advanced by Shri Bhatnagar is that the claimant superannuated on 31-07-1996. Thereafter, issue raised by him in the claim statement nowhere reflects common interest of employees of the Corporation. No resolution was passed by the union, taking up his cause for redressal. Therefore, only an individual dispute has been raised and this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to adjudicate it. Contra to it, claimant agitates that his dispute was espoused by the union vide letter dated 06-04-1998. He argued that since the union took up his cause, it does not lie in the mouth of the Corporation to agitate that an individual dispute has been referred for adjudication.
12.Since an incidental question has been raised by the Corporation that the dispute referred is an individual dispute, it becomes expedient to ascertain as to whether the dispute is an industrial dispute. For an answer to this proposition, definition of the term 'industrial dispute' is to be construed. Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the Act), defines the term 'industrial dispute', which definition is extracted 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 person.''
13.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''.
14.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 Corporation does not dispute that the claimant is workman within the meaning of clause(s) of section 2 of the Act.
15.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 (1) 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 settlement 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[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4653 employment, 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 expression ''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.''
16. In Kyas Construction Company (Pvt ) Ltd. [1958 (2) LLJ 660], the Apex Court ruled that an industrial dispute need not be a dispute between the employer and his workman and that the definition of the expression ''Industrial Dispute'' is wide enough to cater a dispute raised by the employer'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 Journalist [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 submitted by the union of the workmen of the employer against whom, the dispute is raised by an individual workman or by an appreciable number of workmen. In order, therefore, to convert an individual dispute into an industrial 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 establishment. As far as union of the workmen of establishment itself is concerned, the problem of espousal by them generally presents little difficulty, since such workmen who are members of such unions generally have a continuity of interest with an individual employee 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 establishment but is one of which membership is open to workmen 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 dispute 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 sponsoring the dispute. The mere fact that a substantial number of workmen of the establishment in which the concerned 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.
17.The expression ''industrial disputes'' has been construed by the Apex Court to include individual disputes, 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 cannot per-se be an industrial dispute but may become 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 absence 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 Dimakuchi Tea Estate's case [1958 (1) LLJ 500)]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-employment, terms of employment or conditions of labour, the parties, dispute for a direct or substantial interest''.
18.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 ''industrial dispute'' concerning an individual workman is referred for adjudication, has on its roll a few of the workmen 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 consider 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 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. Nevertheless, in order to make a dispute an industrial dispute, it is not necessary that there should always be a resolution 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 member 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].
4654 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]19.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 espoused by the new union, yet unregistered and unrecognized. The Apex Court held that the fact that these disputes were not taken up by a registered or recognized union does not mean that they were not ''industrial dispute''.
of convenience, contents of the said letter are reproduced thus:
''With reference to the above case, we, hereby, authorize Shri S.M. Sawhney, Executive Member, Northern Zone Insurance Workers Organization, Shri Jagdish Prasad, General Secretary, DDIWO and Shri O.P. Dhingra, General Secretary, Northern Zone Insurance Workers Organization, to represent the union in the above referred dispute''.
22.As the above letter projects, it was written by Shri Jagdish Prasad in the capacity of General Secretary of the union. It is evident that the said authority letter was issued by the General Secretary, authorizing the claimant, Shri Jagdish Prasad, (General Secretary himself) and Shri O.P. Dhingra to represent the union in the matter before this Tribunal. It appears that in the evidence the claimant inadvertently spelt the date of the letter as 04-06-1998 instead of 06-04-1998. It is crystal clear that this letter nowhere projects that the union took up the cause of the claimant for redressal of his grievance. It is not an espousal of the case of the claimant before the authorities under the Act.
23.How a case of an individual employee can be espoused by the union or a considerable number of workmen in the establishment of the employer has been specifically provided by the Act as well as Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules , 1957(in short the Rules). Sub- section (2) of Section 10 of the Act projects that when industrial dispute is applied in the prescribed manner to the appropriate Government, if satisfied that the person applying represents majority of each party, it shall make reference accordingly. Rule 3 of the rules projects as to in what form the application under sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Act shall be made. Rule 4 provides as to who shall sign the said application and its accompanying statements. For sake of convenience provisions of the aforesaid rules are reproduced thus :
''3. Application—
20.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].
21.With above prelude in mind, now it would be ascertained as to whether the dispute was espoused by the union. Claimant testified during the course of his cross- examination that his dispute was espoused by the union vide letter dated 04-06-1998. On record, letter dated 06-041998 is there, which is an authority letter on the strength of which claimant was authorized, besides others, to represent the union in the present matter. For the sake 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;
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4655(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.
and Secretary or five representatives in that behalf to sign the application for raising the dispute. Evidently, letter dated 06-04-1998 does not meet the requirements of law.
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 officer 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 :
Provided that such workman is not a member of a
different trade union.''
24.Bare reading of the aforesaid rules makes it apparent that the application in case of workmen shall be signed either by the President and Secretary of the trade union or by five representatives of the workmen duly authorised in that behalf at a meeting of the workmen held for the purpose. In case of dispute relating to dismissal, discharge, retrenchment or otherwise termination of the workman by his employer, the application may be signed by the individual workmen himself or any an officer of the trade union or by another workman in the same establishment duly authorised by him in this behalf. As facts project, it is not a case where a dispute relating to dismissal, discharge, retrenchment or otherwise termination of the service of the claimant has been raised. Therefore, application in raising the dispute was to be signed either by the President and Secretary of the union or by five representatives of the workmen duly authorised in that behalf at a meeting of the workmen held for the purpose. Claimant deposed that his dispute was espoused by the union vide letter dated 04-06-1998 (wrongly mentioned as 06-04-1998 in the evidence). When letter dated 6-04-1998 is perused, it is evident that this document nowhere speaks about resolution made by the union espousing cause of the claimant before the authorities, authorizing its President 25.Even otherwise, letter dated 6-04-1998 is of no consequence. The union can espouse a case on the date when the industrial dispute was raised before the authorities under the Act and not at a later date. Validity of an industrial dispute is to be judged on facts as they stood on the date of reference. Here in the case, reference of the dispute was made by the appropriate Government on 6-01-1998. Consequently, espousal of the dispute can be either prior to 6-01-1998 or on 6-01-1998 and not thereafter. As deposed by the claimant, his dispute was espoused by the union on 06-04-1998. On that date, espousal of the dispute by the union would not accord it status of an industrial dispute. No evidence is there on the record to the effect that the union or considerable number of the workmen in the establishment of the Corporation expressed their collective will to take up the cause of the claimant as their own. No evidence as to passing of a resolution or expression of collective will of the workmen has been brought over the record. Hence, claimant could not bring any evidence to show that the dispute acquired character of an industrial dispute. Therefore, it is crystal clear that the dispute referred for adjudication by the appropriate Government nowhere answers the parameters of an industrial dispute.
26.Unfortunately, full dress trial was conducted. Evidence of the claimant on merits of the case was taken. The Corporation examined Shri Verma to rebut evidence of the claimant. When matter was considered, it was found to be a case of no enquiry. However, the Corporation had adduced evidence relating to misconduct committed by the claimant. But when finding has been recorded to this effect that it was an individual dispute, it would not be in the fitness of things to proceed with further adjudication. Consequently, I refrain my hands from adjudication of the matter on merits.
27.As pointed out above, an individual dispute has been referred for adjudication to this Tribunal. The appropriate Government was incompetent to refer an individual dispute for adjudication under Section 10(1)(d) of the Act. This Tribunal cannot invoke its jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute, since it has not acquired character of an industrial dispute. Resultantly, the Tribunal refrain its hands from adjudicating the matter, with an observation that the appropriate Government was not competent to refer the dispute and the Tribunal has not acquired any jurisdiction to adjudicate it. An award is, accordingly, passed. It be sent to the appropriate Government for adjudication.
Dr. R. K. YADAV, Presiding Officer
Dated : 19-06-20134656 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] नई दिल्ली, 10 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1648.— औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार जनरल मैनेजर, वैकल पफैक्ट्री के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सी.जी.आई. टी./एल.सी./आर./223/91द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-6-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-14011/01/1987-डी-II ;बीद्ध]
सोम नाथ, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the10th July, 2013
S.O. 1648.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/223/91) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of The General Manager, Vehicle Factory and their workman which was received by the Central Government on 28-6-2013.
[ F. No. L-14011/01/1987-D-II(B)]
SOM NATH, Section Officer K.D.Pathak and others ( total 23 employees- list enclosed) by counting their services rendered as Checker by counting their services rendered as checker equivalent to LDC for promotion of UDC is justified? If yes, what relief these workmen are entitled to?"
ANNEXURE
2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. 1st party workman submits their Statement of claim. It is case of the 1st party workman that those 23 employees shows in the annexure were working as checkers since 1972 in IInd party. That because of Administrative reasons, the post of checkers were abolished around 1-4-80. That from 1-1-1973, the Commission recommended scale of Rs. 225-308 for checkers, 264-400 for LDCs. The said pay scale was given to checker from 1-1-1973. In IVth Pay Commission, pay scales were changed. Persons who have joined after the applicant as LDCs have been given promotions as UDCs without considering seniority/length of service. The applicant's claim that the 1st party workman were senior to the UDC promoted in the year 1977 to 1980, they be given seniority of the period they were working as checkers. It is further contended that the duties performed by checkers and LDCs are identical. The 1st party workman has also explained delay in filing reference as they were required to file miscellaneous petition No. 1471/88 even after failure report no action was taken for 2 years. After direction in Writ Petition, the Government refused to make reference. The reference was made only after issuing directions in Miscellaneous Petition No. 270/90. 1st party prays for considering seniority of those 23 employees working as checker during the period 1972 onwards.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/223/91
SHRI R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer.
The President, Vehicle Factory Mazdoor Union, H.No.2798, Vehicle Factory Estate, Jabalpur
. . . Workman/Union
Versus
The General Manager, Vehicle Factory, Jabalpur
. . . Management 3. IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 5/1 to 5/8. The contentions of Hnd party are that initially 1st party were working as checkers from 1972 onwards. The seniority was granted in grade of LDC. That in pursuance of instructions contained in letter dated 28-5 62, giving seniority was discontinued. The seniority was directed to be given as per letter dated 2-8-72. It is submitted that the checkers getting salary of minimum pay scale of LDC was given seniority from such date. It is submitted that the applicants/workmen are not entitled to seniority claimed by them for promotion to the post of LDC from 1972 i.e. their initial appointment as checkers. Rest of the contention of the 1st party workmen are denied.
AWARD
Passed on this 17th day of April 2013
1. As per letter dated 27-11-91 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section 10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-14011/ 1/87-D.II(B). The dispute under reference relates to :
" Whether the demand of Vehicle Factory Mazdoor Union, Jabalpur in asking seniority of Shri 4. It is submitted that Mr. M.Uttaman, LDC was appointed from checker to LDC w.e.f. 8-8-72. That as per letter dated 8-8-72, his seniority in the grade of LDC was considered from the date of crossing minimum basic pay of LDC. That 12 employees were considered for scrutiny and 3 of them were granted seniority as LDC. It is further submitted that the checkers appointed after 22-5-72 to LDC during 1979, 1980 are not. entitled to seniority and upgrade of LDC. IInd party prayed for rejection of claim of 1st party workmen.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 46575. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below :—
(i) Whether the demand of Vehicle In Negative New Delhi, the10th July, 2013
S.O. 1649.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/173/91) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the General Manager, Gun Carriage Factory and their workman which was received by the Central Government on 28-6-2013.
[ No. L-14012/24/1991-IR (DU)]
SOM NATH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
Factory Mazdoor Union, Jabalpur. In asking seniority of Shri K. D. Pathak and others ( total 23 employees—list enclosed) by counting their services rendered as Checker by counting their services rendered as checker equivalent to LDC for promotion of UDC is justified?
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
(ii) If so, to what relief the workman is Demand of
entitled to? 1st party INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR
are rejected.
NO. CGIT/LC/R/173/91
REASONS
6. Though the 1st party workmen has submitted statement of claim, they failed to adduce evidence in support of their demands. Even some of the employee died, their LRs are not brought on record. As seen from the ordersheet, Union did not participate to substantiate its demand under reference. Management also didnot adduce any evidence. Since both parties are not participating in the hearing of the matter, it appears that the demands under reference are not pursued by the Union. For want of evidence, I record my finding on Point No.1 in Negative.
7. In the result, award is passed as under :—
Shri R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer.
Shri Anil Kumar Jha, Ex- T.No.1160/ I.E-Jr.Examiner, C/o Sushma Pandey, 372/2, Hawabagh Rly. Colony, Gorakhpur, Jabalpur . . . Workman
Versus
General Manager, Gun Carriage factory, Jabalpur
. . . Management
AWARD
(1) The demand of Vehicle Factory Mazdoor Union, Jabalpur in asking seniority of Shri K.D.Pathak and others ( total 23 employees- list enclosed) by counting their services rendered as Checker by counting their services rendered as checker equivalent to LDC for promotion of UDC is not just and proper.
(2) Demand ofIst party are rejected."
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 10 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1649.— औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार जनरल मैनेजर, गन कैरिज पफैक्ट्री के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सी. जी.आई.टी./एल.सी./आर./173/91द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-6-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-14012/24/1991-आई आर ;डीयूद्ध]
सोम नाथ, अनुभाग अध्किारी Passed on this 4th day of March 2013
1. As per letter dated 26-9-91 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L-14012/24/91-IR(DU) dated 26-9-91. The dispute under reference relates to :—
"Whether the action of the management of Gun' Carriage Factory, Jabalpur (MP) is justified in terminating the services of Shri Anil Kumar Jha, Ex- T. NO. 1160/I.E-Jr. Examiner, w:e,f. 5-4-85 ? If not, to what relief he is entitled?"
2. After receipt of reference, notices were issued to the parties. 1st party/workman submitted his statement of claim at Page 3/1 to 3/5 of the record. As per statement of claim, the case of 1st party/workman is that he was working as Junior Examiner in IInd party/GCF, Jabalpur. His service record was excellent. He was never punished. Chargesheet was issued on 25-6-84 on the allegation that on 13-6-84 at about 9 PM, he was apprehended by Sepoy Narain Singh4658 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] while stiching the mouth of a bag filled with non-ferrous turnings/barings scrap in the brass scrap in the Vijayanta Vibhag Area weighing about 111.50 Kg. for taking out of the factory. That he had denied the charges. Departmental Enquiry was ordered against him. On the basis of findings of DE, as per order dated 5-4-85 issued by the General Manager, Gun Carriage Factory, Jabalpur. He had preferred appeal challengIng said order. His appeal was rejected.
"3. 1st party/workman challenges order of his removal on the ground that alongwith chargesheet, copies of witnesses were not supplied to him. Consequently he could not submit proper reply to the chargesheet. That enquiry was not properly conducted. The Enquiry Officer acted as prosecutor to see that charges are proved. That evidence of the witnesses had admitted certain facts. Those admission were not considered by the Enquiry Officer. That Shri R.L.Prasad witness No.1 was not examined in Enquiry, his statement was not recorded before Enquiry Officer. Only his previous statement was admitted. Findings of Enquiry Officer are perverse and contrary to the evidence on record. The Enquiry officer based his findings on presumption as such illegal. However Appellate Authority acted mechanically while rejecting his appeal. The order of Appellate Authority is contrary to the provisions of CCS(CCA)Rules. That there was no evidence to prove the charges. The Enquiry Officer cross- examined witnesses of the Ilnd party without justification. The Enquiry Officer imported his personal knowledge while recording his findings. The findings of Enquiry Officer are illegal. 1st party therefore prays for his reinstatement with back wages.
party has also referred to ratio held in different cases on the point of imposing penalty and powers of the Industrial Court. It is submitted that removal of 1st party is legal. The claim of 1st party for reinstatement cannot be allowed.
5. 1st party/workman submitted rejoinder at Page 8/1 to 8/3 retreating the ground in his statement of claim. It is submitted that it is mandatory to supply copy of statement along with charge sheet. That Enquiry Officer cross-examined management's witnesses. The reference is tenable as provisions of I.D. Act relates to adjudication of dispute where as Rules under Article 309 of constitution deals with the service conditions of the employees.
6. Considering pleadings between the parties, preliminary issue about whether the enquiry held against 1st party/workman is just and legal was decided after hearing argument by my predecessor. Vide order. dated 24-1-96, the Enquiry held against 1st party/workman was found just and proper. In view of enquiry against 1st party is legal, the other issues needs to be decided & my findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below :—
(i) whether the findings of In Affirmative
the Enquiry Officer are supported by satisfactory evidence?
(ii) whether the punishment In Affirmative
of removal of 1st party is legal ?
(iii) To what relief, the workman Ist party/workman is entitled ? is not entitled to reinstatment
REASONS
4. IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 6/1 to 6/7. The IInd party denied all the contention of the 1st party. It is not necessary to submit statement of witnesses alongwith charge sheet. The statements of witnesses were supplied during course of enquiry. IInd party has narrated incident that on 13-6-84, 1st party/workman was found near the brass scrap in the Vijayanta Vibhag area between 7 to 9 PM. He was found with scrap filled in the bag attempting to commit theft. He was produced before Security. 1st party/workman was suspended. Charge sheet was issued to him for gross misconduct of attempt to commit theft of Govt. property. That the allegation of 1st party about enquiry conducted against him are not fair and proper and denied by the IInd party. That to find out truth, Enquiry Officer has cross examined witnesses. During enquiry, it was found that 1st party was missing from his place of work. He was found at Watch Tower No. 14 standing near brass scrap heap. The misconduct of 1st party is proved in enquiry from evidence of the witnesses. The findings of the Enquiry Officer are supported by evidence and as such not perverse. The IInd party further contended that the rules under Article 309 under constitution are governing the employees of IInd party. Therefore the reference under I.D . Act is not tenable. IInd 7. Record of enquiry Proceedings is submitted. On its careful reading, I find that 7 witnesses were examined for proving charges against 1st party. Their evidence is recorded in detail. The enquiry is found legal. Learned counsel of 1st party Mr. Shashi did not advance any argument on the point and the findings of the Enquiry Officer are supported by satisfactory evidence. I have carefully gone through the record of enquiry and find that there is sufficient evidence to prove charges against 1st party/workman. Therefore I record my finding on Point No.1 in affirmative.
8. As to Point No.2 , learned counsel for 1st party Mr. Shashi submits that 1st party/workman is no more. That pensionary benefits may be allowed to the dependents of 1st party. Invoking powers under Section 11 A of I.D . Act, learned counsel for IInd party Mr. Shankaran Nair opposed the submissions on behalf of 1st party. Mr. Nair taken view to the charges proved in enquiry against 1st party. Learned counsel further submits that charges against[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4659 legal. Workman is not entitled to reinstatement neither his dependents are entitiled to pensionary benefits. Claim of 1st party is rejected.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 10 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1650.— औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार महाप्रबंध्क स्क्योरिटी पेपर मिल, होशंगाबाद के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सी.जी.आई.टी./एल.सी./आर./46/05द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-6-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-16011/01/2005-आईआर ;डीयूद्ध]
सोम नाथ, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the10th July, 2013
S.O. 1650.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/46/05) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of The General Manager, Security Paper Mill, Hoshangabad, which was received by the Central Government on 28-6-2013.
[ No. L-16011/01/2005-IR (DU)]
SOM NATH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/46/05
Shri R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer.
The General Secretary, SPM Employees Union, Type-II/ 63, Phase-II, SPM, Hoshangabad . . .Workman/Union 1st party are proved. There are no allegations for malafide part of IInd party therefore provisions of Section 11-A of I.D. Act is not attracted. That charge of attempt of theft of 111.50 Kg. Brass scrap are proved. Such act cannot be tolerated. Therefore punishment imposed by Competent authority cannot be interfered. In support of his argument, learned counsel for IInd party relies on ratio held in case of Jantha Bazar (South Kanara Central Cooperative Wholesale Stores Ltd.) and other versus Secretary, Sahakari Noukarara Sangha and others reported in 2000 (7) Supreme Court Cases 517 . Their Lordship of Apex Court dealing with powers under Section 11- A of I.D.Act— Scope of Judicial review held the discretion of employer exercised in imposing penalty after misconduct proved in domestic enquiry held Labour Court cannot substitute the penalty imposed by the employer. Next reliance is placed in the case of General Secretary, South Indian Cashew Factories Workers Union Vrs. Managing Director, Kerala State Cashew Development Corporation Ltd. and Others reported in AIR 2006 (SC) Page 2208. Their Lordship held that powers of Labour Court under Section 11-A to interfere in punishment when no allegations of victimization or malafide or unfair labour practice there is clear finding that findings are not perverse and principles of natural justice were complied with while conducting enquiry. Labour Court has no power to interfere with punishment imposed by management. Since Section 11-A is not applicable to case other than dismissal or discharge Labour Court has no power to reappraise evidence to findout whether findings of Enquiry Officer are correct or not or whether punishment imposed is adequate or not. In case of workman of Balmadies Estates Versus Management of Balmadies Estates and others reported in Case No. 2008(4) SCC-Pg. 517. Their Lordship of Apex Court dealing with interference by Labour Court, Tribunal. Their Lordship considered two workmen dismissed from service for committing theft, on completion of enquiry, Labour Court held that there was no direct evidence to show that the two workmen had committed theft. Evidence was not properly appreciated by Enquiry Officer and finding of guilt was based on very slender evidence. Lordship held on facts, findings of Labour Court were perverse and can be termed to be based on misconception of law. High Court, therefore, rightly observed that the evidence could not have been brushed aside by Labour Court in the manner done.
Versus
The General Manager, Security Paper Mill, Hoshangabad.
. . . Management
AWARD
Passed on this 15th day of March, 2013
1. As per letter dated 26-5-2005 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is 9. In the present case, there is absolutely no argument that whether the findings of the Enquiry Officer are supported by evidence in the enquiry proceedings. Considering the charge of attempt of commit theft of 111.50 Kg. Brass scrap proved against 1st party, I find no reason to interfere the punishment of his removal. On the above reason, I record my findings in Point No.2 &3 as Negative. 10. In the result, Award is passed as under— "Punishment of removal of 1st party/workman imposed by the IInd party/management is just and4660 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section 10 of the I.D. Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L-16011/1/2005-IR(DU) dateed 26-5-2005. The dispute under reference relates to :
" Whether the action of the management of General Manager, Security Paper Mill, Hoshangabad in not giving promotion as a Senior Foreman in E & I Section and not giving benefits to Shri B.K.Gupta since 1983 upto till date is justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled for?"
को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 10-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12011/91/2008-आईआर ;बी-IIद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the10th July, 2013
S.O. 1651.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 18/2009) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court-I, New Delhi now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Punjab and Sind Bank and their workman which was received by the Central Government on 10-7-2013.
[ No. L-12011/91/2008-IR(B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
2. After notice, 1st party/workman failed to appear and submit statement of claim. 1st party is proceeded exparte on 10-9-09. IInd party filed Written Statement. IInd party submits that 1st party workman was appointed as Electrician Higher Scale Gr.II in the scale of pay Rs.330 8- 390. He had filed an application under Section 15 of Payment of Wages Act before Labour Court No.2 Bhopal in 1986 claiming amount Rs. 3615.50 towards difference of wages for the period. His application was dismissed. The 1st party preferred appeal against the said order. The said appeal was decided by Industrial Court, Bhopal on 10-9-98. The appeal was allowed. Ilnd party filed Writ Petition No. 1842/99. However during pendency of Writ Petition, wages Rs.ll,212 were paid.
BEFORE DR. R. K. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER,
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIL TRIBUNAL
NO. 1, KARKARDOOMA COURTS COMPLEX,
DELHI
I.D. No. 18/2009
Shri Yashwant Bhandari through Uttranchal Bank Workers Organisation, 32, Chakrata Road, Dehradun.
. . . Workman
Versus
3. IInd party further submits that 1st party workman was working as Electrician in Electrical Section when the E & I Section was newly created due to modernization. 1st party/workman had worked for 5 months and 5 days and he was transferred to his original section. He is not fulfilling the eligibility for promotion post claimed by him. Such post requires 2 year experience. IInd party prays for rejection of the claim of 1st party.
The Zonal Manager, Punjab and Sind Bank, Regional Office, A. K. Road, Dehradun.
. . . Management
AWARD
4. Ist party has not filed statement of claim nor produced any evidence. Ilnd party filed evidence of his witness Shri Mahapatra denying claim of the 1st party covering all contention in the Written Statement filed by Ilnd party. There is absolutely no evidence for establishing claim of 1st party for permanent post. Therefore the claim of 1st party deserves to be rejected.
5. In the result, award is passed as under:
" The demand of 1st party workman under reference is not supported by any evidence of 1st party workman. His claim is rejected."
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 10 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1651.— औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाब एण्ड सिंध् बैंक के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय-I, दिल्ली के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 18/2009द्ध A Computer Terminal Operator was transferred to Haridwar branch from Rishikesh branch of Punjab and Sindh Bank (in short the bank) in July, 2004. Rishikesh branch of the bank falls under Distt. Dehradun while Haridwar branch is within the territory of Distt. Haridwar, Uttarakhand. The Computer Terminal Operator raised a demand for his re-transfer to Rishikesh branch. It was not conceded to by the bank. He demanded lump sum of Rs. 400 per month in accordance with Schedule VI appended to the 8th Bipartite Settlement. This demand was also not conceded to. He approached the Uttaranchal Bank Workers' Organization (in short the union) for redressal of his grievance. The union approached the Conciliation Officer, before that forum too, the claim was contested. Since the conciliation proceedings ended into a failure, the Conciliation Officer transmitted his report to[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4661 the appropriate Government. On consideration of report of the Conciliation officer, the appropriate Government referred the dispute to Central Government Industrial No. II, New Delhi, for adjudication, vide order No. L-12011/91/ 2008-IR(B-II), New Delhi dated 05-02-2009, with following terms :
"Whether the action of the management of Punjab and Sindh Bank in denying transfer to Shri Yashwant Bhandari, CTO, Haridwar branch back to Rishikesh Branch from where he was transferred or to a nearby branch after reaching to the age of 58 years and also depriving him payment of Rs.400.00 as displacement allowance from the date he joined his duties at Haridwar brahch is legal and justified ? What relief the concerned employee is entitled?"
2. Claim statement was filed by the Computer Terminal Operator, namely, Shri Yashwant Bhandari pleading that he was transferred to Haridwar branch of the bank in July , 2004 from Rishikesh branch to Haridwar branch, Uttarakhand. He raised a demand for his retransfer to Rishikesh branch of the bank, which demand was avoided by the bank. Lump sum amount of Rs.400.00 per month was also not paid to him. Vide letter dated 26-10-2007, he made such a demand, which was declined by the Zonal Manager. He raised a demand through the union before the Conciliation Officer. Conciliation proceedings resulted into a failure. It has been claimed that an award, granting lump sum of Rs. 400.00 per month from July, 2004 to August 2008 may be passed in his favour.
by the claimant may be discarded and an award be passed in favour of the bank.
5. On pleadings of the parties, following issues were
settled :—
(1) Whether the workman is entitled to deployment allowance of Rs. 400.00 per month from July, 2004 to 31.08.2008 ?
(2) As in terms of reference.
(3) Relief.
6. 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.
7. Claimant tendered his affidavit dated 29-04-2010 as evidence. However, he did not come forward to undergo rigors of cross-examination. Hence, no opportunity could be accorded to the bank to purify facts detailed by the claimant in his affidavit, by an ordeal of cross-examination. Since the bank could not avail opportunity of cross- examination, facts detailed in affidavit dated 29.04.2010 cannot be read in evidence.
8. Since there was no evidence from the side of the claimant in that regard, the bank also opted not to adduce any evidence in the matter.
9. Arguments are heard at the bar Ms. Kitu Bajaj, authorized representative, advanced arguments on behalf of the bank. None came forward to raise submissions on behalf of the claimant. I have given my careful consideration to the arguments advanced at the bar and cautiously perused the record. My findings on issues involved in the contraversy are as follows :—
Issue No. 1
3. Claim was demurred by the bank pleading that he was transferred to Haridwar branch in July, 2004. Settlement vis-a vis deployment allowance was signed between the bank and majority Union on 02-06-2005, which was effective from the date of signing the settlement. In view of these facts, claimant is not entitled to relief claimed. Concept of deployment was brought into vogue by the 7th Bipartite settlement wherein bank was empowered to identify pockets of surplus/deficit in areas of operation in different centres. Imbalances in deployment of staff are corrected by the bank by way of settlement at each bank level. 8th Bipartite settlement provided that deployment of non- subordinate staff shall be made in accordance with terms and conditions set forth under Schedule VI of that settlement. Since there was no identification of pockets of surplus/deficit areas of operation, no specific policy to govern the deployment was brought into application.
4. Bank further pleads that the union espousing the cause has a microscopic strength of only 28 workmen and as such espousal is not by substantial number of employees. These facts make it apparent that the dispute is not an Industrial Dispute. Claimant was promoted on 01.09.2008 and ceased to be a workman. He was transferred to Rishikesh branch, on 01-09-2008 and his dispute has become infructuous. It has been claimed that facts pleaded 10. Though there is no, evidence on behalf of the claimant, yet facts pleaded by him are not in dispute. It has been highlighted by the claimant. that he was transferred from Rishikesh branch to Haridwar branch of the bank in July 2004, which fact has been candidly admitted by the bank in its written statement. He also raised an issue that 8th Bipartite settlement entitles him for grant of lump sum amount of Rs. 400 per month, on his transfer from one district to another. Signing of the Bipartite Settlement and grant of lump sum amount, on being deployed to another district are also not a matter of dispute. Consequently, it is evident that these admitted facts would lead this Tribunal to articulate of the controversy in a just manner.
11. Now, before proceeding for adjudication, the Tribunal is required to adjudicate an incidental issue. In4662 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] its written statement, the bank pleads that the union espousing the cause of the claimant has a microscopic strength of only 28 employees, constituting barely 0,8% of total number of workmen in the organization. It has been asserted that in the absence of necessary espousal by substantial number of employees, no industrial dispute exists between the parties. As projected above, the bank had also not adduced any evidence in the matter. Above pleadings make it apparent that espousal of the claim by the union is not a disputed fact. The bank asserts that the union has only microscopic strength of only 28 workmen. Hence question for consideration would be as to whether the dispute raised by the appropriate Government for adjudication is an industrial dispute. For an answer to this proposition, definition of the term 'industrial dispute' is to be construed. Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the Act), defines the term 'industrial dispute'. which definition .is extracted thus :
"2(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 person;"
The definition of "industrial dispute" referred above, can be divided into four parts, viz. (1) factum of dispute, (2) parties to the dispute, viz.(a) employersand 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".
13. 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 ''employment'' 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.
14. Here in the case, the bank dispute that the claimant has ceased to be a workman within the meaning of clause of Section 2 of the Act. As per facts pleaded by the parties, the claimant was working as a Computer Terminal Operator in the bank when he was transferred from Rishikesh bank to Haridwar branch of the bank. He was promoted as an Officer on 1-9-2008. In the dispute, under consideration, benefits for the period from July 2004 to 31st August, 2008 are to be adjudicated. Thus it is evident that the benefits, which are to be articulated, pertains to the period when claimant was working as a Computer Terminal Operator. There is no dispute that he was a workman, when the claimant was performing duties of a Computer Terminal Operator. It would not make any difference that from 1-9-2008, the claimant ceased to be a workman. The objection is, accordingly, discarded.
15. 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 settlement 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 employment, terms of employment, or conditions of labour the workmen as a class have adirect or substancial interest. The observations made by the Apex Court are to
be extracted thus :
"We also agree with the expression "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. "
16. "In Kyas Construction Company (Pvt ) Ltd. (1958 (2) LLJ 660), the Apex Court ruled that an industrial dispute heed not be a dispute between the employer and his workman and that the definition of the expression "industrial dispute "is wide enough to cater a dispute raised by the employer's workman with regard to non-[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4663 employment of others, who may not be employed as workman at the relevant time. The Apex Court in Bombay Union of Journalist [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 submitted by the union of the workmen of the employer against whom, the dispute is raised by an individual workman or' by an appreciable number of workmen. In order, therefore, to convert an individual dispute into an industrial 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 establishment. As far as union of the workmen of establishment itself is concerned, the problem of espousal by them generally presents little difficulty, since such workmen who are members of such unions generally have a continuity of interest with an individual employee 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 establishment but is one of which membership is open to workmen 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 dispute 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 sponsoring the dispute. The mere fact that a substantial number of workmen of the establishment in which the concerned 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.
17. The expression "industrial disputes" has been construed by the Apex Court to include individual disputes, 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 cannot per-se be an industrial dispute but may become 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 absence 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 lndia Match Company [1970 (II) LLJ 256], the Apex Court referred the precedent in Diakuchi Tea Estate's case [1958 (1) LLJ 500] 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 employment, terms of employment or conditions of labour, the parties, dispute for a direct or substantial interest".
18. 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 "industrial dispute" concerning an individual workman is referred for adjudication has on its roll a few of the workmen 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 consider 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. Nevertheless, in order to make a dispute an industrial dispute, it is not necessary that there should always be a resolution 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 member 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].
19. It is not necessay 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 cauae, it is sufficient to convert it into an industrial dispute. In Pardeep Lamp Works [1970(1) LLJ507] complaints relating to dispute of ten workmen were filed before the Conciliation Officer by the indivdual 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 workman elected five representatives to prosecute the Cases of ten dismissed workmen. Thus Cases of the dismissed workmen were espoused by the new union, yet unregistered and unrecognized. The Apex Court held that the fact that these disputes were not taken up by a registered or recognized union does not mean that they were not "industrial dispute".
20. 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 Act4664 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 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 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].
21. With the above legal proposition in mind, now it would be ascertained as to whether the dispute espoused by the union is an industrial dispute. At the cost of repetition, it is pointed out that the bank nowhere disputes that the union has espoused the cause of claimant for redressal. Consequently, it is apparent that the union expressed its collective will and took up the cause of the claimant as their own. The bank nowhere questions the proposition that the union espoused the cause and applied to the appropriate Government in the prescribed manner, as provided by sub-section (2) of section 10 of the Act, for taking steps for reference of the dispute to an industrial adjudicator. An application was moved by the union in consonance with provisions of rule 3 and 4 of the Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957. One may announce that the President and Secretary of the Union signed the application, after expression of collective will by members of the union to take up cause of the claimant as their own.
22. The bank projects that there were 28 member of the union, who constitute barely 0.8% of the total number of workmen in the organization. It has nowhere been projected as to how many workmen were there in Rishikesh or Haridwar branch of the bank or in the region, under consideration. The bank runs its Head Office, Zonal Office and branches throughout the country. For espousing case of a workman, union representing employees of a particular region/branch may take up his cause. Even otherwise, it was for the bank to establish, by way of cogent evidence that the union has only microscopic strength of its members. By simple assertion of facts in its written statement, the bank would not be able to dislodge the proposition that the union represents considerable number of employees in the bank. Since the bank has not been able to dislodge the claim of the Computer Terminal Operator to the effect that his case was espoused by the union having substantial or considerable number of its workmen as its member in the establishment of the bank, findings cannot be recorded to this effect that the dispute raised by the union had not acquired status of an industrial dispute. Resultantly, it is concluded that the dispute referred for adjudication is an industrial dispute and the Trlbunal has rightly invoked its jurisdiction for adjudication.
23. Now I would advert to the facts of the present controversy. Employees in any concern are, in ordinary course of business, liable to be transferred. No concern can possibly run if it has no right to transfer its employees from one branch to another. The transfer might cause some inconvenience but all employees are bound to suffer inconvenience unless there is some stipulation in their condition of services to the effect that they will remain at a particular branch or place of business. Thus, liability to be transferred is a normal incidence of service in any concern and it does not necessarily involve punishment. So the employer has got a right in law to transfer an employee from one branch to another or from one concern to another, which is also under the same employer.
24. In effecting transfer of workmen from one branch to another, the employer must act bonafide and in the interest of its business. The existence of power to transfer and its scope and exercise of it are entirely two different questions. Colourable exercise by the employer of his power to transfer a workman from one establishment at one place to another at different place can always be a subject matter of industrial dispute. In considering the question whether transfer from one place to another had effected a change in the conditions of service of a workman, following types of cases must be considered, namely :—
(a) Where there are standing orders or the conditions of service have been reduced to writing; and
(i) those may either contain provisions to deal with transfers, or
(ii) they may not.
(b) Where there are no standing orders at all or any other instrument in writing to deal with service conditions.
25. In cases falling under (b) or (a) (ii), liability to be transferred from one establishment to another at a different place by the employer or at his instance is an incidence of service, that is to say, an implied condition of service and the workman concerned cannot successfully complain unless he can show that the transfer was made by way of punishment. In cases falling within (a) (i) above two broad questions arise for consideration, namely - (i) whether the rules or provisions dealing with the matter of transfer are of the fullest amplitude, that is to say, whether they cover the whole field of transfer, or (ii) whether they are not.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4665In the first case, those rules or provisions would be the only governing rules or provisions on the subject. Whether the rules regarding transfer are of the fullest amplitude or not would depend upon consideration of the standing orders or contract of service. In the second type of cases, it must be seen as to what extent the special provisions or rules in the standing orders have effected or curtailed the general power of transfer of the employer which is implied in every contract of service.
26. Powers of the employer to transfer an employee from one place to another necessarily includes two things, namely—
(i) It can only be taken away or curtailed or regulated in express terms, and
(ii) that the power is only in the employer which means that only the employer or a person either expressly authorized by him or who can be said to have that authority impliedly, can exercise that power.
27. As detailed below, Shastry Award and Settlement dated 02-06-2005, place restrictions on the powers of the Bank to effect rotational transfers of its employees. Transfer of an employee whith is justified by exigencies of service and also in accordance with the standing orders cannot be said to be creating hardship to the employee. In such transfer, question of hardship cannot be construed to treat the transfer unfair. In Shastry Award, the policy of transfer of the staff was penned down in Para 535. Relying on Sen Award, directives were given, which are reproduced as follows:
(i) Every registered Bank employees' union, from time to time, shall furnish the Bank with the names of the President, Vice President and the Secretaries of the Union;
(ii) Except in very special cases, whenever the transfer of any of the above mentioned office bearers is contemplated, at least five clear working days' notice should be put up on the notice board of the Bank of such contemplated action;
(iii) Any representation, written or oral, made by the union shall be considered by the Bank;
(iv) If any order of transfer is ultimately made, a record shall be made by the Bank of such representation and the Bank's reasons for regarding them as inadequate; and
(v) The decision shall be communicated to the union as well as to the employee concerned.
28.Besides the above, 7th Bipartite Settlement was signed on 27-03-2000 wherein it was provided that the bank may identify pockets of surplus/deficit areas of operation in different centres. Imbalances of deployment of staff may be corrected, and for that purpose, policy may be resolved by way of bank level agreements. 8th Bipartite Settlement was signed on 02-06-2005 wherein detailed policy of deployment was agreed upon between the union and the IBA. Clause 32 of the said settlement details that in continuation of clause 32 of 7th Bipartite Settlement dated 27-03-2000, it is agreed between the parties that deployment of non-subordinate staff in banks shall be in accordance to the terms and conditions set forth in Schedule VI of the settlement. Schedule VI appended to the settlement brings in certain benefits/concessions in favour of the workmen staff. Those benefits/concessions are detailed herein below:
''(i) A workman in the non-subordinate cadre is liable to be deployed, anywhere within a 'District', irrespective of the distance involved.
(ii) In cases necessitating deployment outside the District, the workman concerned may be deployed to any branch/office of the bank situated outside the District up to a distance not exceeding 100 km. from his present place of posting.
(iii) Bank may Identify, based on length of stay at the centre/branch/office, the number of workmen employees, to be redeployed from each centre/ branch / office to meet its requirements.
(iv) The period of deployment shall be 2 years in a difficult centre decided by the bank in accordance with the Government guidelines and 3 years in other centers.
(v) Repatriation to the original centre shall be after serving in the deployed centre for period as in (iv) above. In case it is not administratively possible for the bank to repatriate the employee to his original centre after the above period, the employee may be required to give 3 centers of his choice so that he can be transferred to anyone of the 3 centers opted by him.
(vi) Female employees above the age of 55 and male employees above the age of 56 shall be exempt from redeployment. However, if the required and eligible number of employees is not available to be deployed in terms of the Settlement, the age norms as above may be suitably relaxed up to the age of 58 years so as to ensure that the required and eligible numbers of employees are deployed to the identified centers.
(vii) Employees having mentally retarded/spastic children, certified as such by the attending Doctor, may be deployed only at centers where specialised treatment for such children and special facilities of their schooling are available.
(viii) Employees affected by serious ailments requiring specialised treatment, as certified by the attending Doctor, will be deployed only at centers where4666 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] medical facilities for treatment of such ailments are available.
(ix) Redeployment of physically handicapped/ challenged employees shall be in accordance with the extant Government guidelines.
(x) A workman in the non-subordinate cadre so long as he serves in the deployed centre shall draw a lump sum amount of Rs. 400 p.m. (not ranking for any other benefit) besides protection of emoluments drawn at the original centre. These shall cease on the employee's repatriation to the original centre.
(xi) The above lump sum amount is not payable in case of transfers made at the request of the employee.
(xii) In North-Eastern States, banks may decide on the level and extent of deployment having regard to their requirements within the above norms.
(xiii) The above provisions on deployment are without prejudice to the provisions of paragraphs 535 and 536 of the Sastry Award relating to transfer of workmen.
(xiv) The above provisions on deployment shall be the minimum applicable to all the banks which are parties to this Settlement. Parties agree that any existing bank-level settlement on transfer or deployment whose provisions are restrictive and not up to the minimum provisions on deployment as mentioned above will be modified/terminated as per procedure under the Industrial Disputes Act so as to give effect to the above-mentioned provisions on deployment.
(xv) Any bank which is a party to this Settlement and having bank-level Settlement on transfer or deployment may, however, modify and improve upon the above provisions to suit the needs of the bank ensuring, however, that the norms relating to the geographical minimum area of deployment, period of stay at the deployed centre, conditions for repatriation as mentioned hereinabove are not relaxed or diluted in any manner.
(xvi) In banks which are parties to this Settlement where bank level settlements/policies on transfer or deployment of workmen exist which provide for transferability of employees over a larger geographical area, such bank level settlements on transfer or deployment shall remain operative".
29. The bank raised an issue that the 8th Bipartite settlement was signed on 02-06-1995 while claimant was transferred to Haridwar branch in July 2004. According to the bank, terms of 8th Bipartite Settlement nowhere comes for the benefit of the claimant. Alas! this arguments is not available to the bank. Clause 39 of the 8th Bipartite Settlement highlights that the settlement shall be binding on the parties for five years from 01-11-2002. Clause 38 of the said settlement speaks of implementation of various benefits, agreed to be granted in favour of the workmen staff from different dates as detailed in that clause. As noted, benefits relating to scale of pay, 6th stagnation increment, slab rate, dearness allowance, special pay and consolidated wages of part time employees working less than 6 hours per week were to be implemented from 01-11-2002. Dearness allowance on single slab rate was to be implemented from 01-02-2005. Professional qualification pay, house rent allowance, city compensatory allowance, provident fund, gratuity, recovery of house rent, fixed personal pay, hill and fuel allowance, transport allowance and annual medical aid, special area allowance, project area allowance, split duty allowance and cycle allowance were to be implemented from 01-11-2002. Provisions relating to pension were to be implemented from 01.05.2005. Clauses relating to hospital expenses, halting allowance, compensation on loss on transfer, expenses on road transfer, leave fare concession and overtime allowance were to be implemented from the date of settlement i.e. 02-06-2005. Washing allowance provisions were to be implemented from 1st August, 2004. All other items agreed, but not covered, were to be implemented from the date of settlement, i.e. 02-06-2005.
30. Deployment allowance as provided in Schedule VI of the settlement was to be implemented from the date of settlement, i.e. 02.06.2005. This proposition led the bank to a confusion. As clause 39 spells, settlement is binding on the parties for five years from 01.11.2002. Thus this settlement became operative from 1st November, 2002. When claimant was transferred to Haridwar branch of the bank in July 2004, this settlement was deemed to be operative, on account of retrospective operation accorded to it by clause 39, as referred above. Implementation clause simply points out as to from which date a particular benefit would be implemented. Thus, it is apparent that in July 2004 the settlement was in operation and deployment allowance of Rs. 400.00 per month was to be implemented from 02-06-2005. It would mean that all the workmen staff deployed to other centres after 01-11-2002 would get deployment allowance with effect from 02-06-2005. Consequently, it is crystal clear that the case of the claimant is covered in all four corners of provisions of Schedule VI of the 8th Bipartite Settlement. Claimant was entitled to get deployment allowance in lump sum @ Rs. 400.00 per month from 02-06-2005 till 31-05-2008, the period for which he remained deployed at Haridwar branch of the bank. The issue is, accordingly, answered in favour of the claimant and against the bank.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4667Issue No. 2.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR-COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/14/98
PRESIDING OFFICER: SHRI R.B.PATLE Shri Yogendra Rawat, S/o Shri D.P.Rawat, House No. 16, CTO Colony, Bairagarh, Bhopal ......Workman
Versus
31. Since the claimant has been retransferred to Rishikesh branch of the bank, where he joined on 01.09.2008, there is no occasion for the tribunal to adjudicate as to whether the claimant is entitled for retransfer to that branch. Consequently, the issue of re transfer becomes infructuous. On the other hand, no evidence has been brought forward by the claimant to the effect as to when he reached the age of 58 years and entitled for re- transfer to Rishikesh branch. The issue relating to entitlement of lumpsum of Rs.400.00 as deployment allowance has already been answered In favour of the claimant, as referred above. Issues, raised in the reference order are answered accordingly. Relief
The Branch Manager, Canara Bank, 204, Karamchand Chowk, Post Box No. 221, Jabalpur ........Management
AWARD
32. Since the claimant has already been transferred back to Rishikesh branch of the bank, there is no occasion for the Tribunal to adjudicate as to whether denial by the bank to transfer the claimant to Rishikesh branch is legal and justified. As detailed above, claimants entitled to deployment allowance in terms of Schedule VI of the 8th Bipartite Settlement from 02-06-2005 to31-08-2008 @ Rs.400.00 per month, which allowance comes to Rs.15586.66.The bank shall make payment of the said deployment allowance to the claimant within a period of 30 days from the date the award becomes operative. An award is, accordingly, passed. It be sent to the appropriate Government for Publication. Dated : 27-6-2013
Dr. R.K. YADAV, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 10 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1652.— औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार केनरा बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सीजी आईटी/ एलसी/आर/14/98द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 15-6-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12012/248/1997-आई आर ;बी-IIद्ध] सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 10th July, 2013
S.O. 1652.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/14/98) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Canara Bank and their workman which was received by the Central Government on 15-6- 2013.
[No. L-12012/248/1997-IR(B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer Passed on this 12th day of March, 2013
1. As per letter dated 6-8-1998 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section -10 of I.D.Act 1947 as per Notification No. L-l2012/ 248/9-IR(B-II). The dispute under reference relates to:
"Whether the action of the management of Canara Bank in terminating the services of Shri Yogendra Rawat w. e. f. 25-11-87 is legal and justified? lf not, to what relief the said workman is entitled?"
2. After receipt or the reference, notices were issued to the parties. 1st party/workman filed his statement of claim at Page 3/l to 3/6 of record. It is case of 1st party that he reccived education upto 8th standard. He holds qualification for post or peon/messenger. He had submitted application for appointment in sub-staff cadre under Award Staff. He was called for interview and thereafter was appointed in the post of peon/messenger from 29-1-86. Ist part /workman was posted at Canara Bank, Karamchand Chowk Branch, Jabalpur. He was continued in service till 25-11 -87. He was paid wages for said period and its record is available with IInd party/management. His services were terminated without reasons in violation of Section 25-F of I. D. Act, 1947.
3. 1st party/workman further submits that there was regular vacancies of post of peon with IInd party/ management. Despite of regular vacancy, his services were utilized as temporary employee. He was continuously working in the Bank till 25-11-87 for 504 days without any break. That IInd party/management has also violated Section 25-F of I.D. Act. No letter of appointment or termination was issued. He had completed 240 days working preceding the date of his termination. That as per4668 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] Shastry Award, the employees completing 90 days service in Bank are considered for regular appointment. The IInd party/ management has victimized by not giving benefit of said award. lst party/workman has illegally terminated his srvice that his parents are victim of Bhopal Gas Tragedy. His parents are sick. He prays for his reinstatement with consequential benefits.
4. IInd party/management filed Written Statement at page 5/1 to 5/7 of the record. The claim of lst party workman is denied. It is contended by IInd party that procedure for recruitment was not followed, his name was not sponsored through Employment Exchange. He was engaged at Jabalpur City Branch from 1986 to 87. He was never appointed by the bank, no appointment letter was issued. That 1st party/workman himself stopped coming to Branch of his own violation. Preliminary objection is submitted that the reference of dispute is not tenable. Referring ratio held in several cases. IInd party/ management submitted that dispute is not tenable. Neither Ist party/workman is not entitled to his reinstatement as he has worked for short term period.
5. Ist party/workman submitted rejoinder at page 6/1 to 6/5 denying the material contentions in Written statement filed by IInd party management. It is submitted that the Written Statement is filed to mislead the Court to establish that the workman was not an employee of the bank in view of non-issuance of the appointment letter. Termination of his service is covered as retrenchment under Section 2(oo) of the I.D. Act. Ist party/workman also referred ratio held in several cases and contended that he is entitled to reinstatement with back wages.
6. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below:-
(i) whether the action of the In Negative
management of Canara Bank in terminating the services of Shri Yogendra Rawat w.e.f. 25-11-87 is legal and justified?
(ii) If not, what relief the Ist party is
workman is entitled to?" entitled to one month's notice pay and retrenchment compensation as per final ordcr.
I.D. Act claiming that he has continuously worked for 240 days prior to termination of his service. In the preceding year, he had worked for 205 days as such he acquire status of regular employee of the Bank. His services were orally terminated without assigning any reason. No notice was given. Ist party/workman did not submit his evidence. On 6-11-2011, the workman was proceed exparte. Management has filed affidavit of his witness Shri Sanjeev Kumar. The witness of the management has stated that procedure for recruitment of Ist party/workman was not followed. Ist party/workman was trying to get back door entry to get permanent appointment. That Ist party was engaged temporarily at Jabalpur City Branch from 1986 to 87 on day to day basis. They have not undergone recruitment process. The dispute is referred after 10 years. He submitted that the workman had not completed 240 days working continuously preceding the year of his termination . IInd party/management has also not given the breakup of working period of Ist party/workman. Ist party/workman has given detail of his working of total 504 days. The record relating to employment is presumed to be in the custody of the management but the management has not produced the record. That he has worked 240 days before his date of termination, the total working period as per his pleadings comes 29-1-86 to 25-11-87 for more than 22 months deserves to be accepted. The pleadings and evidence of IInd party are silent about one months termination notice as per Section 25-F of I.D. Act or payment of retrenchment compensation. The counsel for IInd party remained absent. No arguments are advanced. In my considered view, Ist party/workman was working for about 22 months. Retrenchment compensation for 28 days and one months notice pay needs to be paid to the Ist party/workman. For non-compliance of Section 25-F of the I.D. Act, the termination of Ist party/workman is not just and legal. Accordingly I record my finding in Point No. I in Negative.
8. Point No. 2—As per my finding in Point No.1, termination of Ist party/workman is not legal for violation of Section 25-F. However the Ist party had not produced any evidence that he was appointed after following recruitment procedure. Therefore Ist party/workman is not entitled to reinstatement rather he will be entitled to notice pay for one month and retrenchment compensation of 28 days wages. Accordingly for above reasons, I record my finding in Point No. 2.
9. In the result, Award is passed as under :—
(1) Termination of services of Ist party/workman Yogendra Rawat by Canara Bank on 25-11-1987 is not legal.
REASONS
7. The Ist party/workman is challenging his termination from service for violation of Section 25-F, H of (2) IInd party/management is directed to pay one month's salary/wages in lieu of notice and 28 days wages towards retrenchment compensation @ last wages paid to him. Amount as per this order be[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4669
AWARD
paid within 30 days. In case of default, IInd party/ management shall pay 9% interest on above amount from the date of order till its payment.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1653.— औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार पंजाब नेशनल बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआई/एलसी/आर/10/97द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12012/313/95-आई आर ;बी-IIद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 11th July, 2013
S.O. 1153.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/10/97) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Punjab National Bank and their workman which was received by the Central Government on 11-7-2013.
[ No. L-12012/313/95-IR(B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer.
Passed on this 25th day of June, 2013
1. As per letter dated 3-1-97 by the Government of India, Ministry of labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section -10 of I.D. Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L-12012/313/95-IR(B-II). The dispute under reference relates to:
''Whether the action of the management of Punjab National Bank, J abalpur (MP) in reducing the basic pay and consequently recovering amount w.e.f. 13-3-92 from the salary of Shri Makar Singh, Armed Guard, Damoh Branch (MP) is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled for?"
2. Ist party Union is challenging reduction in basic pay and recovery from his salary w.e.f. 13-3-92 in the dispute under reference. Even after issuing notices, the Union has not participated in the proceeding, no statement of claim is filed. Ist party is proceeded exparte on 13-7- 09.
3. Ilnd party management also not filed Written Statement. From conduct of the Ist party, it is clear that the parties are not pursuing or participating in the dispute.
4. In the result, award is passed as under:-
" Reference is disposed off as No Dispute Award."
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जुलाई, 2013
ANNEXURE
का.आ. 1654.— औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार केनरा बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्-िकरण/श्रम न्यायालय-2, मुम्बई के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सी जीआई टी/2/11ऑपफ 2008द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
[सं. एल-12012/106/2007-आई आर ;बी-IIद्ध]
No. CGIT/LC/R/10/97
Presiding Officer : SHRI R.B.PATLE
The Assistant General Secretary, . Punjab National Bank Employees Association, Through Punjab National Bank., Sadar Bazar, Jabapur .....Workman/Union
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 11th July, 2013
Versus
Regional Manager, Punjab National Bank., R.O. 124, Napier Town, Jabalpur ....Management S.O. 1654.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT- 2/11 of 2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court-2, Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Canara Bank and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 11-7-2013.
[ No. L-12012/106/2007-IR(B-II)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer4670 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, MUMBAI
PRESENT : K.B.KATAKE, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO.CGIT -2/11 of 2008
EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE
MANAGEMENT OF
CANARA BANK
The Deputy General Manager, Canara Bank Disciplinary Authority, Disciplinary Action Cell 13th floor, Maker Tower 'E' Cuffe Parade Mumbai-400005.
AND
THEIR WORKMAN
Shri Chandrakant G. Kawle Shivshankar Nagar Salt Pan Road Near Sonali Classes Wadala Mumbai-400 052.
of the Bank. The Bank lodged a Police complaint. The statement of the second party in the nature of confession was recorded by the Police under threat. A criminal case was filed in the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Mumbai against the second party. In that case the second party workman was acquitted by order dated 03-03-2007. In the meantime the first party had initiated disciplinary proceedings against the second party on the identical facts and charges as in the criminal case. During the inquiry the Inquiry Officer did not follow the principles of natural justice and findings recorded in the inquiry proceedings were perverse. It was unlawful on the part of the first party to initiate the disciplinary proceedings on the same subject matter of the criminal case. There was no legal evidence against the second party. The second party had admitted the mistake as he was promised that no disciplinary action would be taken. He was dismissed from service on the basis of perverse findings of the disciplinary authority. The said order of dismissal is illegal and unjustified. The second party therefore prays that the said order of dismissal without notice be set aside and the second party workman be reinstated with full back-wages and consequential benefits.
APPEARANCES :
For the Employer : Mr. S.V. Alva, Advocate For the Workman : Mr. J.H. Sawant, Advocate
Mumbai, dated the 22nd May, 2013
AWARD PART-I
1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment by its Order No. L-12012/106/2007 -IR (B-II) dated 28-01-2008 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:
"Whether the action of the management of Canara Bank in imposing the punishment of Dismissal without Notice on Shri Chandrakant G. Kawle, sub- staff vide Order dated 29-01-2003 is legal, proper and proportionate to the gravity of misconduct allegedly committed by Shri Chandrakant G. Kawle? If not, to what relief Shri Chandrakant G. Kawle is entitled to and from which date and what other orders are necessary in the matter?"
2. After receipt of the reference notices were issued to both the parties. In response to the notice the second party workman filed his statement of claim at Ex-3. According to him he was permanent employee of the first party Bank working as a sub staff. On 27-01-2001 an amount of Rs. 5,50,000 was found missing from the Strong Room 3. The first party management has resisted the statement of claim vide its written statement at Ex-7. According to them the reference is misconceived and not maintainable. It is barred by limitation on the ground of delay and laches. On 25-01-2001 second party was working in Cash Department. He accompanied Shri J.M. Kamath to the Strong Room who was asked to locate the cash slip bundle. Mr. Kamath had collected second set of keys from Shri B.T.Tapiwala, Officer. Mr. Kamath could not locate the cash slip bundle and he left the strong room by handing over second set of keys to the second party. Second party alone was in the strong room for about 15 to 20 minutes along with first set of keys which he had unauthorisedly procured. At the end of the day cash to the extent of Rs.6,00,000 was found short and notes of 500 and 100 denominations were found missing from the double lock strong room. On 27-01-2001 at about 10.00 a.m. the Armed Guard while entering the branch saw a plastic bag hanging on the handle bar of the wooden door fixed in between the main grill gate and the glass door at the entrance. An amount of Rs.5,50,000 was found inside the said bag. Bank lodged a police complaint. On interrogation by Police second party confessed to have stolen the cash to the extent of Rs.6,00,000 and also confessed to having kept the plastic bag containing amount of Rs.5,50,000. The Police also recovered an amount of Rs.45,000 from the house of the second party.
4. The second party was put under suspension pending disciplinary action for the misconduct. He was paid subsistence allowance @ 1/3rd of the salary and emolument for. the first three months of his suspension and thereafter @ one half of his salary. The second party[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4671
REASONS
Issue No.1 :—
was served with charge sheet dt. 22-09-2001. An independent I O Mr. V.B. Moharir, Manager, Vigilance, was appointed as Inquiry Officer. He conducted the inquiry in eight sittings. The second party and the defence representative of his choice Shri N.G.Nikam attended the inquiry proceedings. Copies of full set of documents along with list of documents and witnesses were given to the second party along with charge-sheet well in advance. In all 13 witnesses were examined in presence of second party and his defence representative and they were allowed to be cross examined by the second party. Opportunity was also given to the second party to examine himself or any other witness on his behalf. However neither he examined himself or examined any other witness or produced any document. Full and fair opportunity was given to the second party to defence himself in the inquiry proceeding. The Inquiry Officer submitted his report. Copy thereof was sent to the second party for his Say. The second party submitted his representation on 25-11-2002. The disciplinary authority carefully evaluated the entire proceedings of the inquiry, the oral and documentary evidence and entire record and the submissions of the second party and passed the order of dismissal. The criminal proceeding pending before Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court has no concern and it has no effect on the findings of the inquiry officer. According to the first party the second party was working in a Bank who is custodian of public money and the employees working in the Bank requires utmost honesty and integrity as they are dealing with public money. The second party was found guilty of a serious misconduct of theft. Therefore he is not entitled to any leniency. The punishment is thus proportionate to the misconduct. Therefore first party prays that the reference deserves to be dismissed with cost.
5. The second party workman filed his rejoinder at Ex-8. He explained that, delay in raising the dispute was caused as he raised the dispute after he was acquitted by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. In spite of that the first party refused to reinstate him. He also reiterated that inquiry was not fair and proper and there was violation of principles of natural justice etc.
6. Following are the preliminary issues for my determination. record my findings thereon for the reasons to follow:
Sr. Issues Findings No.
1. Whether the inquiry of workman Shri Yes
Chandrakant G. Kawale held by the first party management is fair and proper?
2. Whether the findings of the Inquiry No.
Officer are perverse?
7. In the case at hand according to the first party after the preliminary inquiry, charge-sheet was served on the second party workman for the alleged misconduct. The second party has admitted the fact in his cross- examination that he received the charge-sheet dated 22-09-2001. Copy thereof is on record at Ex-17. It is contended in the written statement as well as in the affidavit of IO at Ex-20 that copies of all the documents were given to the second party. The said suggestion was put in the cross examination of the second party workman at Ex-13. He has not denied that copies of documents and list of witnesses were supplied to him along with the charge sheet. He vaguely replied that he does not understand whether copies of documents and list of witnesses were supplied to him. The fact is not disputed that Mr. Nikam was defence representative of the second party and he cross examined all the witnesses. The second party has also admitted in his cross that inquiry papers pages 5 to 41 each page bears his signature. The Inquiry Officer has stated in his affidavit at Ex-20 that defence representative Mr. Nikam is a senior, experienced person well versed in English and Marathi. He has also contended in his affidavit that after examination of management witnesses he permitted defence representative to produce his witnesses and the defence representative told that he has no witness and no document to submit. Second party also did not examine himself but submitted a written brief. A specific suggestion was put to the second party in his cross examination at Ex-13. He has not denied that inquiry Officer had given him opportunity to put his defence and examine his witnesses. He has replied the question in the same fashion that he does not understand the same. However he admitted his signature on inquiry proceeding on that date. It is at Ex-18.
8. It is the case of the first party that the copy of the inquiry report was sent to the second party and his submission was sought for. A specific suggestion to that effect was given in the cross-examination of second party at Ex-13 that he and his defence representative were present before the Bank for personal hearing. He replied that he does not remember it. However in the next sentence he has admitted that after personal hearing he had, preferred appeal to the management. He has also admitted in his cross that the IO had sent him the copy of findings of inquiry. In short, the charge sheet was served on the second party. The second party was represented by a defence representative Mr. Nikam. All the management witnesses were examined in presence of the second party workman and his defence representative. Fair and proper opportunity was given to the defence representative to cross examine them. Opportunity was also given to the second party to examine himself and his witnesses.
4672 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]However second party did not examine himself or examine any witnesses or produce any document. The report and findings of IO were sent to the second party and after giving him personal hearing the disciplinary authority passed the order of dismissal.
9. In the circumstances Ld. Adv. for the first party submitted that the lO has followed the procedure prescribed for conducting the inquiry and fair and sufficient opportunity was given to the second party workman. In support of his argument the Ld. Adv. for first party resorted to Apex Court ruling in Sur Enamel and Stamping Works Ltd. V/s. Their Workmen1963 II LLJ 367 wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court laid down the following conditions for fair and proper disciplinary inquiry.
They are:
(1) The employee proceeded against has been informed clearly of the charges levelled against him.
(2) The witnesses are examined-ordinarily in the presence of the employee in respect of the charges.
(3) The employee is given a fair opportunity to
cross examine witnesses.
(4) He is given a fair opportunity to examine witnesses including himself in his defence if he so wishes on any relevant matter and
(5) The inquiry officer records his findings with
reasons for the same in his report.
the departmental inquiry standard of proof is all together different, mere preponderance of probability suffices the purpose. Furthermore though in criminal case the Court has acquitted the workman, there is no bar to proceed with the departmental inquiry and Inquiry Officer can record findings contrary thereto as criminal case and departmental proceeding are based on different standard of proof.
12. In this respect Apex Court ruling can be resorted to in South Bengal State Transport Corporation V/s. Sapan Kumar Mitra & Ors. 2006 I LLJ 1087 wherein on the point Hon'ble Court observed that;
''That being the position, an order of removal from service emanating from a departmental proceeding can very well be passed even after acquittal of the delinquent employee in a criminal case. "
Same view is reiterated by the Apex Court in Suresh Pathrela V/s. Oriental Bank of Commerce 2007 2 SCT 715 wherein Apex Court
observed that;
''It is well settled principle of law that the yardstick and standard of proof in criminal case is different from the disciplinary proceeding. While the standard of proof in a criminal case is a proof beyond all reasonable doubt, the proof in departmental proceeding is preponderance of probability."
13. In the circumstances, the Hon'ble Court in that case held that, acquittal in criminal case would be no bar for conducting a disciplinary proceeding against delinquent officer. Even after acquittal the delinquent workman can be removed from service if found guilty in disciplinary proceeding. In this backdrop I hold that criminal proceeding or even acquittal therein does not affect the punishment awarded in the departmental inquiry. In the circumstances I come to the conclusion that the inquiry is fair and proper. Accordingly I decide this issue no.1 in the affirmative.
Issue No.2:—
10. In the case at hand as per the guidelines of Hon'ble Apex Court all the points referred hereinabove were complied while conducting the inquiry. Furthermore though the second party has contended in his statement of claim and affidavit that there was violation of principles of natural justice, it is not pointed out how there was violation of principles of natural justice. On the other hand after going through the inquiry proceeding and the evidence on record, it is revealed that fair and proper opportunity was given to the workman as contemplated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the above referred ruling. Thus on this ground, fairness of inquiry cannot be challenged.
11. The main objection raised on behalf of the second party is that, when criminal case was pending before Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Inquiry Officer ought to have stayed the inquiry till decision of the criminal case. It was further submitted on behalf of the second party that, as workman is acquitted in the criminal case, he deserves to be reinstated. In this respect I would like to point out that, the law on the point is well settled. In criminal cases charges are required to be proved beyond reasonable doubt to hold the accused guilty. Whereas in 14. In respect of findings of the Inquiry Officer it is contended in the statement of claim that they are perverse. In this respect also it is not specifically pleaded how they are perverse. On the other hand it was rightly pointed out on behalf of the first party that, findings of the Inquiry Officer are based on the evidence on record. There was evidence of 13 witnesses and few documents before the Inquiry Officer. Furthermore it has come on record that an amount of Rs.6,00,000 was missing from the strong room. It has come on record that the workman was in the strong room for about 15 - 20 minutes and Mr. Kamath had handed over second key to him.The workman had Aunauthorisedly obtained the first key of the strong room. It has also come on record that the workman has confessed that he has[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4673 New Delhi, the 11th July, 2013
S.O. 1655.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 53/2007) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jablpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of WCL, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 11-07-2013.
[ No. L-22012/303/2006-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABLPUR
taken away the amount and an amount of Rs.5,50,000 was kept by him in a plastic bag at the door of the Bank. An amount of Rs.45,000 was also recovered from his residence. The findings of the Inquiry Officer are based on the evidence of the witnesses examined by the management. Though they were thoroughly cross- examined by the defence representative nothing adverse was revealed from their cross-examination. In the circumstances the findings of the Inquiry Officer which are based on the evidence on record and consistent thereto thus the same cannot be called perverse. In this respect I would also like to point out that, the Tribunal is not sitting as an appellate court to scrutinize the findings which are prima facie based on the evidence on record. On the point Apex Court ruling can be resorted to in US State Road Transport Corporation & Ors V/s. Musais Ram & Ors. 1999 (83) FLR 226 (SC) wherein on the point Hon'ble Court observed that;
NO. CGIT/LC/R/53/07
''The Court does not sit in appeal over the findings of the IO. If the findings are based on uncontroverted material placed before the IO, it cannot be said that these findings are perverse."
SHRI R. B. PATLE , Presiding Officer
The General Secretary, SKMS (AITUC), CRO Camp, Iklehra, Distt Chhindwara (MP) ....Workman/Union
Versus
15. In short the findings of the Inquiry Officer are based on evidence before him. They are not contrary to the evidence on record and cannot be called perverse. Thus I hold that the findings of the IO are not perverse. Accordingly I decide this issue no. 2 in the negative and proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER
(i) The inquiry is held fair and proper.
The Chief General Manager, WCL, Pench Area, PO Parasia, Distt. Chhindwara
. . . Management
AWARD
(ii) Findings of the Inquiry Officer are not perverse.
(iii) The parties are directed to argue/lead evidence on the point of quantum of punishment.
Date: 22-05-2013
K. B. KATAKE , Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जुलार्ई, 2013
का.आ. 1655.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स डब्ल्यू सी एल के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संख्या 53/2007द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 22012/303/2006-आई आर;सीएम-II]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी Passed on this 20th day of June, 2013
1. As per letter dated 5-7-2007 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tnbunal under Section-10 of ID. Act, 1947 as per Notification. No. L-22012/303/2006-IR(CM-II). The dispute under reference relates to :
"Whether the action of the management of WCL in dismissing Shri Prabhu Dayal from services w.e.f. 22-5-06 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?"
2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. However 1st party workman filed to appear the file Statement of claim. 1st party workman is proceeded exparte on 30-7-2011. The management submitted Written Statement the case as submitted by management of IInd party is that 1st party workman was working as PBX Operator at Rawanwara Khas Colliery of ECL, Pench Area. He was habitual absentee, his attendance was poor, warning letters were issued to him, he did not show improvement in4674 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] attendance. The workman was unauthorisely absent from 18-5-02 without intimation, permission or sanctioned leave. The charge sheet was issued to him on 30-10-2002, no reply was received. Vide order dated 30-3-05, the Departmental enquiry was ordered against him. That after issuing notice as no response was received, said witness Mr. Shakir Ahmed Sr. Under Manager'was appointed as Enquiry Officer, P.M. Lokhande, Under Manager was appointed as Management Representative. That the enquiry was conducted following principles of natural justice. Opportunity for defence was given to the workman. The delinquent employee did not appear after notice. The enquiry was proceeded exparte as he remained absent. The evidence of management's witness was recorded after receiving Enquiry Report. That charges were proved, notice was issued to delinquent employee. Any reply was not received to the notice. Workman was dismissed for proved misconduct.
3. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below :—
(i) Whether the action of the
नई दिल्ली, 11 जुलार्ई, 2013
का.आ. 1656.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स डब्ल्यू सी एल के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 4/2008द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 22012/306/2007-आई आर;सीएम-II] बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 11th July, 2013
S.O.1656.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 4/2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of WCL, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 11-07-2013.
[ No. L-22012/306/2007-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
management of M/s WCL In Affirmative in dismissing Shri Prabhu Dayal from services w.e.f. 22-5-06 is legal?
(ii) If so, to what relief the Relief prayed
workman is entitled to?" by workman are BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR
rejected.
NO. CGIT/LC/R/4/2008
REASONS
PRESENT : SHRI R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
General Secretary, Samyukta Koyla Mazdoor Sangh (ATUC), CRC Camp, Iklehra, Distt Chhindwara, Chhindwara
. . .Workman/Union
Versus
The Chief General Manager, WCL, Pench Area, PO Parasia, Distt. Chhindwara (MP) . . .Management
AWARD
4. As stated above, reference is made for adjudication for legality of dismissal or the services of workman from 22-5-06. However the workman has failed to appear after notice. He proceeded exparte. He has not adduced any evidence. The management filed affidavit of its witness Shri Y. Seshidhar. the witness has stated most of the facts pleaded in Written Statement filed by management of IInd party. That services of 1st party workman was dismissed for is unauthorized. absence. DE was conducted. Workman failed to participate in enquiry. The evidence of witqess of management remained unchallenged. Workman failed to appear in the proceeding therefore 1 find no reason to disbelieve evidence of. management's witness. The action of the management therefore cannot be said illegal. For above reasons, I record my finding in Affirmative.
In the result, I pass the following award:—
(1) The action of the management of WCL in dismissing Shri Prabhu Dayal from services w.e.f. 22-5-06 is legal.
(2) Relief prayed by workman is rejected.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer Passed on this 20th. day of June, 2013
1. As per letter dated 3-1-2008 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, .New. Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made. to this Tnbunal under Section -10 of LD. Act, 1947 as per Notification. No. L-22012/306/2007-IR(CM-II). The dispute under reference relates to :
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4675"Whether the action of the management of M/S WCL in \dismissing the services of Shri Lalit Kumar w.e.f. 16-6-05 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?"
2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. The workman failed to appear after service of notice. As per order dated 22-11-2012, 1st party workman is proceeded exparte. Management filed Written Statement.
3. The case of IInd party management disclosed from its Written Statement is that workman was terminated from 16-6,-05. The dispute is referred in 2010 which is a very belated stage. The workman was habitual absentee. Despite of warning letters, there was no improvement in his attendance. Chargesheet was issued to him on 7 12-2002. The workman failed to reply even after service of chargesheet. The DE was conducted by Pench Area Manager G.K.Gupta. Mr. A. Dutta was the Management Representative. The details of Enquiry proceedings and dates of hearings are elaborately given in the Written Statement. It is submitted that the enquiry was proceeded exparte, principles of natural justice were followed. The workman failed to participate in enquiry proceeding and defend him. The services of workman were terminated as per order dated 16-5-05, no appeal was filed by workman. On such ground, it is submitted that the termination of service, of 1st party workman is legal.
4. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below :—
(i) Whether the action of the
management of M/s WCL In Affirmative in dismissing the Services of Shri Lalit Kumar w.e.f. 16-6-05 is legal?
(ii) If so, to what relief the Relief prayed dismissing service of Shri Lalit Kumar w.e.f. 16-6-05 is legal. Therefore I record Point No.1 in Affirmative.
6. In the result, award is passed as under:—
(l) The action of the management of M/S WCL in dismissing the services of Shri Lalit Kumar w.e.f. 16-6-05 is legal:
(2) Relief prayed by workman is rejected.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जुलार्ई, 2013
का.आ. 1657.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स डब्ल्यू सी एल के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 19/1992द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 22012/390/1991-आई आर;सीएम-II]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 11th July, 2013
S.O.1657.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 19/92) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of WCL, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 11-07-2013.
[ No. L-22012/390/1991-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
workman is entitled to?" by workman is
rejected.
REASONS
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/19/92
PRESENT : SHRI R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
General Secretary, S.K.M.S (AITUC), PO Chandametta, Distt. Chhindwara.
. .Workman/Union
Versus
5. The reference is made for adjudication for dismissal of service of workman. However the workman has failed to appear in the proceeding in spite of notice. He is proceeded exparte as per order dated 22-11-2012. The management has filed affidavit of witness Shri Padmakar Paunikar. The witness of the management has stated in writing about the unauthorized absence and Departmental Enquiry held against workman, different notices issued and public notice published is also expressed. The evidence of witness remained unchallenged. The workman failed to participate in the proceeding. I do not find reason to disbelieve the unchallenged evidence of management's witness. There is no evidence to hold that the action of management in The Manager, Chandametta Colliery, PO Chandametta, Distt. Chhindwara
. . . Management4676 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
AWARD
Passed on this 19th day of June, 2013
1. As per letter dated 9-1-92 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made. to this Tribunal under Section -10 of LD. Act, 1947 as per Notification. No. L- 22012/390/91-IR(C-II). The dispute under reference relates to :
"Whether the action of the management i.e. Manager, Chandametta Colliery of WCL, Pench Area, PO Chandametta, Distt. Chhindwara (MP) to stop from work to Smt. Bhagwati Bai D/o Gindu, Ex-Wagon Loader of Chandametta: Colliery w.e.f. 6-1-1974 is proper and justified? If not, to what relief are the said workman is entitled to?" The reference speaks about stopping Smt. Bhagwati Bai w.e.f. 6-1-74 . is incorrect. The reference is liable to be rejected as her name is not appearing in the Form B Register. On said ground, IInd party prays for rejection of claim of the workman.
5. Workman filed rejoinder at Page 7/1 to 7/2 reiterating her earlier pleadings. Management submitted rejoinder at Page 8/1 to 8/5 denying that the workman was its employee, that name of workman was not appearing in the rolls. Rest of all contentions of workman are denied by the management.
6. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as, under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below :—
i) Whether the action of the
management i.e. Manager, In Affirmative Chandametta Colliery of WCL, Pench Area, PO Chandametta Dist. Chhindwara (MP) to stop from work to Smt. Bhagwati Bai D/o Gindu, Ex-Wagon Loader of Chandametta Colliery w.e.f. 6-1-1974 is legal?
(ii) If so, to what relief the Relief prayed
workman is entitled to?" by workman is
rejected.
REASONS
2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. 1st party workman submitted her statement of claim at Page 4/1 to 4/4. The case of 1st party workman is that Bhagwati Bai, D/o Gindu was working as Wagon Loader since seven years. On 7-12-71, she suffered injuries while loading the wagon. Her both hands cut injuries. Her right hand was amputed. Three fingers of left hand were cut. That she was receiving treatment in Burkui Hospital. She was discharge from said Hospital on 13-1-1972. That injury certificate was issue from Hospital on 18-12-1972. From 6-1-74, she had went Parmanand Hospital, Chhindwara for fitting artificial hands. She was receiving treatment in said Hospital from 24-6-74 to 30-6-75 Thereafter workman was sent back to colliery. That she again received treatment for fitting artificial hands during the period 7-4-75 to 11-4-75 even after artificial hands were fitted, she was provided employment by the IInd party. She was asked to produce disability certificate. Thereafter she submitted disability certificate. She was no provided work.
3. The workman further submits that she had narrated her grievance to Central Minister Mr. Kamalnath. He also gave instruction to Branch Manager but workman was not provided work. It is submitted that workman has become unconscious while loading wagon. She fell on regulator and her both hands were amputed. She received treatment in WCL hospital as well as rehabilitation centre, Chhindwara. She was not provided work. That the workman is holding P.F.A/C No. A/4/8/1434. She claims compensation of Rs. 20 Lakhs as IInd party failed to provide work to her.
4. IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 6/1 to 6/3. IInd party denied that workman was working m Its mine. It is denied that she was stopped from work from 6-1-74. That the reference is highly belated as the dispute is referred in 1992, therefore the reference is not tenable. That as per provisions of Coal Mines Nationalisation Act, the liability of WCL is only with regard to such employees who are in the rolls of the private owners on the appointed date i.e. 30-1-72. According to records on 30-1-73, Smt. Bhagwati Bai was not on the rolls of Chandametta Colliery.
7. In order to substantiate her claim, the workman has filed affidavit of her evidence. She has stated in her evidence that she was working as Wagon Loader from 7-12-1971. She had lost her senses while loading wagon and fell on regulator and both hands were amputed. She received treatment in Hospital of Burkui Mines, Injury Certificate was issued to her, she also received treatment in Parmanand Hospital, Chhindwara. She. was admitted for fitting artificial hands at Parmanand Hospital. That she was not provided work despite of repeated request. In her cross- examination, workman says she was doing work of wagon loader from 4 years prior to December 1971. She had received Token No., Identity Card, Coal Card, letter of appointment. That accident slip was prepared. The said document was submitted in hospital. Her hand was amputed in the incident. She did not recollect her number. That about 200 labours were working as Wagon Loader. She has suffered injury prior to nationalization of Mine in 1973. All 200 labours were absorbed in Coal Mines except her. That after she was discharged from hospital, she has gone to Mine office, she was kept sitting in office. She claims ignorance whether after nationalization, list of employees of Private owner was submitted. She also claims to be member of INTUC Union. That her present age is about 60-62 years.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4677The evidence of workman is not supported by any documents. The zerox copies of documents produced by workman about her treatment in hospital and reports, no witness is examined by workman to prove those documents. Therefore those documents cannot be considered as legal evidence.
8. The evidence of management's witness is by nature of denial. Workman was working in IInd party Coal Mines, The witness of the management has stated that name of workman was not appearing in the list of employees received from Private Employer. The witness of the management Rajesh Sharma is not shattered in his cross examination. Contrary suggestion are denied by witness of the management.
9. Learned counsel for IInd party Mr. Shashi submits that the dispute is referred after 18 years highly belated is not tenable. In support of his argument, learned counsel relies in ratio held in case of —
"Assistant Executive Engineer, Karnataka Versus Shivalinga reported in 2002-I-LLJ-457. Their Lordship of the Apex Court dealing with delay and latches held delay of more than 9 years in approaching the Labour Officer was talked in case."
In case of Indian Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. Versus Prahlad Singh reported in 2001-I Supreme court Cases 424, Their Lordship held Industrial Dispute raised after 13 long years of termination of services as no reasonable explanation is given for such delay, the Industrial Tribunal rightly refused to grant any relief. .
In case of Nedungadi bank Ltd. versus K.P.Madhavankutty reported in AIR-2000 SC-839 . Their Lordship held the power of Government to make reference- no time limit prescribed doesnot mean that power can be exercised any point of time, still dispute cannot be referred.
10. In the result, award is passed as under :—
(1) The action of the management i.e. Manager, Chandametta Colliery of WCL, Pench Area, PO Chandametta, Distt Chhindwara (MP) to stop from work to Smt. Bhagwati Bai D/o Gindu, Ex-Wagon Loader of Chandametta Colliery w.e.f. 6-1-1974 is legal.
(2) Relief prayed by workman is rejected.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जुलार्ई, 2013
का.आ. 1658.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, असनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 21/2012द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 22012/31/2012-आई आर;सीएम-II)]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 11th July, 2013
S.O. 1658.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 21/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of J. K. Nagar Colliery, M/s. E.C. Ltd., and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 11-07-2013.
[ No. L-22012/31/2012-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
PRESENT : SHRI JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding
Officer
REFERENCE NO. 21 of 2012
In present case, no record is produced by workman about her employment in Private Employer neither she has produced legal evidence about her employment in WCL- the IInd party after her discharge from hospital. As per her evidence, her both hands were amputed, artificial hands were fitter, she was not provided employment, no documents are produced that her name was appearing in the list of workman received from Private Employer. Her name was not appearing in Form B Register. The workman was stopped from work in 1974 and the dispute is referred in 1992 after almost 18 years. No documents can be preserved for such long time. Considering no evidence on record, long delay in making reference, it is clear that the claim of Ist party is not supported by satisfactory evidence. Therefore action of management cannot be said illegal. For above reasons, I record my finding in Point No.1 in Affirmative.
PARTIES : The management of J.K. Nagar Colliery, M/s. ECL, Burdwan(WB)
Vs.
The Sri D.K. ROUTH, BRANCH Jt. Secy., CMC(HMS), Aradanga, Asansol, (W.B.)4678 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
REPRESENTATIVES :
For the management : Sri P.K. Das, Ld. Advocate
For the union (Workman) : Sri D.K. Routh, Ld.
Representative
INDUSTRY : Coal STATE: West Bengal
Dated - 16-04-13
मैनेजर, सैन्ट्ररल वेयरहाउसग कारपोरेशन, भोपाल के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सी.जी.आई.टी./एल.सी./आर./101/2000द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-06-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 42011/02/2000-आई आर;डीयूद्ध]
AWARD
In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- section(1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/ 31/2012 I.R.(CM-II) dated 19.04.12 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
सोम नाथ, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 11th July, 2013
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of J. K. Nagar Colliery of M/s. ECL in not payment HRA @ 10% of Basic Pay to Sri Taran Chandra Paul while he was posted at J. K. Nagar, Raniganj is fair and justified? To what relief the concerned workman is entitled to ?"
S.O.1659.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/101/2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of the Regional Manager, Central Warehousing Corporation, Bhopal and their workman which was received by the Central Government on 28-06-2013.
[ No. L-42011/02/2000-IR(DU)]
SOM NATH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABLPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/101/2000
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/31/ 2012-I.R. (CM-II) dated 19.04.12 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 21 of 2012 was registered on 08-05-12 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that Sri D.K. Routh, Branch Jt. Secretary of the Union, has prayed for the closure of the case as the workman is not interested to proceed with the case. Since "the workman is not interested to proceed with the case, the case is closed and accordingly an order of "No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
SHRI R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
General Secretary, Central Warehousing Corporation Employees Union, C/o Central Ware housing Corporation, 52-53, Amar Niwas, Bhopal (MP) .....Workman/Union
Versus
ORDER
Let an "Award" be and the same is passed as "No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAY ANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जुलार्ई, 2013
का.आ. 1659.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार रीजनल Personnel Manager, Central Warehousing Corporation, 4/1, Siri Institutional Area, Hauz Khas, New Delhi.
Regional Manager, Central Warehousing Corporation, Regional Office, 52-53, Amar Niwas, Bhopal (MP)
....Managements[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4679
AWARD
Passed on this 20th day of March 2013
1. As per letter dated 2-6-2000 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-42011/ 2/2000/IR(M). The dispute under reference relates to:
"Whether the action of the management of Central Warehousing Corporation in transferring and relieving Shri G.S.Gupta, Shri Mansingh, Shri Indal Singh and Shri Sureshchand from their respective places by way of using colourable exercise of power and unfair labour practice is justified? If not, to what relief the workmen are entitled?"
2. After receipt of reference and notices issued to the parties, the Union filed statement of claim at Page 2/1 to 2/6. The contention of the Union is that there is no transfer policy in establishment of Central Ware Housing Corporation. The IInd party management is using transfer as tool to victimize the members of this Trade Union. That the IInd party is empowered to transfer Class-IV staff but such power cannot be used to favour one set of workers. It is alleged that IInd party has shown favour to members of unrecognized Union and members of 1st party Union are encouraged to join membership of unrecognized Union. That staff from Khandwa and other sector is transferred without providing substitute. The orders are cancelled or kept in abeyance to create vacancies at Khandwa. That IInd party contravened provisions of I.D.Act, committed unfair labour practice in Schedule IV by encouraging members of Trade Union discriminating the workman. The transfer is malafide. That Ilnd party issued instructions to Ware House Manager, Satna to relieve Shri Suresh Chandra. That Shri Jagmohan is still enjoying stay who is member of the unrecognized Union. The grievances was submitted before ALC(C), Bhopal IInd party arranged to relieve Iqbal Ali for Khandwa. He has not joined. It is alleged that Shri Mansingh from Gwalior, Shri Vijay Kumar from Morena, Shri D. K. Shukla from Morena, Shri Home Singh from Indore, Shri O. P. Singh from Indore, Shri Bharat Singh, Morena and Shri Nepal Singh, Morena are transferred. Their transfer is stayed or cancelled to favour of unrecognized Union. The transfer order are issued by way of victimazation. Union prayed for setting aside the same.
3. IInd party/management filed Written Statement denying allegations of 1st party/workman, That the Corporation has its own recruitment rules and service conditions duly approved by the Government and notified in the Gazette of India. The services of the employees are governed under these regulations called CWC Staff Regulations 1986. The corporation has 17 Regional offices all over the country and Bhopal region is one of them which is running 38 units in different parts of MP and Chhattisgarh State. That Bhopal Region has a biggest Warehouse. That warehouse Khandwa has a capacity of 90,000 MT. FCI is major depositor at Khandwa. That prior to posting of three employees namely Shri G.S.Gupta, Mansingh, and Suresh Chandra, there were only 3 JTAs against sanctioned strength of 16 JTAs for the preservation of the food grain at Central Warehouse Khandwa. That the pesticide treatment and fumigation work cannot be carried out to preserve heavy stock of foodgrain. Keeping in view the pressing need of technical staff at CWC, Khandwa the management issued transfer order leading to the dispute by Union. It is submitted that the transfer orders of those persons have been issued without malafide intention. The allegations are denied. The detailed reasons in respect of transfer of Shri Shri G.S.Gupta, Shri Mansingh, Shri Indal Singh and Shri Sureshchand are given. It is denied that members of the unrecognized Union are shown favour and for encouraging its membership, the transfer orders are issued by way of victimization. IInd party/management prays for rejection of claim of 1st party.
4. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below :—
(i) Whether the management
of Central Warehousing In Negative Corporation in transferring and relieving Shri G. S. Gupta, Shri Mansingh, Shri Indal Singh and Shri Sureshchand from their respective places by way of using colourable exercise of power and unfair labour practice is justified?
(ii) If not, what relief the work- Claim of 1st Party
man is entitled to ?" is rejected.
5. Ist party/Union challenging order of transfer of 4 of its members Shri G.S.Gupta, Shri Mansingh, Shri Indal Singh and Shri Sureshchand alleging that the transfer orders are issued to victimize members of the Union with malafide intention. It is alleged that orders are issued to encourage membership of unrecognized Union. That transfer is not condition of service. IInd party is contending that the transfer orders are issued considering need of the trained staff for protection of stocks at CWC, Khandra. Union has failed to adduce evidence. Union is proceeded exparte on 6-4-2011. The management filed affidavit of witness 8hri Mritunjoy Kumar Verma covering all its contentions that the transfer orders are issued considering the requirement of staff.
6. The allegations of Union that transfer orders are issued with malafide intention or by way of victimization in colourable exercise of powers are not supported by any4680 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] evidence. Therefore allegation of Union cannot be accepted. For above reasons, I record my finding on Point No.1 in Negative.
Divisional Railway Manager, South Eastern Railway, Bilaspur
. . . Management
AWARD
7. In the result, award is passed as under:—
"(1) The transfer order of Shri G.S.Gupta, Shri Mansingh, Shri Indal Singh and Shri Sureshchand issued by management of Central Ware Housing Corporation is legal.
(2) Relief prayed by 1st party/Union is rejected."
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जुलार्ई, 2013
का.आ. 1660.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार डिवीशनल रेलवे मैनेजर, विलासपुर के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक अध्किरण जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सी.जी.आई.टी./एल.सी./आर./139/93द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-06-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 41012/54/1992-आई आर;डीयू]
सोम नाथ, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 11th July, 2013
S.O. 1660.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/139/93) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of The Divisional Railway Manager, Bilaspur and their workman which was received by the Central Government on 28-06-2013.
[ No. L-41012/54/1992-IR(DU)]
SOM NATH, Section Officer Passed on this 2nd day of May, 2013
1. As per letter dated 21-1-93 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L-41012/54/92-IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:
"Whether the action of the management of South Eastern Railway, Bilaspur Division in terminating the services of Shri Kailash Rao, s/o Late Mukunda Gangman, w.e.f. 29-9-90 is justified? If not, what relief is the workman is entitled to?"
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABLPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/139/93
SHRI R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
Shri Kailash Rao, S/o Late Mukund, Railway Colony, Bhilai-3, Distt. Durg . . .Workman 2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. 1st, party workman submitted his statement of claim at page 3/1 to 3/6 of record. The case of 1st party workman is that he was appointed on 24-2-90 as Gangman as per appointment letter dated 31-2-90. Howeveer without giving any order in writing, his services were orally terminated w.e.f. 29-9-90. He submits that he was continued in service without break, without assigning any reason, was prevented from doing duties. That he was going to the office of the IInd party. That he was orally prohibited from duty. That there can be no oral tennination order. That in absence of order of termination in writing, it is deemed to be in service. That orally he was informed that his services were terminated for using incorrect casual cards. According to him, casual cards are not precedent for employment and that could not be a reason for terminating his services. That he was not allowed reasonable opportunity. To explain his case, he has referred to case held in AIR 1978-SC-597— Maneka Gandhi Versus Union of India., He. has also quoted ratio held in case of Divisional Suptd., Central Railway, Jabalpur in 1969 (1) LLJ- 705. He reiterated that oral termination without giving opportunity of hearing is illegal. The termination of his service amounts to retrenchment of I.D. Act. The Railways are employing many persons without giving chance to him. That he was working in regular post, vacancies are still existing. Hundreds of persons similarly situated are retrenched in service. Only some persons are removed on ground of submitting false card. Their termination is unjust, unfair and violative of article 14 of the Costitution. That he had completed 120 days service and attained temporary status as provided in Indian Railway Establishment Manual. He is entitled to certain rights as in Para 2.5.11 of Railway Establishment Manual. It is submitted that the services of workman cannot be terminated on charges of obtaining employment producing false document without following procedure in the department
Versus
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4681rules. He submits that his termination from service is violative of natural justice and mandatory provisions of law. He also submits that his services are terminated in violation of Section 25-F of I.D. Act. He was not served with notice. No retrenchment compensation was paid. That in several other cases filed before CAT at Jabalpur the orders were passed holding the termination order illegal. Workman prays similar relief of reinstatement with back wages with regularization of service.
3. IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 6/1 to 6/7. It is case of Ilnd party that 1st party was engaged as casual Gangman from 14-2-90 subject to conditions that if the documents produced by him are found false at any time during their engagement, their service would be terminated automatically without any notice. The service certificate produced by him was found bogus. His services is terminated from 25-9-90 as per conditions in the deptt. rules and services. 150 candidates were terminated including the 1st party workman.
6. Though termination in reference show from 29-9-90, as per pleadings termination is from 25-9-90. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below:—
(i) Whether the action of the In Affirmative management of South Eastern Railway, Bilaspur Division in terminating the services of Shri Kailash Rao, s/o Late Mukunda Gangman, w.e.f. 25-9-90 is justified?
(ii) If so, to what relief the Ist party workman workman is entitled to?" is not entitled to
relief prayed by him.
REASONS
4. It is submitted that 1st party workman was not holding civil post under Union of India nor he held any civil post earlier. The case of the applicant was of forgery with the Railway Administration. He was not an employee, he is not entitled to protection under I.D. Act, 1947. It is reiterated that 1st party workman was engaged as casual gangman on daily rate of pay. He was posted under the CPWI Abhanpur on 24 2-90. The workman was engaged subject to the condition laid down in the appointment letter. As the service certificate is found false after verification, his services are terminated from 25-9-90. The above facts are the repeated in the Written Statement. The certificate of service produced by employees found genuine after verification of service. That out of 861 casual candidates, services of 150 casual candidates were terminated as the certificate produced by them were found false after verification. Other contentions of 1st party workman are denied. It is denied that 1st party workman is entitled to reinstatement. That workman had not completed 240 days continuous service. IInd party prayed for rejection of the relief prayed by 1st party workman.
5. Ist party workman filed rejoinder at page 7/1 to 7/2. It is not correct that the workman was not employed only on the basis of the past service card. There is no rule or regulation in Railway requiring production of casual labour card for the purpose of appointment. Workman was not aware of the said documents. He denies that he had submitted false and fabricated document of service card. It is denied that his claim is not permissible under I.D. Act. It is submitted that he had not obtained appointment by producing false card. That the termination on the allegation of producing false service card casting stigma and therefore Departmental Enquiry is necessary. He further submits that principles of natural justice was violated and terminated his services.
7. Ist party workman is challenging his termination w.e.f. 29-9-90 for the allegations being produced false service certificate/casual labour card. It is contented by him that he was not given any opportunity before terminating the services nor enquiry was held, no notice was issued, principles of natural justice violated, action of management is violative of Article 20 of the Constitution of India. All those contentions are denied by IInd party. However IInd party has not disputed that 1st party workman was engaged as casual labour from 14-2-90 and his services were terminated from 25-9-90. The workman had worked for about 7 months 11 days. Workman filed affidavit of evidence covering his contentions in Statement of claim. The date of his appointment and termination shows that he has completed 120 days service, he had attained status of temporary employee as per statutory provisions contained in Indian Railway Establishment Manual- Para 2511. In his affidavit of evidence, he has stated that he has never submitted casual card for getting employment as casual labour. That there is no rule or regulation in Railway which require casual labour card for getting appointment. He has stated that similar cases were filed before CAT, Jabalpur. It was held that the service of casual employee was terminated on the ground that he had obtained employment by producing false card without holding enquiry. In his evidence in cross-examination, Ist party workman says that in para-4 of the affidavit of evidence contents relates to casual labour card and not require for purpose of employment, no questions are asked with respect to other averments of 1st party workman. However the copy of appointment order Exhibit M-1 finds clear condition that the working certificate/caste certificate/service certificate if found false at any time during their engagement the service will be terminated automatically without any notice. Para in bottom of Exhibit M-1 finds clear reference4682 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] to past service certificate/service certificates. The said appointment order was issued on 14-2-90 as stated by 1st party in his statement of claim and affidavit of evidence, it is clear that if the casual labour card found service, the services are liable to be terminated without notice. The documents Exhibit M-2 is the order of termination dated 25-9-90 refers to the discharge of 1st party workman. The reason shown against his name is "produced false certificate".
8. The evidence of management's witness Shri R.S. Bepari on affidavit has stated that the false casual gangmen after bifurcation from Bilaspur Division, all cases of Raipur Division related to false cases of gangmen were transferred to Raipur. Similar cases were filed before CAT, Jabalpur and the matters were taken before Hon'ble High Court, Chhattisgarh. Which were remitted back by to CAT, Jabalpur and are pending. That appointment were made with the condition that if the certificate submitted by them were false, their services will be automatically terminated. The files and documents were stolen from the chamber of Administrative Officer, Shri Bhasker Rao by breaking the lock of the Almirah. FIR was filed by the management. In his cross-examination, the management's witness says that he was not working when the employee were discharged. The engagement letter were given as casual gangman. The fake certificate were stolen from the office of the Railway. He was unable to tell from which place those certificates were issued. For security of record, no guard was posted. Deliberation was made and certificates were found fake. He was unable to tell the name of the Verifying Officer. That he had seen verification report and report on its basis. In view of the verification report, documents were found fake. In case of casual employee, it is not necessary to hold departmental enquiry.
9. Learned counsel for 1st party workman Mr. Shashi heavily emphasized that the employee was not given opportunity of hearing. That even 240 days service is not completed. The dispute is tenable. That the services of 1st party workman are terminated on the ground that he submitted false certificate casting stigma, no enquiry was held, no opportunity of hearing was given and therefore the allegation of cheating, forgery were made. Therefore the termination of service is illegal. In reply, learned counsel for Ilnd party management supports the order of termination. That 1st party workman has not completed 240 days, he is not holding civil post. Ist party workman is not entitled to protection of article 311 of the constitution of India. That his services are not governed by CCS Rules and prays for rejection of relief prayed by Ist party workman.
10. Learned counsel for 1st party Mr. Shashi relies
on—
Ratio held in the case of Nepal Singh Versus State of U.P reported in AIR 1990 Supreme Court 1459.
Their Lordship of the Apex Court held an order terminating the services of a temporary Government servant and ex facie innocuous in that it does not cast any stigma on the Government Servant or visits him with penal consequences must be regarded as effecting a termination simpliciter, but it is discovered on the basis of material adduced that although innocent in its terms the order was passed infact with a view to punishing the Government servant, it is a punitive order which can be passed only after complying with Article 311.
From reading para-2 of the judgment, it is clear that case before their Lordship was relating to temporary Sub Inspector of Police posted at Shajapur. 1st party workman is not holding any civil post, he was not regular employee of the Railway. Therefore Article 311 is not applicable in the present case.
From reading of Article 311, it is clear that the said article only extends protection to the person who is member of Civil Service of Union and All India Service or Civil Service of State or holds a civil post under Union of a State. Therefore the ratio in above cited case cannot be applied to the case at my hand.
11. Next reliance is placed by Mr. Shashi in ratio held
in case of—
Shri Anoop Jaiswal versus Government of India and Another reported in 1984(2) Supreme Court Cases 369. Their Lordship held order punitive in nature which in absence of any proper enquiry amounted to violation of Article 311 (2) of the Constitution, hence the order is liable to be set aside to be reinstated in service with full benefits. The case before their Lordship relate to appointment of probationer as IPS Officer. Delay was alleged on his part for P.T/unarmed combat practice.
'The workman was engaged as casual labour hardly worked for about 7 months, was not holding any civil post therefore the ratio in above cited case cannot be applied to the present case at hand.
In case of Bhagwan Singh Rawat versus State of MP and Others reported in 2003(4) M.P.H.T. 309, the allegation against petitioner is of making demand of illegal gratification. Removal from the post of Agriculture Member. It was held by his Lordship that until unless petitioner is found guilty of demanding illegal gratification and charge is established petitioner could not be fastened with the penalty of removal.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4683As the workman is not holding any civil post neither he is regular employee of the Railway, the ratio held in the case cannot be applied to the present case at hand.
Reliance is placed on ratio held in case of Radha Mohan Goswami and others versus State of Madhya Pradesh and others reported in 2004(2) M.P.H.T. 49. His Lordship considering the petitioners were appointed on daily wage basis, the same persons were appointed on daily wage. In compliance of these orders they joined their posts. Suddenly order of regularization in favour of employees cancelled on 10-6-2003. Against this cancellation, his Lordship held right accrued to petitioners when the order was passed on 3-6-2003. An administrative order having adverse effect on accrued right of employee without giving him opportunity of hearing is unsustainable. Hence order dated 10-6-2003 cancelling order of regularization dated 3-6-03 was quashed.
In present case, 1st party workman was never regularized. The facts of above cited case are not comparable. The facts of the above said case cannot be beneficially applied to the case at hand.
12. Counsel for IInd party Shri Tripathi has produced
copy of Indian Railway Establishment—
Para 2001 Clause I(b) provides that casual labours are also engaged on Railways for execution of Railway projects, such as new lines, doubling, conversion, construction of buildings, track renewals, route relay interlocking Railway electrification, Setting up of new units etc. Casual Labour so engaged are referred to as project Casual Labour. Such of those casual labour engaged on open line (revenue) works, who continue to do the same work for which they were engaged or other work of the same type for more than 120 days without a break will be treated a temporary on completion of 120 days continuous employment.
However Para-2004 of the said manual provides that notice is necessary under any statutory obligation, no notice is required for termination of service of casual labour.
Condition in Exhibit M-l shows that if the service certificate produced by such gangman found false after verification. The services are liable to be terminated without notice. 1st party workman accepted the said appointment order and joined the service therefore said condition No.1 is binding on him. He cannot be permitted to claim contrary to the said condition. That the copies of judgment in several matter by Hon'ble CAT, Ahmadabad and Jabalpur are produced on record but the judgment in R/191/91 by CGIT, Jabalpur, the facts are not comparable and the jurisdiction of CAT is wide whereas the jurisdiction of this Tribunal is limited to decide the reference under I.D. Act. Therefore the judgments delivered by CAT in different cases are not binding.
13. Rule 3(1) of CCS Rules clearly provides that those
rules are not applicable to the Railway servant.
14. The legal position with respect to the jurisdiction, powers of Central Administrative Tribunal together provided in Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunal's Act, 1985 is clear that the casual labours acquiring temporary status does not become a temporary Railway Servant or a member of Railway Service Card holder under Railway. Section 14 (1)(A) is not attracted to the consideration of the Tribunal.
15. Learned counsel for 1st party Mr. Shashi during further course of argument submitted that 1st party workman is covered under Sectin 2(s) of I.D. Act. The establishment of IInd party is covered as Industry under Section 2(j) of the I.D. Act. That the dispute defined under Section 2(k) covers difference between employees employer between employers and workman etc. The appropriate Government is Central Government, reference is made. The reference is tenable. The services were terminated without notice or giving opportunity of hearing. Therefore the termination of service of 1st party workman is illegal. Chapter V-A of I.D. Act dealing with retrenchment under Section 25-B of I.D. Act provides continuous service within meaning of clause (1) for a period of one year if the employee worked for 240 days during preceding 12 calendar months. 1st party workman has not completed 240 days continuous service therefore he is not covered as workman under Section 25(B) of I.D. Act. For said reason, 1st party workman is not entitled to protection under Section 25-F clause (a), (b) of I.D. Act. He is not entitled to notice prior to his termination or retrenchment compensation provided under clause (b)b of Section 25 F. That when service certificate produced by him is found false, no notice is required as per the condition in Exhibit M-l. For above reasons, I record finding on Point No.1 in Affirmative.
16. Point No.2— In view of my finding in Point No.1 that the termination of services of 1st party workman is legal, the workman is not entitled to any relief prayed by him. Accordingly I record in my finding on point No. 2.
17. In the result, award is passed as under :—
(1) Termination of 1st party workman Shri Kailash Rao w.e.f. 29-9-90 by IInd party management is legal.
(2) Reliefs prayed by 1st party workman Shri Kailash
Rao is rejected.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer4684 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] नई दिल्ली, 11 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1661.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार डिविजनल रेलवे मैनेजर, बिलासपुर के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी/एलसी/आर/154/96द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-6-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[पफा. सं. एल-41012/24/1992-आई आर ;डीयूद्ध]
सोम नाथ, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 11th July, 2013
S.O. 1661.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/154/96) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of The Divisonal Railway Manager, Bilaspur and their workman which was received by the Central Government on 28-6-2013.
[ F. No. L-41012/24/1992-IR(DU)]
SOM NATH, Section Officer Section-10 of I.D. Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L-41012/24/92-IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to :
"Whether the action of the management of DRM, S. E. Railway, Bilaspur in terminating the services of Shri P.Venkatswamy is legal and justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?"
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/R/154/96
SHRI R.B. P ATLE : Presiding Officer
Shri P.Venkatswamy, Cut Cabin, Rameshwar Nagar, Bhanpuri, PO WRS, Raipur .......Workman
Versus
Divisional Railway Manager, South Eastern Railway, Bilaspur .......Management
AWARD
Passed on this 2nd day of May 2013
1. As per letter dated 6-8-96 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under 2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. Ist party workman submitted his statement of claim at page 2/1 to 2/4 of record. The case of Ist party workman is that he was appointed on 15- 2-90 as Gangman as per appointment letter dated 15-2-90. However without giving any order in writing, his services were orally terminated w.e.f. 19-4-90. He submits that he was continued in service without break, without assigning any reason, was prevented from doing duties. That he was going to the office of the IInd Party. That he was orally prohibited from duty. That there can be no oral termination order. That in absence of order of termination in writing, it is deemed to be in service. That orally he was informed that his services were terminated for using incorrect casual cards. According to him, casual cards are not precedent for employment and that could not be a reason for terminating his services. That he was not allowed reasonable opportunity. To explain his case, he has referred to case held in AIR 1978-SC-597 - Maneka Gandhi Versus Union of India. He has also quoted ratio held in case of Divisional Suptd., Central Railway, Jabalpur in 1969 (1) LLJ-705. He reiterated that oral termination without giving opportunity of hearing is illegal. The termination of his service amounts to retrenchment of I.D.Act. The Railways are employing many persons without giving chance to him. That he was working in regular post, vacancies are still existing. Hundreds of persons similarly situated are retrenched in service. Only some persons are removed on ground of submitting false card. Their termination is unjust, unfair and violative of article 14 of the Constitution. That he had completed 120 days service and attained temporary status as provided in Indian Railway Establishment Manual. He is entitled to certain rights as in Para 2-5- 11 of Railway Establishment Manual . It is submitted that the services of workman cannot be terminated on charges of obtaining employment producing false document without following procedure in the department rules. He submits that his termination from service is violative of natural justice and mandatory provisions of law. He also submits that his services are terminated in violation of Section 25-F of I.D. Act. He was not served with notice. No retrenchment compensation was paid. That in several other cases filed before CAT at Jabalpur the orders were passed holding the termination order illegal. Workman prays similar relief of reinstatement with back wages with regularization of service.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 46853. IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 7/1 to 7/6. It is case of IInd party that Ist party was engaged as casual Gangman from 15-2-90 subject to conditions that if the documents produced by him are found false at any time during their engagement, their service would be terminated automatically without any notice. The service certificate produced by him was found bogus. His services is terminated from 19-4-90 as per conditions in the deptt. rules and services. 150 candidates were terminated including the Ist party workman.
4. It is submitted that Ist party workman was not holding civil post under Union of India nor he held any civil post earlier. The case of the applicant was of forgery with the Railway Administration. He was not an employee, he is not entitled to protection under I.D. Act, 1947. It is reiterated that Ist party workman was engaged as casual gangman on daily rate of pay. He was posted under the CPWI Abhanpur on 15- 2-90. The workman was engaged subject to the condition laid down in the appointment letter. As the service certificate is found false after verification, his services are terminated from 19-4-90. The above facts are the repeated in the Written Statement. The certificate of service produced by employees found genuine after verification of service That out of 861 casual candidates, services of 150 casual candidates were terminated as the certificate produced by them were found false after verification. Other contentions of Ist party workman are denied. It is denied that Ist party workman is entitled to reinstatement. That workman had not completed 240 days continuous service. IInd party prayed for rejection of the relief prayed by Ist party workman.
5. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below:—
(i) Whether the action InAffirmative of the management of South Eastern Railway, Bilaspur Division terminating the services of Shri P.Venkatswamy w.e.f. 19-4-90 is justified?
(ii) If so, to what relief Ist party workman is workman is entitled to?" not entitled to relief prayed by him.
was issued, principles of natural justice violated, action of management is violative of Article 20 of the Constitution of India. All those contentions are denied by IInd party. However IInd party has not disputed that Ist party workman was engaged as casual labour from 15-2-90 and his services were terminated from 19-4-90 .. Workman filed affidavit of evidence covering his contentions in Statement of claim. Ist party workman in his evidence on affidavit has stated that he was appointed on 15-2-90 as Gangman. His services were terminated from 19-4-90. He hardly worked for 2 months, 4 days. Casual cards are not condition precedent for employment. Termination of his services without hearing is nullity. That he was working on regular post and vacancies are still existing. His termination amounts to retrenchment. His services are terminated without enquiry or without giving opportunity of hearing mandatory provisions of Section 25-F not complied. He should have been afforded opportunity of hearing/defence. Workman in his cross-examination says that he was appointed in February 1983, 2nd time he was appointed on 1990, he worked for 2 months, he was not told reasons for termination. He himself has not pleaded in his statement of claim about bogus service certificate, it is written by Advocate. No FIR was submitted against him. That he has submitted certificate of date of birth. The appointment letter is produced along with affidavit of management's witness Shri R.S. Bepari. Condition No.1 provides if the service certificate found false, their services will be terminated without notice. The past service certificate finds reference. In bottom para of the appointment order, Ist party workman accepted such conditions and joined the service.
7. The evidence of management's witness Shri Lingaraj rout is filed covering all contents in Written statement filed by the management. His evidence in cross-examination shows that he has no personal knowledge about the termination/discharge. He has filed affidavit of evidence on the basis of available record. He only claim ignorance whether appointment order was produced on record or not. He has no knowledge about the verification of the certificate.
REASONS
6. Ist party workman is challenging his termination w.e.f. 19-4-90 for the allegations being produced false service certificate/casual labour card. It is contented by him that he was not given any opportunity before terminating the services nor enquiry was held no notice 8. Learned counsel for Ist party workman Mr. Shashi heavily emphasized that the employee was not given opportunity of hearing. That even 240 days service is not completed. The dispute is tenable.That the services of Ist party workman are terminated on the ground that he submitted false certificate casting stigma, no enquiry was held, no opportunity of hearing was given and therefore the allegation of cheating, forgery were made. Therefore the termination of service is illegal. In reply, learned counsel for IInd party management supports the order of termination. That Ist party workman has not completed 240 days, he is not holding civil post. Ist party workman is not entitled to protection of article 3114686 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] of the constitution of India. That his services are not governed by CCS Rules and prays for rejection of relief prayed by Ist party workman.
9. Learned counsel for Ist party Mr. Shashi relies
on—
Ratio held in the case of Nepal Singh Versus State of U.P. reported in AIR 1990 Supreme Court 1459. Their Lordship of the Apex Court held an order terminating the services of a temporary Government servant and ex-facie innocuous in that it does not cast any stigma on the Government Servant or visits him with penal consequences must be regarded as effecting a termination simpliciter, but it is discovered on the basis of material adduced that although innocent in its terms the order was passed infact with a view to punishing the Government servant, it is a punitive order which can be passed only after complying with Article 311.
From reading para-2 of the judgment, it is clear that case before their Lordship was relating to temporary Sub Inspector of Police posted at Shajapur. Ist party workman is not holding any civil post, he was not regular employee of the Railway. Therefore Article 311 is not applicable in the present case.
From reading of Article 311, it is clear that the said article only extends protection to the person who is member of Civil Service of Union and All India Service or Civil service of State or holds a civil post under Union of a State. Therefore the ratio in above cited case cannot be applied to the case at my hand.
10. Next reliance is placed by Mr. Shashi in ratio
held in case of—
Shri Anoop Jaiswal versus Government of India and another reported in 1984(2) Supreme Court Cases 369. Their Lordship held order punitive in nature which in absence of any proper enquiry amounted to violation of Article 311 (2) of the Constitution, hence the order is liable to be set aside to be reinstated in service with full benefits. The case before their Lordship relate to appointment of probationer as IPS Officer. Delay was alleged on his part for P.T/unarmed combat practice.
The workman was engaged as casual labour hardly worked for about 2 months, was not holding any civil post therefore the ratio in above cited case cannot be applied to the present case at hand.
In case of Bhagwan Singh Rawat versus State of MP and Others reported in 2003(4) M.P.H.T. 309, the allegation against petitioner is of making demand of illegal gratification. Removal from the post of Agriculture Member. It was held by his Lordship that until unless petitioner is found guilty of demanding illegal gratification and charge is established petitioner could not be fastened with the penalty of removal.
As the workman is not holding any civil post neither he is regular employee of the Railway, the ratio held in the case cannot be applied to the present case at hand.
Reliance is placed on ratio held in case of Radha Mohan Goswami and Others versus State of Madhya Pradesh and Others reported in 2004(2) M.P.H.T. 49. his Lordship considering the petitioners were appointed on daily wage basis, the same persons were appointed on daily wage. In compliance of these orders they joined their posts. Suddenly order of regularization in favour of employees cancelled on 10-6-2003. Against this cancellation, his Lordship held right accrued to petitioners when the order was passed on 3-6-2003.An administrative order having adverse effect on accrued right of employee without giving him opportunity of hearing is unsustainable. Hence order dated 10-6-2003 cancelling order of regularization dated 3-6-2003 was quashed.
In present case, Ist party workman was never regularized. The facts of above cited case are not comparable. The facts of the above said case cannot be beneficially applied to the case at hand.
11. Counsel for IInd party Shri Tripathi has
produced copy of Indian Railway Establishment.
Para 2001 Clause I(b) provides that casual labours are also engaged on Railways for execution of Railway projects, such as new lines, doubling, conversion, construction of buildings, track renewals, route relay interlocking Railway electrification. Setting up of new units etc. Casual Labour so engaged are referred to as project Casual Labour. Such of those casual labour engaged on open line (Revenue) works, who continue to do the same work for which they were engaged or other work of the same type for more than 120 days without a break will be treated as temporary on completion of 120 days continuous employment.
However Para-2004 of the said manual provides that notice is necessary under any statutory obligation, no notice is required for termination of service of casual labour.
Condition in Exhibit M-l shows that if the service certificate produced by such gangman found false after verification. The services are liable to be terminated without notice. 1st party workman accepted the said[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4687 appointment order and joined the service therefore said condition No.1 is binding on him. He cannot be permitted to claim contrary to the said condition. That the copies of judgment in several matter by Hon'ble CAT, Ahmedabad and Jabalpur are produced on record but the judgment in R/191/91 by CGIT, Jabalpur, the facts are not comparable and the jurisdiction of CAT is wide whereas the jurisdiction of this Tribunal is limited to decide the reference under I.D. Act. Therefore the judgments delivered by CAT in different cases are not binding.
12. Rule 3(1) of CCS Rules clearly provides that those rules are not applicable to the Railway servant.
13. The legal position with respect to the jurisdiction, powers of Central Administrative Tribunal together provided in Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunal's Act, 1985 is clear that the casual labours acquiring temporary status does not become a temporary Railway Servant or a member of Railway Service Card holder under Railway. Section 14(1)(A) is not attracted to the consideration of the Tribunal.
15. In the result, award is passed as under :—
(1) Termination of 1st party workman Shri P. Venkatswamy w.e.f. 19-4-90 by Ilnd party management is legal.
(2) Reliefs prayed by 1st party workman Shri P.
Venkatswamy is rejected.
16. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment as per rules.
R.B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 12 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1662.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार करूर वैश्या बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, चेन्नई के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 102/2003द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12011/27/2002-आई आर ;बी-Iद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 12th July, 2013
S.O. 1662.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 102/ 2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Karur Vysya, Bank Ltd., and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 12-7-2013
[ No. L-12011/27/2002-IR(B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM -LABOUR COURT,
CHENNAI
Thursday, the 25th April, 2013
PRESENT :
A.N. JANARDANAN, Presiding Officer
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No.102/2003
Learned counsel for 1st party Mr. Shashi during further course of argument submitted that 1st party workman is covered under Seetion 2(s) of I.D. Act. The establishment of IInd party is covered as Industry under Section 2 (j) of the I.D. Act. That the dispute defined under Section 2(k) covers difference between employees employer between employers and workman etc. The appropriate Government is Central Government, reference is made. The reference is tenable. The services were terminated without notice or giving opportunity of hearing. Therefore the termination of service of 1st party workman is illegal. Chapter V-A of I.D. Act dealing with retrenchment under Section 25-B of I.D. Act provides continuous service within meaning of clause (1) for a period of one year if the employee worked for 240 days during preceding 12 calendar months. 1st party workman has not completed 240 days continuous service therefore he is not covered as workman under Section 25(B) of I.D. Act. For said reason, 1st party workman is not entitled to protection under Section 25-F clause-(a), (b) of I.D. Act. He is not entitled to notice prior to his termination or retrenchment compensation provided under clause (b) of Section 25-F. That when service certificate produced by him is found false, no notice is required as per the condition in Exhibit M-l. For above reasons, I record finding on Point No.1 in Affirmative.
14. Point No. 2—In view of my finding in Point No.1 that the termination of services of 1st party workman is legal, the workman is not entitled to any relief prayed by him. Accordingly I record in my finding on point No. 2.
[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 Karur Vysya Bank and their Workman.]4688 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
BETWEEN
1. The General Secretary 1st Party/1st Petitioner
All Banks Appraisers Union Federation No.1, Kattiyakaran Street Cuddalore-607002
2. The General Secretary 1st Party/2nd Petitioner
Karur Vysya Bank Union Employees Union 5, IV Street, Sowrastra Nagar, Choolaimedu Chennai-600094
AND
The Chairman 2nd Party/Management Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. (Head Office) Karur -639002
the Tribunal shall be free to proceed with the reference already made to which the Respondent No. 1- Bank Employees Union has already been added as a party. In view of the withdrawal of the said writ petitions and revival of the reference made by the Central Government, it will be unnecessary for the Union of India to make a second reference on the very same questions as are pending before the Tribunal."
APPEARANCE:
For the 1st and 2nd Party/Petitioner Union
M/s. V. Ajoy Khose and S. Manogaran, Advocates
For the 2nd Party/Management
M/s. T.S. Gopalan & Co., Advocates
AWAR D
The Central Government, Ministry of Labour and Employment vide its Order No. L-12011/27/2002-IR(B-I) dated 29-04-2003 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication.
The schedule mentioned in that order is :
"Whether the demand of the All India Bank Appraisers Federation, Tamil Nadu to regularize the services of Jewel Appraisers (as per annexure) is the Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. is legal and justified? If so, what relief the workmen are entitled to?" 3. The common case of both the petitioners in their separate Claim Statement and Reply Statement in a nutshell is that the jewel appraisers of the Respondent Bank establishment are legally and factually entitled to be regularized for the grounds and reasons set forth in the Claim Statement as permanent employees in the respective branches of the Respondent Bank with all service and monetary benefits thereto and therefore it is prayed that the reference may be answered passing an award in favour of petitioners directing the Respondent Management to regularize service of the Jewel Appraisers as in the annexure (S.No. 1 to 12) with all service monetary benefits, continuity of service, etc. of regular employees. The Hon'ble Supreme Court was pleased to dispose of the Civil Appeal 3292/ 2012 permitting First Party Union No. 2 to agitate their demand for regularization of Jewel Appraisers in I.D. No.1 02/2003. Demand of First Party Union No.2 for regularization of all Jewel Appraisers shall be made direct permanent Clerical Staff with time scale of pay and all other attendant benefits from the date of completion of 480 days of service from the date of their initial appointment .
4. In the separate Counter Statement filed before and after the impleadment of the First Party Union No. 2 what is stated in a nutshell is as follows:
The Jewel Appraisers are neither regular staff nor can they claim regularization in the bank. As per the judgment of the Supreme Court in IOB case there is no scope to hold that the Jewel Appraisers engaged by the Respondent are employed in the service of the Bank. The claim is to be rejected.
5. Points for consideration are :
(i) Whether the claim of the petitioner unions/first party to regularize the service of the Jewel Appraisers in Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. is legal and justified.
(ii) To what relief the concerned workmen are entitled?
Points (i) and (ii)
2. After the receipt of Industrial Dispute, this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 102/2003 and issued notices to both sides. Both sides entered appearance through their Advocates and filed their Claim, Counter and Reply Statement subsequently filing additional Claim Statement and Counter Statement consequent to impleadment of second petitioner/first party in the claim petition as per order dated 11.07.2008 in IA 19/2007 in the ID as confirmed in the order dated 26-03-2012 in Civil Appeal No. 3292 of 2012 arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 6689 of 2007 of the Supreme Court. A relevant extract of the order of the Supreme Court is as follows :
"In the result, therefore, we dispose of this appeal with the observations that the appellant-Bank shall within two weeks from today withdraw Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 22658 and 22659 of 2008, in which event, 6. When the matter came up for further proceedings First Party/2nd Petitioner made an endorsement on the Claim Statement withdrawing the dispute. First Party/1st Petitioner did not present himself for further proceedings in the matter. Heard both sides. Perused the records.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4689New Delhi, the 15th July, 2013
S.O. 1663.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 71/2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Bangalore as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the management of Karnataka Bank Limited, and their workmen received by the Central Government on 15-7-2013.
[ No. L-12012/123/2003-IR(B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
BANGALORE
7. As far as it relates to the First Party/2nd Petitioner, their claim is no longer pursued up for the relief claimed by them for regularization in the Respondent Bank. As far as it relates to the First Party/1st Union, they have not had been in the scene for prosecuting their claim since a long time. It is not established that the workmen whose cause is espoused by the Unions are workmen under the Respondent Bank independent of their isolated status as Jewel Appraisers who are only independent contractors with no employer-employee relationship interse them and the Bank Management. They have failed in carving out an exception to the more or less settled position that Jewel Appraisers are generally not employees of the Bank under which they usually function as independent contractors in terms of specific contracts for employment reached between them in the absence of specific proof in otherwise particular circumstances. Therefore it is only to be held that the claim of the petitioner unions to regularize them and declare them entitled to consequential benefits thereof is not legal and justified. They are therefore not entitled to any relief.
7. The reference is answered accordingly.
Dated : 7th June, 2013
Present :
Shri S. N. Navalgund, Presiding Office
CR No. 71/2008
(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 25th April, 2013).
A. N. JANARDANAN, Presiding Officer Sri B. V. Chandrashekar, .....I Party No. 15/3, Model House Street, IV Street, N. R. Colony, Bangalore-560 004
Witnesses Examined :
For the 1st Party/Petitioner : None
For the 2nd Party/Management : None
Documents Marked :
On the petitioner's side
The Chairman and Managing .....II party Director, Karnataka Bank Limited, HR & IR Dept., P B No. 599, H O, Com., Mahaveer Circle, PO Kankanady, Mangalore - 575 002.
APPEARANCES :
Ex. No. Date Description
N/A
On the Management's side
Ex. No. Date Description
Nil
I Party : Shri S.T. Satheesh Naik,
Advocate
II Party : Shri Ramesh Upadhyaya,
Advocate
AWARD
नई दिल्ली,15 जुलाई,2013
1. The Central Government vide order No. L-12012/ 123/2003- IR(B-I) dated 15.09.2008 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:
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 1663.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार कर्नाटक बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, बंगलौर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 71/2008द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 15-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12012/123/2003-आई आर ;बी-I)]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी "Whether the action of the management of Karnataka Bank Ltd., in removing the petitioner, Shri B.V. Chandrashekar, Special Assistant· from service, is justified? If not to what relief he is entitled?"4690 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 2. On receipt of the reference registering it in C R 71/ 2008 when notices were issued to both the sides they entered their appearances through their respective advocates and I party filed his claim statement on 29-07-2010 and II Party its counter statement on 16-11-2010.
direction to the II Party to reinstate him into his original post granting him all the consequential benefits like reinstatement, full backwages, promotion etc., as if there was no order for removal from services. The II party in its Counter Statement filed on 16-05-2011 without disputing that the I party joined the services as Clerk at its Bangalore Chickpet branch on 06-05-1978 contended that while he was working at its Bangalore City Market Branch in the year 1998 after taking his willingness letter entrusted of duties/promoted as Special Assistant and transferred to Ajampura Branch of Shimoga Region by order dated 23-07-1998 and on receipt of the said order he requested for modification of his transfer to his places of choice and as same was not acceeded to, he got relieved from Bangalore City Market Branch on 08-10-1998 and reported to Ajampur Branch on 10-10-1998 and in the meanwhile he submitted a letter dated 28-09-1998 seeking voluntary retirement and considering the same favourably the acceptance of his voluntary retirement was communicated to him by letter dated 20-11-1998 that he will be retired on 01-04-1999 as requested by him and there after the I Party through his letter dated 14-11-1998 and 02-12-1998 requested to transfer him to any one of the branches in Bangalore and as the same was not acceded to he had written a letter dated 26-11-1998 thanking the management for having accepted his letter for voluntary retirement and for having permitted him to clear his loan liabilities as desired by him. It is further contended though the II party wanted to relieve the I Party prior to 01-04-1999 on his request the effective date for voluntary retirement was fixed to 01-04-1999 to clear the outstanding loans and that by his letter dated 01-03-1999 his request to postpone the date of relieving from 01-04-1999 to 10-05-1999 was rejected he filed suit in O S 65/1999 on the file of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Tarikere seeking declaration of his voluntary retirement as null and void and for permanent injunction from relieving him from services w.e.f. 01-04-1999 and obtained an exparte order of status-quo in the said suit on 31-03-1999 and due to that order he could not be relieved from services w.e.f. 01-04-1999 and as the Hon'ble Court vacated the exparte interim order on 17-04-1999 he stood relieved w.e.f. 01-04-1999. The II party further denying the allegations that the voluntary retirement was created obtaining his signature under the pretext that his request for modification of his transfer order will be favourably considered or under threat or coercion, it is contended that a valid order of acceptance of the voluntary retirement fixing date of relieving on 01-04-1999 was being passed on a specific request he has come up with false allegations, it is prayed to reject the reference.
3. The I party in his claim statement claims that he joined the service as Clerk with the II Party at its Bangalore Chickpet Branch and while he was working at its Bangalore City Market Branch received Office Order dated 23-07-1998 posting him as Special Assistant to Ajampur, Shimoga Branch and being aggrieved by the said order in the middle of the academic session he gave a representation dated 28-07-1998 with a prayer to modify the said order and to accommodate him in anyone of the branches in and around Bangalore City and as the same was neither considered nor rejected he joined the Ajampur Branch on 10-10-1998 as he was threatened with dire consequences of removal from service if he files appeal seeking modification of transfer order. It is further contended that in the meanwhile the II Party which was bent upon to get rid of his services on one or the other pretext under the pretext that his request for modification of orders will be considered favourably obtaining his signatures on blank papers created VRS letter dated 28-09-1998. It is further contended before the actual date of its acceptance he gave voluminous representation seeking continuation of his services but to his shock a letter dated 20-11-1998 was received by him communicating that his VRS letter dated 28-09-1998 is accepted and he will be relieved of his duties from 01-04-1999. Being aggrieved by the said letter he raised an industrial dispute and after elaborate deliberations it ended in failure through failure report dated 04-03-2003 and as no action was taken on the said failure report by the Ministry of Labour he filed a Writ Petition before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in W P No. 36852/2003 wherein the Hon'ble High Court by order dated 08-03-2007 directed the Ministry to consider the failure report and refer the matter for industrial adjudication if warranted, the Central Government made this reference for adjudication. It is further contended under the threat of removal from services and using force, giving tension a letter dated 28-09-1998 was obtained from him as if he seeks voluntary retirement from services and that at the intervention of elders and well wishers he gave a representation dated 28-09-1998 seeking permission to withdraw the alleged voluntary retirement from services under letter dated 28-09-1998 but without giving any reply to the said representation an order dated 28-11-1998 was served on him communicating that his VRS is accepted and he will be relieved from services w.e.f. 01-04-1999 and as he has every right to withdraw the VRS letter before its actual acceptance the action of the II Party is an act of deprivation of his livelihood amounting to termination from services practising of unfair labour practice under Section 2(ra) of I.D. Act 1947. With these averments it is prayed for
4. At the outset, it has to be said that the term used in the schedule of reference "removing the petitioner" appears to be used loosely or inadvertently as it is nobodies case that he is removed from service on any charge as such it ought to have been "relieving the petitioner".
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4691in the light of the arguments put forward by the learned advocates, I have arrived at conclusion of Rejecting the Reference holding that the action of the management of KBL in relieving the petitioner Sh. B. V. Chandrashekar, Special Assistant from service w.e.f. 01-04-1999 pursuant to his request through letter dated 28-09-1998 is legal and justified for the following reasons :
REASONS
5. After completion of the pleadings when the II Party was called upon to adduce evidence justifying its action its learned advocate while filing the affidavit of B Dinesh Bhat, Senior manager, HR & IR Department reiterating the counter statement examining him on oath as MW 1 got exhibited Office copies of the appointment letter relating to I party dated 27-03-1978;Memorandum dated 10-07-1984, 09,.09-1989, 04-05-1994 (04-05-1004) relating to transfer of I Party; Original letter of I party dated 24-06-1998; Office copy of reply dated 17.08.1998; office copy of the relieving certificate; original letters received from I party dated 10-10-1998, 28-09-1998, 14-11-1998, 02- 12-1998 requesting for acceptance of his Voluntary Retirement; copies of plaintiff IA in O S 65/1999 on the file of Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)Tarikere & copy of order dated 17-04-1999 in the said suit; original letter from I party dated 26-12-1998 for accommodating him at Bangalore; Office copy of letter dated 10-03-1999 intimating the party about confirming date of his Voluntary Retirement being w.e.f. 01- 04-1999; original letter received from the I party dated 01- 03-1999 requesting him to relieve him on 10-05-1999 instead of 01-04-1999; office copy of letter dated 20-04-1999 addressed to I Party relating to settlement of his PF, Gratuity and Pension Two original receipt dated 14-08-1999 passed by I party having received Rs. 95,596 and Rs. 1,42,404 as Ex M-1 to Ex M-19 respectively and by filing the affidavit of H S Sanjeev, Branch Manager, Ajampur Branch during 1996 to 1999 examined him on oath as MW 2 to confirm the two letters received by him from the I Party dated 14-11-1998 and 02-12-1998 which were exhibited as Ex M- 10 and Ex M-11 in the evidence of MW 1. Interalia, the learned advocate appearing for the I Party reiterating the claim statement while filing the affidavit of I Party examining him on oath as WW 1 got exhibited Copy of the Representation given by him for Voluntary Retirement dated 28-07-1998; Letter of the II Party dated 20-11-1998 for having 'accepted his Voluntary Resignation; certified copy of the order in W P No. 36852/2003 dated 08-03-2007 issuing direction to the Ministry of Labour to consider the FOC report and pass appropriate order; copy of the representation purported to have been given by him for cancellation of Voluntary Retirement letter submitted by him to the Deputy General Manager as Ex W-2 to Ex W-5 respectively and in the cross-examination of MW 1 he had got exhibited the transfer order served on the I party dated 23-07-1998 as Ex W-1.
6. After close of the evidence of both the sides when the matter was posted for arguments, learned advocate appearing for the I party filed his written arguments on 27-02-2013 and today when the learned advocate appearing for the II party addressed his arguments, the learned advocate appearing for the I party gave his reply with a request to pass Award expeditiously since the superannuation age of the I Party is fast approaching.
8. The claim of the I Party that the letter of Voluntary Retirement purported to have been given by him dated 28-09-1998 exhibited as Ex M-9 is a creation obtaining his signatures under the pretext that his request for modification of order of transfer will be considered favourable and under threat duress and coercion is a convenient plea put forward by him without any corroboration to overcome some how the letter of resignation voluntarily submitted by him with a specific request to relieve him w.e.f. 01-04-1999 enabling him to participate in the Platinum Jubilee Deposit Mobilization contest 1998- 1999 and to achieve the desired results. As contended by the II party, I party in his two letters written to the II party subsequent to the impugned letter of voluntary retirement dated 14-11-1998 and 02-12-1998 which are marked as Ex M-10 and Ex M-11 without whispering his desire to withdraw his lefter of voluntary retirement he having requested to extend the date of relieving him to 10-05-1999 from 01-04-1999 and further strengthened it by his own suit filed in O S No. 65/1999 on the file of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Tarikere wherein he challenged the order of II Party rejecting his request to postpone the date of relieving him to 10-05-1999 from 01-04-1999. In the above suit filed by the I Party on 27-03-1999 he filed an interim application under Order 39 Rule 2 read with section 151 of CPC supported by his own affidavit for issue of temporary injunction restraining the defendants to relieve him w.e.f. 01-04-1999 and in Para 2 of the affidavit filed in support of the said Interim Application he states that he has challenged the order of the defendants to relieve him from the services w.e.f. 01-04-1999 after office. hours instead of 10.05.1999 and obtained an exparte order of injunction and admittedly that exparte interim order came to be vacated on 17-04-1999, if at all the voluntary retirement letter dated 28-09-1998 was obtained from him under the pretext that his request for change of place of transfer would be favourably considered or under threat or coercion as alleged by him he would have definitely stated so in his application filed for interim injunction or if he had withdrawn or given a letter for cancellation as now claimed he would have mentioned that aspect also in the said suit. Therefore, this theory that the letter of voluntary retirement was obtained under threat, coercion or pretext of considering his request for change of place is after thought some how to get over his own folly/err committed in submitting the voluntary retirement letter dated 28-09-1998. As far as the theory tried to be put forward that he also submitted a letter for 7. On appreciation of the pleadings, Oral and Documentary evidence brought on record by both the sides4692 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय मुम्बई नं. 1 के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 3/2006द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12012/117/2005-आईआर ;बी-1द्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the16th July, 2013
S.O. 1664.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 3/2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, No. 1, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of State Bank of India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 12-7-2013.
[ No. L-12012/117/2005-IR (B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 1, MUMBAI
Present
JUSTICE G. S. SARRAF, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE No. : CGIT-1/3 OF 2006
Parties: Employers in relation to the management of
State Bank of India
And
Their workman (Ramesh Bhivaji Kamble)
Appearances:
withdrawal or cancellation of the letter of resignation by his letter dated 29-09-1998 appears to be a make believe story to some how fit in his case to the facts of the decision cited by him of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Shambu Murari Sinha vs. Project and Development India Ltd. And anr. reported in 2002 RD SC 131 wherein it is held Employee withdrawing application for voluntary retirement before effective date being valid. It is pertinent to note that though it is denied by the II party such a letter of withdrawing' the resignation letter dated 29-09-1998 being given, he just rest contended by producing a letter purported to have been sent by him for cancellation of voluntary retirement and getting it exhibited as Ex W-5 without producing any evidence having either forwarded it through post or presenting it in person to any of the responsible officials of the II party. Added to this in the cross-examination of MW 1 his learned advocate has made a suggestion to him that even this letter dated 29-09-1998 got marked as ex W-5 being obtained by the II Party for cancellation of the VRS from Service. Thereby even the case tried to be made out for the I Party that he withdrew or requested for cancellation of his letter of voluntary retirement before the date of its acceptance or date fixed for relieving him is just a story created ingeniously to some how get over from the effect of accepting the voluntary retirement letter submitted by him. Under these circumstances in the absence of the I Party failing to prove or demonstrate that the impugned letter of voluntary retirement dated 28-09-1998 was an outcome of signatures obtained from him on blank papers under the pretext that his request for change of place would be favourably considered or either under threat or coercion and also to prove that he gave letter of withdrawing the letter of resignation as claimed by him as per Ex. W-5 absolutely I find no reasons to say that the action of the management in relieving him from service w.e.f. 01-04-1999 being not justified. In the result, I arrive at conclusion of rejecting the reference holding that the action of the management of KBL in relieving the petitioner. Sh. B V Chandrashekar, Special Assistant, w.e.f. 01-04-1999 is justifiedand that he is not entitle for any relief and pass the following order :
ORDER
For the Management : Mr. Nadkarni, Adv.
For the Union : Mr. Umesh Nabar, Adv.
State : Maharashtra
Mumbai, dated the 5th day of June, 2013.
AWARD PART-I
The Reference is Rejected holding that the action of the management of Karnataka Bank Limited in removing the petitioner, Shri B V Chandrashekar, Special Assistant from service is legal and justified and that he is not entitle for any relief. No order to cost.
(Dictated to U.D.C., transcribed by him, corrected
and signed by me on 7th June, 2013).
S. N. NAVALGUND, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1664.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, This is a reference made by the Central Government in exercise of its powers under clause (d) of sub- section (1) and sub-section (2-A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947. The terms of reference given in the schedule are as follows:
Whether the management of SBI has followed the norms of justice, in discharging the services of the workman? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled to?
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4693According to the written statement filed by the Bank the workman was working as Head Clerk in Killari branch. He committed several irregularities such as resorting to heavy outside borrowings without obtaining prior approval of controllers, issuing cheques for large amounts without obtaining/maintaining sufficient balance in his savings bank accounts, misappropriating funds from the account of the customer and manipulating transactions in depositors account for his own benefit. All these acts amounted to gross misconduct under the Shastry Award and subsequent Bipartite Settlements. Several complaints against the workman were received. A complaint was filed against the workman under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and that complaint was withdrawn after payment of the amount. The workman was issued chargesheet for the followings acts of misconduct.
(i) Resorting to heavy outside borrowing without
obtaining prior approval of controllers.
(ii) Issuing cheques for large amounts without maintaining sufficient balance in his savings bank account, resulting in the said cheques being returned unpaid when presented for payment.
(iii) Misappropriating funds from the Account No.NRE/4111 of Shri Vijaykumar C.Dombale and utilizing the same for personal use.
(iv) Manipulating transactions from some depositors account in a malafide manner. For example unauthorisedly withdrawing Rs.10,000 on 21st May 1993 from SB Account No.A/9/1590 of Shri Subhash Nile and crediting the amount by transfer entry to Account No.P12/1590 of Shri Jagdale and Account No.P/13/4612 of Shri R.D.Suryavanshi and allowing withdrawal of Rs.4,000 from the aforesaid account of Shri Suryavanshi even though the balance in the account was only Rs.304.85.
(v) Negligently allowing of Rs. 5,000 from the Account No.NRE/4111 on 2nd July 1993 without verifying the specimen signature of the account holder i.e. the withdrawal was signed in English whereas the specimen signature of the account holder on record was in Marathi.
(vi) Several complaints being received from the constituents of the branch on account of above acts as also a complaint being filed against him in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class at Ausa under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
(vii) Seriously jeopardizing the interest of the Bank and loss of faith of the constituents on account of the aforesaid acts.
According to the statement of claim filed by State Bank of India Staff Union (hereinafter referred to as the Union) Ramesh Bhivaji Kamble joined the services of the State Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as the Bank) as Cashier-cum-Clerk w.e.f. 31.1.1979. The workman was then designated as Head Assistant w.e.f. 12.6.1982. The workman was having clean and unblemished service record of more than seventeen years till he was subjected to disciplinary action vide chargesheet dt.13.7.1996. The family of the workman consisted of aged parents, six sisters, wife and four children and he was the only earning member in the family. The father of the workman borrowed heavy amounts from private money lenders for performing marriages of the sisters of the workman without the knowledge of the workman. The workman was under legal and moral obligations to secure loans advanced to his father because the entire amount could not be repaid in time and by way of security the workman was required to issue cheques which were not to be used for realisation and, therefore, it was not necessary to keep sufficient balance in the account. The father of the workman repaid the entire amount after selling the ancestral property. As regards withdrawal from account No. NRE/4111 the account holder was known to the workman and as such cash was handed over to the bearer of the withdrawal slip. The suit filed against him was withdrawn after satisfaction of the claim in the suit. During the pendency of the enquiry proceedings the workman was not suspended. The workman cleared all his liabilities and no claim was pending against him. However, the Bank did not apply its mind before issuing the chargesheet and, therefore, the chargesheet is legally improper and bad in law. The disciplinary proceedings were not fair in asmuchas the Bank did not lead any evidence in support of the allegations levelled against the workman. The copy of enquiry proceedings was not made available to the workman till a copy of enquiry report was furnished to the workman for submitting his comments. Thus the proceedings conducted against the workman are in violation of the principles of natural justice. The Enquiry Officer found the workman guilty of the charges nos.1, 2, 3 and 6 and exonerated him from the charges nos. 4, 5 and 7. The findings of the Enquiry Officer holding the workman guilty of charges nos. 1, 2, 3 and 6 are perverse and are liable to be set aside. The enquiry held against the workman was not fair. The Disciplinary Authority did not look into the contentions of the workman before passing the order of punishment of discharge from service and as such the order of punishment is wholly perverse. The workman filed an appeal which was dismissed by the Appellate Authority without dealing with the contentions raised on behalf of the workman. The Union has, therefore, prayed that the Bank be directed to reinstate the workman to his original post w.e.f.13.9.2003 with full back wages, continuity of service and all consequential benefits.
Initially S.B.Saraf, Chief Manager of Nanded branch of the Bank was appointed as Enquiry Officer and4694 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] consequent to his transfer C.H.Gaushal, Chief Manager, Killari branch of the Bank was appointed as Enquiry Officer. It was noticed that the workman was working at Killari branch under Gaushal, therefore, to have a unbiased and fair enquiry, V.Y.Potdar, Manager, Udgir branch of the Bank was appointed as Enquiry Officer in place of Gaushal. The workman was duly represented by his defence representative V.W.Patil. The Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry in accordance with the principles of natural justice and gave full and fair opportunity to the workman to defend himself. The Enquiry Officer vide report dt.30.11.1998 found the workman guilty of charges nos.1,2,3 and 6. A copy of the enquiry report was sent to the workman vide letter dt.7.6.1999. The workman made his submission vide letter dt.6.7.1999. After considering the enquiry report and the submissions made by the workman the Disciplinary Authority proposed the punishment of discharge with superannuation benefits as would otherwise be due to the workman at that stage and without disqualification from future employment. Show cause notice was then given to the workman. During the personal hearing the workman pleaded for sympathetic view of the matter and modification of the penalty. After carefully considering all the aspects of the matter the Disciplinary Authority passed his final order on 13.9.2003 and imposed the punishment as proposed. The Appellate Authority rejected the appeal of the workman vide order dt.19.1.2004. According to the written statement the Bank conducted legal, fair and proper enquiry. The Bank, has, therefore, prayed that the reference be rejected.
The Union has filed rejoinder wherein it has reiterated its stand.
Following Issues have been framed as per order sheet dt.14.3.2011.
(i) Whether the enquiry held against the workman is fair and proper?
(ii) Whether the findings of the Enquiry Officer are perverse?
(iii) Whether the punishment given to the workman is shockingly disproportionate?
(iv) What relief?
The Union has filed affidavit of the workman Ramesh Bhivaji Kamble and he has been cross-examined by learned counsel for the Bank. The Bank has filed affidavit of Vijay Potdar and he has been cross-examined by learned counsel for the Union.
each case. However, to sustain the allegation of violation of principles of natural justice one must establish that prejudice has been caused to the workman for non- observance of principles of natural justice.
The workman has stated in his cross-examination as under:
This is correct that the Bank held an enquiry against me in respect of the chargesheet dt.13.7.1996. This is correct that I fully participated in the enquiry. I appointed defence nominee of my choice. Whatever transpired it was correctly recorded in the order sheets of the enquiry. I and my defence nominee would sign every order sheet. If my defence nominee was not present on account of some reason the Enquiry Officer would adjourn the matter. Whatever documents Bank submitted in the enquiry, copies of those documents were given to me. I also had full opportunity to submit document in my defence and accordingly I submitted. Ex.M-09 (page 6 to 12) are the enquiry proceedings. I was given a copy of the enquiry report and I filed an appeal. I was given personal hearing in the appeal. This is correct that I submitted reply of the chargesheet.
It is amply clear from the statement of the workman himself that no prejudice has been caused to him. As such there is no violation of any principle of natural justice.
This is correct that the Bank has not led any oral evidence before the Enquiry Officer. But there was no occasion for the Bank to bring oral evidence to prove the documents as the genuineness of the documents relied by the Bank was not challenged by the workman. If the allegations in the enquiry are such which can be proved by the documents then it is not obligatory for the Bank to bring oral evidence. In this case the genuineness of the documents has not been denied by the workman and, therefore, the Union cannot complain that no witness has come forward to prove the documents.
From the above discussion it is clear that the enquiry held against the workman is fair and proper and the findings of the Enquiry Officer cannot be said to be perverse.
Issues nos.(i} and (ii) are, therefore, decided in favour of the Bank and against the workman.
Award Part-I is passed accordingly.
JUSTICE G. S. SARRAF, Presiding Officer
ANNEXURE-II
Heard Shri Nabar on behalf of the Union and Shri Nadkarni on behalf of the Bank.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, MUMBAI
PRESENT :
Issues nos. (i) and (ii): Principles of natural justice are not embodied rules. It cannot be put in a straightjacket formula. It depends upon the facts and circumstance of JUSTICE G. S. Sarraf, Presiding Officer[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4695
REFERENCE No. : CGIT-1/3 OF 2006
Parties: Employers in relation to the management of
State Bank of India
And
Their workman (Ramesh Bhivaji Kamble) that enquiry are not frowned upon then this Tribunal should not interfere with the quantum of punishment unless the punishment is shown to be vitiated by malafides. This certainly is not the position in the present case.
Appearances:
For the Management : Mr. Nadkarni, Adv.
For the Union : Mr. Umesh Nabar, Adv.
State : Maharashtra
Mumbai, dated the 18th day of June, 2013 The Banking business requires absolute devotion, integrity and honesty and if this is not there surely the confidence of the public/depositors will be impaired. In such a case there should be no place for generosity or sympathy.
AWARD PART-II
This is a reference made by the Central Government in exercise of its powers under clause (d) of sub section (1) and sub-section (2-A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947. The terms of reference given in the schedule are as follows:
Whether the management of SBI has followed the norms of justice, in discharging the services of the workman? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled to?
It is not necessary to narrate the facts here as the facts have been stated in detail in the Award Part-I dt. 5-6-2913 passed by this Tribunal.
(i) Whether the enquiry held against the workman is
fair and proper?
(ii) Whether the findings of the Enquiry Officer are
perverse?
(iii) Whether the punishment given to the workman is
shockingly disproportionate?
(iv) What relief?
Issues nos.(i) and (ii) have been decided in favour of the Bank and against the workman. Thereafter the workman has filed his affidavit and he has been cross examined by learned counsel for the Bank. The Bank has not led any evidence.
Heard Mr. Nabar learned counsel for the workman
and Mr.Nadkarni learned counsel for the Bank.
Issue no. (III) : The workman was found guilty of excessive borrowings and misappropriation. The Disciplinary Authority awarded the punishment of discharge with superannuation benefits as would otherwise be due to the workman at that stage and without disqualification from future employment.
Once there has been an enquiry in accordance with principles of natural justice and the findings recorded at The fact that the workman was not suspended during the pendency of the enquiry proceedings and the fact that there is a long interval between the submission of the enquiry report and the order of punishment passed against the workman are of no help to the workman while considering whether the punishment is shockingly disproportionate.
Considering all the facts and circumstances of the matter. I do not think that the punishment imposed against the workman is shockingly disproportionate to the charges proved against him so as to warrant interference by this Tribunal.
Issue no. (iii) is decided against the workman.
Issue no. (iv): The workman is not entitled to any
relief.
Award Part-II is passed accordingly.
JUSTICE G. S. SARRAF, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1665.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 105/2003द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12012/477/2001-आईआर ;बी-Iद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the16th July, 2013
S.O. 1665.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 105/ 2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of State Bank of India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16-7-2013.
[No. L-12012/477/2001-IR (B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer4696 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR
COURT, JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/l05/2003
Presiding Officer : SHRI R. B. PATLE
The General Secretary,
Daily Wages Bank Employees Association,.
9, Sanwer Road,
Ujjain
. . .Workman/Union
3. IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 1111 to 11/14. Objection is taken that Ram Nagwanshi, General Secretary of the Union was terminated from service of the Bank. He cannot be present for workman. That workman was employed purely on daily wages as Messenger. In 1985, he worked for 76 days, in 1986 for 70 days, during period 1993 to 1998 he worked for 1316 days at Indore Main Branch as daily wager. That Ist party was discontinued after payment of wages on account of notice and retrenchment compensation amount Rs. 5760 was paid. The IInd party further submits that as per under in conciliation proceeding bonus Rs. 3604 was paid. The 1st party workman was engaged on contract basis as per exigency of work. His discontinuance is covered under Section 2(oo) of I.D. Act.
Versus
The Asstt. General Manager,
State Bank of India,
Zonal Office, Hamidia Road,
Bhopal (MP)
. . .Management
AWARD
Passed on this 17th day of June, 2013
1. As per letter dated 14-2-2003 by the Government
of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is
received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under
Section-10 of I.D. Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L-12012/
477/2001-IR (B-I). The dispute udner reference relates to :
''Whether the action of the management of Asstt.
General Manager, State Bank of India, Bhopal in
terminating the services of Shri Sanjay Jawkhedkar
w.e.f. 11-12-1998 instead of regularizing him is
justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled?"
2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to
the parties. Ist party workman submitted statement of claim
at Page 2/2 to 2/5. The case of 1st party workman is that he
was working on vacant post of messenger from 11-2-1991.
He rendered his services satisfactorily. He was working
for 8 hours. That Head Office had issued circular for
absorbing casual daily wage employees. That his services
were terminated from 11-12-98. He claims that he had
completed 240 days continuous service since. initial
appointment. That he was forcibly handed over cheque of
Rs. 5760. He was also paid bonus Rs. 3604 That he had
4. IInd party further submits that workman has not completed 240 days service during any of the calendar years. He is not covered as workman under Section 25(B) of I.D. Act. That as per settlement dated. 17-11-87, a temporary employee in subordinate cadre were given chance of being considered for appointment in the Bank. Those who completed. 240 days temporary service during 12 months or less after 1975, those who have completed 270 days aggregate temporary service in any continuous block of 36 calendar months after 1-7-75, those who have completed minimum of 30 days aggregate temporary service in any calendar year after 1975 or a minimum of 70 days aggregate temporary service in any continuous block of 36 months after 1-7-75. The details of the settlements are given in Para-5. The settlement was extended time to time on 27-10-88, 9-1-91, 30-1-96. The settlement was last extended till 31-3-97. IInd party submits that workman has submitted application. He was called for interview on 23-1-90. He could not be given permanent employment as his name was much below in Waiting List. Ist party did not submit his application to the Bank. Therefore name of Ist party was not considered for employment in the Bank. Ist party was engaged purely on daily wage basis during 1993 to 1998 as per exigency. He could not be regularized being casual employee. Rest of the contention of workman are denied. It is submitted that workman had not completed 240 days service in one calendar year. He was not appointed against available vacant post. Ist party workman had worked for 1360 days form 1993 to 1998. It is denied that termination of service of Ist party is in violation of Section 25-F,G & N of I.D. Act. IInd party prayed for rejection of reliefs prayed by workman.
worked for total 1890 days. That his services were
terminated without displaying list of retrenched employees.
The termination is in violation of Section 25-G, F & N of
I.D.Act. Ist party prays for his reinstatement with
consequential benefits.
5. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below :—
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4697"(i) Whether the action of the
management of Asstt. In Negative General Manager, State Bank of India, Bhopal in termi- nating the services of Shri Sanjay Jawkhedkar w.e.f. 11-12-1998 instead of regularizing him is legal?
(ii) If so, to what relief the As per order
workman is entitled to?"
REASONS
6. The dispute under reference relates to whether the action of the IInd party management in terminating his services instead of regularizing him is legal? From pleadings between parties, there is no dispute that workman was working for 146 days from 10-7-85 till 1986. He had worked for 146 days. Thereafter Ist party workman was engaged from 1991 and his services were terminated on 11-12-98. The IInd party management in his Written Statement has admitted, that Ist party workman was called for interview on 31-1-90, his name was in the Waiting List much below he could not be given permanent employment.
7. The workman filed affidavit of his evidence on 19-12-2010 but did not enter in witness box for cross- examination on behalf of Ilnd party. The ordersheet dated 29-12-12 finds clear observation that workman filed evidence but he submitted that he doesnot want to produce witness for cross-examination. As such his evidence is not to be looked into in the case. The evidence of workman was closed. Thus evidence of workman cannot be read on evidence in case.
8. However the documents produced by workman are admitted by the management. Exhibit W-1 is copy of reference order, W-2 is letter dated 27-1-94 by Asstt. General Manager to Branch Manager, Bhopal. The said letter is clear that casual employees could be engaged on temporary basis where it is absolutely necessary. The Waiting List was available in the Regional Office. Suitable action could be done considering the names and address of the candidates in Waiting List. That there was no satisfied time in which the candidates in Waiting List can have employed. In para-2, it is made clear that the candidates in Waiting List in different categories were to be appointed. Exhibit W-3 is the copy of cheque of Rs. 3604 in name of workman. Exhibit W-4 is letter given by Dy.General Manager finds clear reference that workman Jawkhedkar was daily wage employee. He was engaged as per availability of work on daily wages. Exhibit W-5 is copy of cheque of Rs. 5716 in name of workman. Exhibit W-6 is copy of cheque of Rs. 3604.
9. Witness of IInd party Dilip Mogre filed affidavit of his evidence. He has stated that during 93 to 98 workman had worked for 1316 days. However its details are not shown in his affidavit. In para-3 of his affidavit, the witness has stated that workman has not completed 240 days continuous service during any calendar year. In para-6 of his affidavit, he has stated that on 23-1-90, workman was interviewed. His name was included in the list considering the length of his service as casual employee. The list is not produced by Ilnd party. It is not known why services of workman were not regularized. The order of termination of services of workman Exhibit W-5 finds reasons for retrenchment that they there are no approved branches available, your services stands terminated with immediate effect. The IInd party has not produced the Waiting List in which the name of workman was included. No document about filling of vacancies from time to time by Ilnd party are produced. The order Exhibit W-5 finds payment of retrenchment compensation Rs. 4320 and one month's pay Rs. 1440. However the list of retrenched employees is not displayed, no documents are produced in that regard by the IInd party.
10.Section 25-F of I.D. Act 1947 provides—
" No workman employed in any industry who has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer until—
(a) The workman has been given one month's notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment and the period of notice has expire, or the workmen has been paid in lieu of such notice, wages for the period of the notice,
(b) The workman has been paid at the time of retrenchment compensation which shall be equivalent to fifteen days average pay for every completed year of continuous service or any part thereof in excess of six months and,
(c) Notice in the prescribed manner is served on the appropriate Government or such authority as may be specified by the appropriate Government by notification in the Official Gazette."
Secion 25-G provides-
"Where any workman in an industrial establishment, who is a citizen of India, is to be retrenched and he belongs to a particular category of workmen in that establishment, in the absence of any agreement between the employer and the workman in this behalf, the employer shall ordinarily retrench the workman who was the last person to be employed in that category, unless for reasons to be recorded the employer retrenches any other workman."
11. Thus there is no evidence about compliance of Section 25-G When approved branches were not available, why the services of 1st party workman alone was terminated. Seniority list of employees was not produced4698 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] even Waiting List was not produced by the IInd party. The evidence on record is clear that workman was interviewed in 1990. He was selected for regularization, his name was included in the Waiting List. The said list is not produced. The principle of last come Ist go was not followed. The Union Representative Mr. Ram Nagwanshi relies on ratio held in—
"Case of Samishta Dube and City Board Etawah and another reported in 1999(81 )FLR 746. Their Lordship held in absence of any agreement between the employer and the workmen in behalf the employer shall ordinarily retrench the workman who was last person to be employed in that category, unless for reasons to be recorded, the employer retrenches any other person."
In case of Regional Manager, SVI versus Rakesh Kumar Tewari reported in 2006( 108)FLR 733 . Their Lordship held provisions of Section 25-G , H doesnot require continuation employment of workman within the meaning of Section 25 (B) of I.D. Act.
In case of Jaipur Development Authority Versus Ramsahai and another in 2007-1 Supreme Court Cases (L&S) 518. Their Lordship held Section 25-G is not imperative in nature for reasons to be recorded, the employer may retrench a workman other tha as required by the Last come first go principle. That applicability of Section 25-G and 25-H of I.D.Act, requirement of continuous work in terms of Section 25(8) is not a requirement.
services of Shri Sanjay Jawkhedkar w.e.f. 11-12-1998 instead of regularizing him is illegal.
2. IInd party management is directed to reinstate workman and regularize his services as per the Waiting List prepared after interview held on 23-1-90. He is not entitled to back wages.
15. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment as per rules.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1666.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार रेल विकास निगम लि. के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 70/2012द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-41011/17/2009-आईआर ;बी-Iद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the16th July, 2013
S.O. 1666.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes 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, Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Rail Vikash Nigam Ltd., and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16-7-2013.
[No. L-41011/17/2009-IR (B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
12. IInd party 'management has not produced Waiting List, no documents are produced as to how many candidates in Waiting List were given opportunity. How many vacancies were filled and why Ist party workman was not regularized in service after his name appeared in the Selection List. The action of the management instead of regularizing his services terminating the services of Ist party workman is illegal. For above reasons, .I record my finding in Point No.1 in Negative.
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
BHUBANESWAR
Present : Shri J. Srivastava, Presiding Officer, C.G.I.T.-cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar.
I.D. CASE No. 70/2012
Date of Passing Order - 13th June, 2013
Between :
13. Point No. 2—The question is what relief workman is entitled. The workman has not entered in witness box for his cross-examination. The services of Ist party workman were terminated in 1998. He had continuously worked from 1993 to 1998. He was selected after, absorption in regular staff as per the settlement. He was not given appointment order for long period. Considering above aspects, 1st party workman deserves to be regularized in service on vacant post as per Waiting List prepared by management of IInd party. As workman not made available for cross- examination, his evidence cannot be accepted. He cannot be allowed backwages.
14. In the result award is passed as under:-
1. The action of the management. of Asstt. General Manager, State Bank of India, Bhopal in terminating the 1. The Managing Director,
HCIL-AD HIKARYYA-ARSS (HAA) (JV) HIG-46, BDA Enclave, G.M. Marg, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar (Orissa) -751 013.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 46992. The Chief Project Manager, Rail Vikash Nigam Ltd., Metro Tower, Vani Vihar, Bhubaneswar (Orissa)
1st Party-Managements.
And
The President, All Orissa Railway Contractors' Workers' Union, VR-5/l, Unit-III, Kharvela Nagar, Bhubaneswar (Orissa) - 1.
2nd Party-Union.
को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/69/2012-आईआर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the16th July, 2013
Appearances :
None : For the 1 st Party-
Management.
None : For the 2nd Party-
Union.
S.O. 1667.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 32/ 2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of J.K. Nagar Colliery, Satgram Area, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16-7-2013.
[ No. L-22012/69/2012-IR (CM-II)]
ORDER
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-lABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
Present : Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE No. 32 OF 2012
This reference was received in this Tribunal on 20.7.2012. The 2nd Party-Union was required to file the statement of claim within fifteen days of receipt of the order of reference in this Tribunal, but no statement of claim was filed. Therefore a notice was issued to the 2nd Party-Union on 6.12.2012 asking it to file the statement of claim by 17.12.2012. But when no response was received a further notice was issued through regd. post to the 2nd Party- Union on 4.3.2013 calling it to file the statement of claim by 23.4.2013. But even after issuing notice under regd. cover no statement of claim was filed. The 2nd Party-Union was further allowed time to file statement 'of claim by 13.6.2012, but neither any-one appeared on behalf of the 2nd Party- Union nor filed any statement of claim. Hence it appears that the 2nd Party-Union is not interested in prosecuting its case. It might be that the 2nd Party-Union has settled the dispute out of court with the 1st Party-Management and because of which the Union is not taking any steps in the matter under dispute.
Parties : The management of J.K. Nagar Colliery,
Satgram Area, M/s. ECl, Burdwan(WB)
Vs.
Sri D.K. Routh, Branch Jt. Secy., CMC (HMS), Aradanga, Asansol(W.B.)
REPRESENTATIVES:
2. In the above circumstances there is no use to keep the case pending indefinitely. Hence a no-dispute award is required to be passed in the case. Accordingly a no-dispute award is passed and the reference is answered in the above terms.
JITENDRA SRIVASTAVA, Presiding Officer For the management : None
For the union (Workman): None
INDUSTRY : COAL STATE: West Bengal
Dated : 03.04.13
AWARD
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1667.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, असनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 32/2012द्ध In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- section (1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/ 69/2012- I.R.(CM-II) dated 11.09.2012 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
4700 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of J.K. Nagar Colliery not to pay HA @ 10% of basic to Sri Mahendra Muchi is fair, appropriate and justified, while J.K. Nagar comes under Raniganj (UA), which is classified 'C' Class city and HRA payable is 10% of basic and even in view classification comes under 'Z' class where rate of HRA is 10% of Basic Pay?" of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16-7-2013.
[No. L-22012/225/2006-IR (CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
Present : Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO. 05 OF 2007
Having received the Order of Letter No.L-22012/69/ 2012-I.R (CM-II) dated 11.09.2012 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 32 of 2012 was registered on 25.09.12 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
Parties : The management of Chinakury
Colliery, M/s. ECL, Burdwan(WB)
Vs.
The Chief Org. Secy., KMC, Sitarampur (W.B.)
REPRESENTATIVES:
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that the workman is neither appearing nor taking any step since long. It seems that the workman is now no more interested to proceed with the case. Since the workman is not interested to proceed with the case, the case is closed and accordingly an order of "No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
For the management : None
For the union (Workman) : Sri R.K. Tripathi, Ld.
Representative
ORDER
INDUSTRY : COAL STATE: West Bengal
Dated -16.04.13
AWA RD
Let an "Award" be and the same is passed as "No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- section(1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/ 225/2006-I.R.(CM-II) dated 08.01.2007 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 1668.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, असनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 5/2007द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/225/2006-आईआर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the16th July, 2013
S.O. 1668.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 5/2007) "Whether the action of the management of Chinakury Mine No. 111 under Sodepur Area of M/s. ECL in dismissing Shri Santosh Bouri w.e.f. 24.06.2004 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?"
Having received the Order of Letter No.L-22012/225/ 2006-LR (CM-II) dated 08.01.2007 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 05 of 2007 was registered on 19.02.07and accordingly an order to that effect-was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4701
REFERENCE No. 38 OF 2008
to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
Parties : The management of Paras Cole
Colliery, M/s. ECL, Burdwan(WB)
Vs.
The Vice-President, KMC, Burdwan (W.B).
REPRESENTATIVES:
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that Sri R.K. Tripathi, representative of the Union, submitted that the workman had already reinstated in the service and was died thereafter and then his wife has got employment in her plea. Sri Tripathi also prayed for the closure of the case. Since the workman has passed away, the case is closed and accordingly an order of "No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
For the management : None
For the union (Workman) : Sri S.K. Pandey,
Ld. Representative
INDUSTRY : COAL STATE: West Bengal
ORDER
Dated -21.02.13
AWA RD
Let an "Award" be and the same is passed as "No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- section(1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/ 59/2008-I.R.(CM-II) dated 30.06.2008 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 1669.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, असनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 38/2008द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/59/2008-आईआर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the16th July, 2013
S.O. 1669.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 38/
2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16-7-2013.
[No. L-22012/59/2008-IR (CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer "Whether the action of the management of M/s. ECL in dismissing Shri Gujara Hari from service w.e.f. 21.05.2005 is legal and justified? To what relief is the claimant entitled?"
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/59/ 2008-1. R (CM-II) dated 30.06.2008 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 38 of 2008 was registered on 15.07.08 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that the workman has already joined in the service. Since the workman has joined in the service, the case is closed and accordingly an order of "No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
ORDER
ANNEXURE
Let an "Award" be and the same is passed as "No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
Present : Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen, Presiding Officer JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer4702 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
vide its Order No. L-22012/50/2008-IR(CM-II) dated 30-6-2008 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 1670.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/ श्रम न्यायालय आसनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 37/2008द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/50/2008-आई आर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 16th July, 2013
S.O. 1670.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 37/2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16-7-2013
[No. L-22012/50/2008-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer ''Whether the action of the management of M/s. ECL in dismissing Shri Mantu Shaw from service w.e.f. 01-12-1998 is legal and justified? To what relief is the claimant entitled?"
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/ 50/2008-IR (CM-II) dated 30-6-2008 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 37 of 2008 was registered on 15-7-08 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
ANNEXURE
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that Sri R. K. Tripathi, representative of the Union, submitted that the workman has already reinstated in the service and he prayed for the closure of the case. Since the workman has already reinstated in service, the case is closed and accordingly an order of ''No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
ORDER
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
Present: Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE No. 37 OF 2008
Parties : The management of Sodepur (R) Colliery,
M/s. ECL, Burdwan (WB)
Vs.
The Chief Org. Secy. KMC. Sitarampur (WB) Let an ''Award" be and the same is passed as ''No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
Representatives :
For the management : None
For the union (Workman) : Sri R. K. Tripathi, Ld.
Representative
Industry : Coal State : West Bengal
Dated - 16-4-13
का.आ. 1671.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/ श्रम न्यायालय आसनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 45/2006द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/225/2005-आई आर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
AWARD
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub-section (1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disptues Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), Government of India through the Ministry of Labour New Delhi, the 16th July, 2013
S.O. 1671.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 45/2006)[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4703 of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Kenda Area of M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16-7-2013
[No. L-22012/225/2005-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
Present: Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen, Presiding Officer On perusal of the case record, it has been found that the workman Sh.Musafir Rajbhar moved his petition dated 26-3-13 and submitted that he does not want to proceed with the case as the Management is ready to absorb him in service and also prayed for the closure of the case. Since the workman is not interested to proceed with the case, the case it closed and accordingly an order of ''No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
ORDER
REFERENCE No. 45 OF 2006
Parties : The management of Chora Block Incline, Kenda Area, M/s. ECL, Burdwan (WB)
Vs.
The Gen. Secy. KMC. Asansol, Burdwan (WB) Let an ''Award" be and the same is passed as ''No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer Representative :
For the management : None
For the union (Workman) : Sri S. K. Pandey, Ld.
Representative
Industry : Coal State : West Bengal
Dated - 03-04-13
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
AWARD
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub-section (1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disptues Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), Government of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/225/2005-IR(CM-II) dated 2-8-2006 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
का.आ. 1672.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/ श्रम न्यायालय आसनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 13/2012द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/16/2012-आई आर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 16th July, 2013
SCHEDULE
''Whether the action of the management of Chora Block Incline, under Kenda Area of M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited in dismissing Sh. Musafir Rajbhar, U.M. No. 501745, UG.L. from service w.e.f. 22-8-2003 is legal and justified? If not to what relief is the workman entitled?"
S.O. 1672.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 13/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the management of J.K. Nagar Colliery, M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workmen received by the Central Government on 16-7-2013.
[No. L-22012/16/2012-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/ 225/2005-IR (CM-II) dated 2-8-2006 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 45 of 2006 was registered on 14-8-06 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties Present: Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen, Presiding Officer4704 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
REFERENCE No. 13 OF 2012
Parties : The management of J.K. Nagar Colliery, Satgram Area, M/s. ECL, Burdwan (WB)
Vs.
Sri D.K. Routh, Branch Jt. Secy. CMC (HMS), Aradanga, Asansol (W.B.) information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
Representative :
For the management : None
For the union (Workman) : None
Industry : Coal State : West Bengal
Dated - 03-04-13
का.आ. 1673.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/ श्रम न्यायालय आसनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 12/2012द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/23/2012-आई आर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
AWARD
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub-section (1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disptues Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), Government of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/16/2012-IR(CM-II) dated 29-03-2012 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 16th July, 2013
SCHEDULE
''Whether the action of the management of J.K. Nagar Colliery in not payment HRA@ 10% of basic to Sri Jankinath Bouri S/o Late Manohar Bouri is fair and justified? To what relief the concrrned workman is entitled?"
S.O. 1673.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 12/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the management of J.K. Nagar Colliery, M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16-7-2013.
[No. L-22012/23/2012-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
Present: Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE No. 12 OF 2012
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/ 16/2012-IR (CM-II) dated 29-3-2012 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 13 of 2012 was registered on 19-4-12 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
Parties : The management of J.K. Nagar Colliery, Satgram Area, M/s. ECL, Burdwan (WB)
Vs.
Sri D.K. Routh, Branch Jt. Secy. CMC (HMS), Aradanga, Asansol, Burdwan (W.B.)
Representative :
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that the workman is neither appearing nor taking any step since long. It seems that the workman is now no more interested to proceed with the case. Since the workman is not interested to proceed with the case, the case it closed and accordingly an order of ''No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
For the management : None
For the union (Workman) : None
Industry : Coal State : West Bengal
Dated - 20-03-13
ORDER
AWARD
Let an ''Award" be and the same is passed as ''No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub-section (1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disptues Act, 1947 (14 of 1947),[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4705 Government of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/23/2012-IR(CM-II) dated 29-03-2012 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
New Delhi, the 16th July, 2013
SCHEDULE
''Whether the action of the management of J.K. Nagar Colliery of M/s. ECL in not payment HRA@ 10% of basic to Sri Binoy Roy S/o Late Janki Roy is fair in fair and justified? To what relief the concrrned workman is entitled?"
S.O. 1674.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 08/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of J.K. Nagar Colliery, M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16-7-2013.
[No. L-22012/13/2012-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
Present: Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE No. 08 OF 2012
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/ 23/2012-IR (CM-II) dated 29-3-2012 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference cass No. 12 of 2012 was registered on 19-4-12 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
Parties : The management of J.K. Nagar Colliery, Satgram Area, M/s. ECL, Burdwan (WB)
Vs.
Sri D.K. Routh, Branch Jt. Secy. CMC (HMS), Aradanga, Asansol, Burdwan (W.B.)
Representatives :
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that Sri D.K. Routh, Branch Jt. Secretary of the Union, has endorsed that the case may be closed and a ''No Dispute Award" may be passed as the workman is not interested to proceed with the case further. Since the workman is not iterested to proceed with the case, the case is closed and accordingly an order ''No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
For the management : None
For the union (Workman) : None
Industry : Coal State : West Bengal
ORDER
Dated - 19-03-13
AWARD
Let an ''Award" be and the same is passed as ''No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub-section (1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disptues Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), Government of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/13/2012-IR(CM-II) dated 28-03-2012 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 1674.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, आसनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 08/2012द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/13/2012-आई आर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी ''Whether the action of the management of J.K. Nagar Colliery of M/s. ECL in not payment HRA@ 10% of basic to Sri Bapi Bouri S/o Late Rabin Bouri is fair and justified? To what relief the concrrned workman is entitled?"
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/ 13/2012-IR (CM-II) dated 28-3-2012 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference cass No. 08 of 2012 was registered on 19-4-12 and4706 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
Present: Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE No. 11 OF 2012
Parties : The management of J.K. Nagar Colliery, Satgram Area, M/s. ECL, Burdwan (WB)
Vs.
Sri D.K. Routh, Branch Jt. Secy. CMC (HMS), Aradanga, Asansol (W.B.)
Representatives :
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that Sri D.K. Routh, Branch Jt. Secretary of the Union, has endorsed that the case may be closed and a ''No Dispute Award" may be passed as the workman is not interested to proceed with the case further. Since the workman is not interested to proceed with the case, the case is closed and accordingly an order ''No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
For the Management : None
ORDER
For the union (Workman) : None
Industry : Coal State : West Bengal
Dated - 19-03-13
AWARD
Let an ''Award" be and the same is passed as ''No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub-section (1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disptues Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), Government of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/24/2012-IR(CM-II) dated 29-03-2012 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 1675.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, आसनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 11/2012द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/24/2012-आई आर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 16th July, 2013
S.O. 1675.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 11/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the management of J.K. Nagar Colliery, M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 16-7-2013.
[No. L-22012/24/2012-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer.
''Whether the action of the management of J.K. Nagar Colliery of M/s. ECL in not payment HRA@ 10% of basic to Sri Sujal Paul S/o Late Umapada Paul is fair and justified? To what relief the concerned workman is entitled?"
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/ 24/2012-IR (CM-II) dated 29-3-2012 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference cass No. 11 of 2012 was registered on 19-4-12 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that Sri D.K. Routh, Branch Jt. Secretary of the Union, has endorsed that the case may be closed and a ''No Dispute Award" may be passed as the workman is not interested to proceed with the case further. Since the[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4707
Representatives :
workman is not iterested to proceed with the case, the case is closed and accordingly an order ''No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
For the management : Sri P.K. Das, Ld.
Repesentative
ORDER
For the union (Workman) : None
Industry : Coal State : West Bengal
Dated - 26-03-13
AWARD
Let an ''Award" be and the same is passed as ''No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub-section (1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disptues Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), Government of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/336/2001-IR(CM-II) dated 11-02-2003 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 1676.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, आसनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 4/2003द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/336/2001-आई आर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 16th July, 2013
S.O. 1676.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 04/2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Jhanjra M.I.C. M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workmen received by the Central Government on 16-7-2013.
[No. L-22012/336/2001-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer ''Whether the action of the management of Jhanjra M.I.C. M/s. Eastern Coalfields Ltd. in not providing employment to Smt. Rani Majhi, dependent of Late Samar Majhi is legal and justified? If not, to what relief is the said dependent of the workman entitled?"
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/ 336/2001-IR (CM-II) dated 11-2-2003 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 04 of 2003 was registered on 11-3-03 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
Present: Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen, Presiding Officer On perusal of the case record, it has been found that the workman is neither appearing nor taking any step since long. It seems that the workman has now no more interest in this case. The case is also too old- 2003. Since the workman is not iterested to proceed with the case, the case is closed and accordingly an order of ''No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
ORDER
REFERENCE No. 04 OF 2003
Parties : The management of Jhanjra M.I.C. M/s.
ECL, Burdwan (WB)
Vs.
The President UCMU (INTUC), Ukhra Burdwan (W.B.)
Let an ''Award" be and the same is passed as ''No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer4708 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
Government of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/14/2012-IR(CM-II) dated 29-7-2012 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 1677.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, आसनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 07/2012द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-7-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/14/2012-आई आर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 16th July, 2013
S.O. 1677.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 07/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the management of J.K. Nagar Colliery, M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workmen received by the Central Government on 16-7-2013.
[No. L-22012/14/2012-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer ''Whether the action of the management of J.K. Nagar Colliery of M/s. ECL in not paying HRA @ 10% of basic to Sri Jalandhar Rajbhar S/o Late Chikuri Rajbhar is fair and justified? To what relief the concerned workman is entitled?"
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/ 14/2012-IR (CM-II) dated 29-3-2012 of the above-said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 07 of 2012 was registered on 19-4-12 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
Present: Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen, Presiding Officer On perusal of the case record, it has been found that Sri D.K. Routh Branch Jt. Secretary of the Union, has endorsed that the case may be closed and a ''No Dispute Award" may be passed as the workman is not interested to proceed with the case further. Since the workman is not interested to proceed wtih the case, the the case is closed and accordingly an order of ''No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
ORDER
Reference No. 07 of 2012
Parties : The management of Jhanjra Nagar Colleiry
M/s. ECL, Burdwan (WB)
Vs.
Sri D.K. Routh, Branch Jt. Secy. CMC(HMS), Aradanga, Asansol, Burdwan (W.B.)
Let an ''Award" be and the same is passed as ''No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
Representatives :
For the management : None
For the union (Workman) : None
Industry : Coal State : West Bengal
Dated - 19-03-13
AWARD
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub-section (1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disptues Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), का.आ. 1678.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, आसनसेाल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 50/1995द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 22012/65/1995-आईआर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4709 New Delhi, the 16th July, 2013
S.O. 1678.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 50/1995) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Parbelia Colliery, M/s. E.C. Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16-07-2013.
[No. L-22012/65/1995-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 50 of 1995 was registered on 05-10-95 and accordingly, an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM-LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
Present : Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen,
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that the workman is neither appearing nor taking any step since 1997. It seems that the workman has now no more interest in this case. The case is also too old in the year of 1995. Since the workman is not interested to proceed with the case, the case is closed and accordingly an order of "No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
ORDER
Presiding Officer
Reference No. 50 of 1995
Parties : The management of Parbelia Colliery,
M/s. ECL, Purulia (W.B.)
Vs.
The Gen. Secy., W.B.K.M.S.(UTUC), Sitarampur, Burdwan (W.B.) Let an "Award" be and the same is passed as "No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
Representatives :
For the management : Sri P. K. Das, Ld.
Representative
For the union (Workman) : None
Industry : Coal State : West Bengal
Dated the 19th March, 2013
का.आ. 1679.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, आसनसेाल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 06/2012द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
AWARD
In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- Section(1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/ 65/95-I.R.(CM-II) dated 21-09-1995 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
[सं. एल- 22012/15/2012-आईआर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 16th July, 2013
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of Parbelia Colliery of M/s. E.C. Ltd., in not sending Sh. Bimal Majhee, Pump Khalasi to age determination Committee for determination of his correct age is justified ? If not, to what relief is the workman is entitlted to ?"
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/65/ 95-I.R (CM-II) dated 21-09-1995 of the above said reference S.O. 1679.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No.06/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of J.K. Nagar Colliery, M/s. E.C. Ltd., and their workman, received by the Central Government on 16-07-2013.
[No. L-22012/15/2012-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer4710 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ANNEXURE
interested to proceed with the case any further. Since the workman is no more interested to proceed with the case, the case is closed and accordingly an order of "No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM-LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
ORDER
Present : Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen,
Presiding Officer
Reference No. 06 of 2012
Parties : The management of J. K. Nagar
Colliery, M/s. ECL, Burdwan (W.B.)
Vs.
The Sri D. K. Routh, Branch Secy., CMC(HMS), Burdwan (W.B.) Let an "Award" be and the same is passed as "No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order of the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
Representatives :
For the management : None
For the Union (Workman) : None
Industry : Coal State : West Bengal
Dated, the 13th March, 2013
का.आ. 1680.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, आसनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 10/2012द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
AWARD
In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section(1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/ 15/2012-I.R.(CM-II) dated 29-03-2012 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
[सं. एल- 22012/11/2012-आईआर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 16th July, 2013
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of J. K. Nagar Colliery of M/s. ECL in not paying HRA @ 10% of basic to Sri Ramu Ruidas S/o Late Habul Ruidas is fair and justified ? To what relief the concerned workman is entitled to?"
S.O. 1680.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 10/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of J.K. Nagar Colliery, M/s. E.C. Ltd., and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16-07-2013.
[No. L-22012/11/2012-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM-LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
Present : Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen,
Presiding Officer
Reference No. 10 of 2012
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/15/ 2012-IR (CM-II) dated 29-03-2012 of the abovesaid reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 06 of 2012 was registered on 19-04-12 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that Sri D. K. Routh, Branch Joint Secretary of the union, has endorsed that the case may be closed and no dispute award may be passed as the workman is now no more Parties : The management of J. K. Nagar
Colliery, M/s. ECL, Burdwan (W.B.)
Vs.
The Branch Secy., CMC(HMS), Aradanga, Asansol (W.B.)[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4711
Representatives :
For the management : Sri P. K. Goswami,
Ld. Advocate
For the Union (Workman) : D. K. Routh, Ld.
Representative
Industry : Coal State : West Bengal
Dated, the 14th March, 2013
एल के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, आसनसेाल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 51/1993द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 22012/281/1993-आईआर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
AWARD
In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section(1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/ 11/2012-IR(CM-II) dated 28-03-2012 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
New Delhi, the 16th July, 2013
SCHEDULE
S.O. 1681.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 51/1993) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/s. E.C. Ltd., and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16-07-2013.
[No. L-22012/281/1993-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
"Whether the action of the management of J. K. Nagar Colliery of M/s. ECL in not paying HRA @ 10% of basic to Sri Balmiki Ram is fair and justified ? To what relief the concerned workman is entitled to ?"
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM-LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
Present : Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen, Presiding Officer
Reference No. 51 of 1993
Parties :
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/11/ 2012-I.R (CM-II) dated 28-03-2012 of the abovesaid reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 10 of 2012 was registered on 19-04-12 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
The management of Shyamsundarpur Colliery, M/s. ECL, Burdwan(WB)
Vs.
The Working President, CMU, Ukhra, Burdwan (W.B.)
Representatives :
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that Sri D. K. Routh, Branch Secretary of the union, appears and prayed for the closure of the case as the workman is not interested to proceed with the case any further. Since the workman is not interested to proceed with the case, the case is closed and accordingly an order of "No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
For the management : Sri P. K. Das, Ld.
Advocate
For the union (Workman) : None
ORDER
Industry : Coal State : West Bengal
Dated, the 14th March, 2013
AWARD
Let an "Award" be and the same is passed as "No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order of the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1681.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section(1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/ 281/93 IR(CM-II) dated 16-02-93 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
4712 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]SCHEDULE
Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/s. E.C. Ltd., and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-07-2013.
[No. L-22012/41/2000-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
''Whether the action of the management of Shyamsundarpur Colliery, Bankola Area, M/s. ECL, PO: Ukhra, Distt. Burdwan in dismissing Shri Suku Majhi, UG Loader in the Shyamsundarpur Colliery vide their letter No. BA/PD/Dis/1786 dated 27-5-91 is justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to?''
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
Present : Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen, Presiding Officer
Reference No. 73 of 2000
Parties :
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/ 281/93-IR (CM-II) dated 16-2-93 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 51 of 1993 was registered on 23.12.93 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
The management of Bahula Colliery, M/s., ECL, Burdwan (WB)
Vs.
The Gen. Secy., UCMU(INTUC), Ukhra, Burdwan (W.B.)
Representatives :
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that the workman is neither appearing nor taking any step since 1ong. It seems that the workman is now no more interested to proceed with the case any further. The case is also too old- 1993. Since the workman is not interested to proceed with the case, the case is closed and accordingly an order of "No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
For the management : Sri P. K. Goswami,
Ld. Advocate
For the union (Workman) : None
ORDER
Industry : Coal State : West Bengal
Dated 13th March, 2013
AWARD
Let an "Award" be and the same is passed as "No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour,' New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- section(1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/ 41/2000 IR(CM-II) dated -4-8-2000 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 1682.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय आसनसेाल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 73/2000द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 22012/41/2000-आईआर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 16th July, 2013
S.O. 1682.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 73/2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour "Whether the action of the management of Bahula Colliery of M/s. Eastern Coalfields Ltd. in not regularising Sh. Moloy Kumar Banerjee, Mining Helper as Cap Lamp Issue Clerk w.e.f. 1991 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/41/ 2000-IR (CM-II) dated 4-8-2000 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 73 of 2000 was registered on 6-9-2000 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4713
Parties :
appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
The management of Lachipur Colliery, M/s. ECL, Burdwan(WB)
Vs.
The Asst. Gen. Secy., KMC, Asansol (W.B.)
Representatives :
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that the workman is neither appearing nor taking any step since long. It seems that the workman has lost his interest to proceed with the case any further. Since the workman is no more interested to proceed with the case, the case is closed and accordingly an order of "No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
For the Management : None
For the Union (Workman) : None
Industry : Coal State : West Bengal
Dated 20-2 2013
ORDER
AWARD
Let an "Award" be and the same is passed as "No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- section(1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/ 88/99 IR (CM-II) dated 31-8-1999 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 1683.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई सी एल के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, आसनसेाल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 148/1999द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 22012/88/1999-आई. आर. ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 16th July, 2013
S.O. 1683.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 148/1999) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/s. E.C. Ltd., and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-07-2013.
[No. L-22012/88/1999-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer "Whether the action of the management of Lachipur Colliery of M/s. ECL in forcefully superannuating Sh. Durja Dakua, Wagon Loader from 1-7-88 and subsequently allowing him in duty on 23-7-89 and not paying the wages for the period of forced idleness from 1-7-88 to 23-7-89 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"
Having received the Order of Letter No.L-22012/88/ 99-IR (CM II) dated 31-8-1999 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 148 of 1999 was registered on 14-9-99 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
ANNEXURE
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that the Union is neither appearing nor taking any step after 16.02.2006 despite registered notices. Several opportunities were given but of no effect. It seems that the workman is now no more interested to proceed with the case further. Since the Union does not want to proceed with the case further, the case is closed and accordingly an order of "No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
ORDER
Present : Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen, Presiding Officer
Reference No. 148 of 1999
Let an "Award" be and the same is passed as "No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt.
4714 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 16 जुलाई, 2013
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-22012/ 118/93 IR (CM-II) dated 17-8-1993 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 1684.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स बी सी सी एल के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, आसनसेाल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 37/1993द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 22012/118/1993-आईआर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]
बी. एम. पटनायक, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 16th July, 2013
S.O. 1684.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 37/1993) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-07-2013.
[No. L-22012/118/1993-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Desk Officer "Whether the action of the management of Central Ropeways, B.B. Camp, in not paying the wages to Shri Kalachand Bouri for the period from 22-8-90 to 23-12-90 and to Narayan Kumar, Kamdeb Bouri and Nando Kumbhakar for the period from 11-9-90 to 23-12-90 is justified ? If not, to what relief is the concerned workmen entitled to?"
Having received the Order of Letter No. L-22012/ 118/93-IR (CM-II) dated 17-8-1993 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 37 of 1993 was registered on 23-8-93 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
ANNEXURE
On perusal of the case record, it has been found that the Union is neither appearing nor taking any step since long despite registered notices. Several opportunities were given but of no effect. It seems that the workman is now no more interested to proceed with the case further. Since the case is too old-1993, the case is closed and accordingly an order of "No Dispute Award" is hereby passed.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
ORDER
Present : Sri Jayanta Kumar Sen, Presiding Officer
Reference No. 37 of 1993
Parties :
The management of, Ropeway, B.B. Camp, M/s. BCCL, Dhanbad(Jharkhand)
Vs.
The Gen. Secy., CREU, Purulia (W.B.)
Let an "Award" be and the same is passed as "No Dispute" existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
JAYANTA KUMAR SEN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 17 जुलाई, 2013
Representatives :
For the management : None
For the union (Workman) : None
Industry : Coal State : Jharkhand
Dated 21-2 2013 का.आ. 1685.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार नर्मदा मालवा ग्रामीण बैंक के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 78/93द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
AWARD
In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- section(1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the
[सं. एल- 12012/30/93-आईआर ;बी-Iद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4715 New Delhi, the 17th July, 2013
S.O. 1685.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No.78/93) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Narmada Malwa Gramin Bank and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 12-07-2013.
[No. L-12012/30/93-IR(B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer had approached Labour Officer, Indore. 1st party claims that he was continuously working for 5 years he was dong work of scavenging, distribution of letters, filling water, movements of files, stationery etc. That he had completed 240 days continuous service during each of the year.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
3. IInd party submitted Written Statement at Page 7/1 to 7/4. It is submitted by IInd party that the rural banks were established as per act of 1976. 1st party workman was engaged as per exigency of work. He had never completed 90 days of service in a calendar year or 240 days continuous service during any of the year. That services of 1st party were engaged when regular employee used to remain absent. That services of 34 casual employees were regularized as per settlement before ALC, Indore. The name of 1st party was not appearing in it. IInd party further contented that the reference is not legal, there is no industrial dispute and therefore reference deserves to be rejected.
NO. CGIT/LC/R/78/93
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R. B. PATLE
Shri Prem Narayin, S/o Shri Balaram Raikwar, 205, Laxmi Nagar Colony, Ujjain
...Workman 4. Ist party filed rejoinder at Page 8/1 to 8/3. He has reiterated his earlier pledings that he was working as messenger during leave vacancy. That he has continuously worked for 3 years with IInd party. He had completed 240 days service during each of the calendar year. That his services were termmated illegally.
Versus
The President, Narmada Malwa Gramin Bank, Dashhara Maidan, Ujjain
... Management 5. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below :
AWARD
Passed on this 10th day of June, 2013 (i) Whether the action of the — In Affirmative management of Indore Ujjain Kshetriya Gramin Bank in not regularizing the services of Shri Prem Narain Balaram is justified?
(ii) If so, to what relief the — Relief prayed by workman is entitled to?" workman is rejected.
REASONS
1. As per letter dated 7-4-1993 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section -10 of I. D. Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L- 12012/30/93-IR(B-I) . The dispute under reference relates to :
" Whether the action of the management of Indore Ujjain Kshetriya Gramin Bank in not regularizing the services of Shri Prem Narain Balaram is justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date?"
2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. 1st party workman submitted his statement of claim at Page 2/1 to 2/3. The case of 1st party workman is that he was working with IInd party as messenger from 1986 to 1991. Again after gap of one month, continuously worked till year 1994. His services were terminated after he 6. 1st party workman is claiming for reinstatement. It is submitted that he was continuously working for a period of 3 years and then terminated whereas the terms of reference deals with whether the action of the management in not regularizing services of 1st party workman is legal. 1st party workman filed affidavit of his evidence at Page 19/1 to 19/2. In his evidence, he has stated that he was continuously working as messenger with Ilnd party from February, 1988 to May, 1991. He had completed 240 days continuous work during each of the year. That he was doing different works of messenger. In his cross- examination, workman says he was engaged on daily wages. He knows one Gajanand Sharma. At the time of his evidence, he was not working in the Ilnd party. He was discontinued from work from 1992. He denied that he was engaged by Bank as per exigency of work.
4716 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 10, 2013/SRAVANA 19, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]7. Management filed affidavit of evidence of witness Shri Devi Singh Nayak . The said witness has stated that 1st party was engaged for cleaning work as per exigency. He was paid wages for petty works. That 1st party is claiming regularization without following recruitment rules. The evidence of management's witness remained unchallenged as 1st party workman failed to cross-examine the said witness.
New Delhi, 17th July, 2013
S.O. 1686.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No.19/98) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of State Bank of India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 12-07-2013.
[No. L-12012/109/97-IR(B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM - LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/19/98
8. After the evidence was closed, case was fixed for argument on 13-11-11, 11-4-2012, 5-10-12 but paties remained absent. On, 12-4-13, the parties remamed absent, notice was directed to be issued. It appears that no notice was issued to the parties. However, both parties remained absent from 29-5-2013. The conduct of parties shows that they did not show interest in argument of the matter. The pleadings and evidence of 1st party doesnot show that he was continuously working with the IInd party. His appointment was not made following recruitment process. The unchallenged evidence of management's witness is on the point that 1st party workman was engaged as per exigency of work without following recruitment rules. The evidence discussed above does not establish claim of 1st party for regularization of service. For above reasons, I answer Point No.1 in Affirmative.
Presiding Officer : SHRI R.B.PATLE
Shri Ramadhar Parganiha, S/o Bisru Ram Parganiha, Block No. 29/1 /H, Risali Sector, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (MP)
...Workman
Versus
9. Point No. 2- In view of my finding on Point No.1, as 1st party are not appointed after following procedure for recruitment rather unchallenged evidence of management's witness that the services of 1st party were engaged as per exigency of work. The workman is not entitled to regularization. The relief prayed by workman is rejected.
10. Accordingly award is passed as under :—
Regional Manager, State Bank of India, Region-III, Shankar Nagar, Raipur (MP)
...Management
AWARD
(1) The action of the IInd party management in not regularizing the services of 1st party Shri Prem Narain Balaram is justified.
(2) Relief prayed by workman is rejected.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 17 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1686.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के प्रबंध्तंत्रा के संब( नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 19/98द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 12-07-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 12012/109/97-आईआर ;बी-Iद्ध]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अध्किारी Passed on this 24th day of June, 2013
1. As per letter dated 21-1-98 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section -10 of I. D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L- 12012/l09/97-IR(B-I). The dispute under reference relates to :
" Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India, through Regional Manager, Region- III, Raipur in relation to their Sector-I, Bhilai Branch in refusing employment to Shri Ramadhar Parganiha, waterman w.e. f. 29-10-95 is lawful and justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled to?"
2. After receiving reference notices were issued to the parties. Statement of claim is submitted, by workman at Page 6/1 to 6/4. It is case of 1st party workman that he was appointed on 1-7-95 on permanent post of waterman. He was continuously working with IInd party till 20-10-95. His services were orally terminated on 28-8-95. That in Conciliation proceedings, IInd party had admitted[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : अगस्त 10, 2013/श्रावण 19, 1935 4717
REASONS
that workman was paid wages Rs. 20 per day. That workman claims that he had continuously worked for 480 days. His services were discontinued without paying retrenchment compensation, without notice in violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. That junior employees Mr. Tondon was continued as waterman. Termination of his services is illegal. Rule 76, 77 of I.D. Act was not complied Principles of last come 1st go was not followed. On such grounds, workman is praying for his reinstatement with consequential benefits.
3. IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 9/1 to 9/3. IInd party denied that workman was appointed on permanent vacant post of waterman from 1-7-94 to 28-10- 95. It is submitted that applicant was engaged as temporary employee due to exigencies. He was paid Rs. 20 to 25as part time worker. That workman was not in continuous service. He was working as per the terms of contract. That services are not terminated in violation of provisions of I.D. Act. That workman is not covered as defined under I.D. Act. He was not appointed on permanent post. IInd party prays for rejection of claim of workman.
4. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below :—
(i) "Whether the action of the In Affirmative management of State Bank of India, through Regional Manager, Region-III, Raipur in relation to their Sector-I, Bhilai Branch in refusing employment to Shri Ramadhar Parganiha, waterman w.e.f. 29-10-95 is legal ?
(ii) If so, to what relief the Relief prayed by workman is entitled to?" workman is rejected.
5. Though workman challenged termination of his services from 29 10-95, he has failed to adduce evidence in support of his claim. Workman was proceeded ex parte on 18-1-95. Management filed affidavit of its witness Shri Jayant Bhardwaj. He has stated in his affidavit that the workman was not engaged against permanent vacant post. Workman was engaged on daily wage basis as per exigency of work. He was feed to come on next day for his work. The management was at liberty not engaging him on next date. That Branch Manager working at various branches has no authority to appoint any subordinate staff on regular basis, however, they are authorized to appoint person on daily wages depending upon exigency of work. That workman has not worked for 240 days in any calendar year. He is not entitled to retrenchment compensation. That there is no relationship of master and employee. The evidence of management's witness remained unchallenged as workman failed to cross-examine the witness of the management.
6. Considering unchallenged evidence of management's witness and the workman has not adduced any evidence in support of his claim, it cannot be said that the action of the management is legal. For above reasons, I record my finding in Point No.1 in Affirmative.
7. In the result, award is passed as under :—
1. The action of the management of State Bank of India, through Regional Manager, Region-III, Raipur in relation to their Sector- I, Bhilai Branch in refusing employment to Shri Ramadhar Parganiha, waterman w.e.f. 29-10-95 is legal.
2. Relief prayed by workman is rejected.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
Printed by the Manager, Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064 and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054.