72 GI/2015
(221)
dkfeZd] yksd f'kdk;r rFkk isa'ku ea=kky;
(dkfeZd vkSj izf'k{k.k foHkkx)
ubZ fnYyh] 26 fnlEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 104-—dsUnz ljdkj ,rn~}kjk naM izfØ;k lafgrk]
1973 (1974 dk vf/fu;e la- 2) dh /kjk 24 dh mi&/kjk (8)
}kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, jkaph fLFkr >kj[kaM mPp
U;k;ky; esa fnYyh fo'ks"k iqfyl LFkkiuk (lhchvkbZ) }kjk tkap
fd, tk jgs ekeyksa vFkok muls mRiUu vU; ekeyksa esa vfHk;kstu]
vihyksa vkSj iqujh{k.kksa dk lapkyu djus fy, Jh dSyk'k izlkn
nso] vf/oDrk dks fnYyh fo'ks"k iqfyl LFkkiuk (dsUnzh; vUos"k.k
C;wjks) dk fo'ks"k yksd vfHk;kstd fu;qDr djrh gS A
[iQk- la- 225@49@2014&,-oh-Mh-&II]
jktho tSu] voj lfpo
MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC
GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS
(Department of Personnel and Training)
New Delhi, the 26th December, 2014
S.O.
104.—In exercise of the powers conferred
by sub-section (8) of section 24 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974), the Central Government
hereby appoints Shri Kailash Prasad Deo, Advocate as
Special Public Prosecutor of the Delhi Special Police
Establishment (Central Bureau of Investigation) in the
Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi for conducting the
prosecution, appeals, revisions or other matters arising
out of the cases investigated by the Delhi Special Police
Establishment (CBI).
[F. No. 225/49/2014.AVD.II]
RAJIV JAIN, Under Secy.
izkf/dkj ls izdkf'kr
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
lkIrkfgd
WEEKLY
la- 03]
ubZ fnYyh] tuojh 11] 2015—tuojh 17] 2015] 'kfuokj@ikS"k 21—ikS"k 27] 1936
No. 03]
NEW DELHI, JANUARY 11, 2015—JANUARY 17, 2015, SATURDAY/PAUSA 21—PAUSA 27, 1936
bl Hkkx esa fHkUu i`"B la[;k nh tkrh gS ftlls fd ;g i`Fkd ladyu ds :i esa j[kk tk lds
Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation
Hkkx II—[kaM 3—mi&[akM (ii)
PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)
Hkkjr ljdkj ds ea=kky;ksa (j{kk ea=kky; dks NksM+dj) }kjk tkjh fd, x, lkafof/d vkns'k vkSj vf/lwpuk,a
Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India
(Other than the Ministry of Defence)
jftLVªh la. Mh. ,y. (,u) 04@0007@2003µ05
REGD. NO. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05
222
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ubZ fnYyh] 8 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 105-—dsUnzh; ljdkj ,rn~}kjk naM izfØ;k lafgrk]
1973 (1974 dk vf/fu;e la- 2) dh /kjk 24 dh mi&/kjk (8)
}kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, fnYyh fo'ks"k iqfyl LFkkiuk
(dsUnzh; vUos"k.k C;wjks) }kjk laLFkkfir vkjlh 11(,)@2012@lhchvkbZ]
,lhch psUubZ rFkk blls lEc¼ ,oa mlh laO;ogkj ds vU; ekeyksa
ls mRiUu vihyksa@iqujh{k.kksa esa psUubZ fLFkr ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky;]
enzkl esa mifLFkr gksus ds fy, Jh ijethr flag iVokfy;k] Hkkjr
ds vfrfjDr lkfyflVj tujy dks fo'ks"k yksd vfHk;kstd ds :i
esa fu;qDr djrh gSA
¹iQk- la- 225@28@2014&,-oh-Mh-&IIº
jktho tSu] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 8th January, 2015
S.O. 105.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
sub-section (8) of section 24 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974), the Central Government
hereby appoints Shri Paramjit Singh Patwalia, Additional
Solicitor General of India as Special Public Prosecutor for
appearing in CBI Case No. RC 11(A)/2012, CBI, ACB,
Chennai before the Hon'ble High Court of Madras at
Chennai on behalf of (CBI) Delhi Special Police
Establishment and appeals/revisions or other matters
connected therewith and incidental thereto.
[F. No. 225/28/2014.AVD.II]
RAJIV JAIN, Under Secy.
foÙk ea=kky;
(foÙkh; lsok,a foHkkx)
ubZ fnYyh] 31 fnlEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 106-—jk"Vªh;d`r cSad (izca/ ,oa izdh.kZ mica/)
Ldhe] 1970@1980 ds [kaM 3 ds mi&[kaM (1) vkSj [kaM 8 ds
mi&[kaM (1) ds lkFk ifBr cSaddkjh daiuh (miØeksa dk vtZu
,oa varj.k) vf/fu;e] 1970@1980 dh /kjk 9 dh mi&/kjk (3)
ds [kaM (d) }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUnzh;
ljdkj] ,rn~}kjk] cSad vkWiQ bafM;k ds dk;Zikyd funs'kd
Jh vkj- dksfV'oju (tUe frfFk % 10-06-1956) dks muds }kjk
inHkkj xzg.k djus dh rkjh[k ls vf/of"kZrk dh vk;q izkIr dj ysus
rd vFkok vxys vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh igys gks] bf.M;u vksojlht
cSad ds izca/ funs'kd ,oa eq[; dk;Zikyd vf/dkjh ds :i esa
fu;qDr djrh gS A
¹iQk- la- 4@4@2013&chvks&I (ii)º
fot; eYgks=kk] voj lfpo
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Department of Financial Services)
New Delhi, the 31st December, 2014
S.O. 106.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 9 of The Banking
Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings)
Act, 1970/1980 read with sub-clause (1) of clause 3 and
sub-clause (1) of clause 8 of The Nationalized Banks
(Management and Miscellanceous Provisions) Scheme,
1970/1980, the Central Government, hereby appoints Shri
R. Koteeswaran (DoB : 10.06.1956), Executive Director, Bank
of India as Managing Director & Chief Executive Officer,
Indian Overseas Bank from the date of assumption of
charge of the post up to the age of superannuation or
until further orders, whichever is earlier.
[F. No. 4/4/2013.BO-I (ii)]
VIJAY MALHOTRA, Under Secy.
ubZ fnYyh] 31 fnlEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 107-—jk"Vªh;d`r cSad (izca/ ,oa izdh.kZ micaèk)
Ldhe] 1970@1980 ds [kaM 3 ds mi&[kaM (1) vkSj [kaM 8 ds
mi&[kaM (1) ds lkFk ifBr cSaddkjh daiuh (miØeksa dk vtZu
,oa varj.k) vf/fu;e] 1970@1980 dh /kjk 9 dh mi&/kjk (3)
ds [kaM (d) }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUnzh;
ljdkj] ,rn~}kjk] iatkc ,aM fla/ cSad ds dk;Zikyd funs'kd
Jh fd'kksj dqekj lkalh (tUe frfFk % 19-08-1957) dks
01-01-2015 dks vFkok mlds ckn muds }kjk inHkkj xzg.k djus dh
rkjh[k ls vf/of"kZrk dh vk;q izkIr dj ysus rd vFkok vxys
vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh igys gks] fot;k cSad ds izca/ funs'kd ,oa
eq[; dk;Zikyd vf/dkjh ds :i esa fu;qDr djrh gS A
¹iQk- la- 4@4@2013&chvks&I (ii)º
fot; eYgks=kk] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 31st December, 2014
S.O. 107.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 9 of The Banking
Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings)
Act, 1970/1980 read with sub-clause (1) of clause 3 and
sub-clause (1) of clause 8 of The Nationalized Banks
(Management and Miscellanceous Provisions) Scheme,
1970/1980, the Central Government, hereby appoints
Shri Kishore Kumar Sansi (DoB : 19.08.1957), Executive
Director, Punjab & Sind Bank as Managing Director &
CEO, Vijaya Bank from the date of assumption of charge
of the post on or after 01.01.2015 up to the age of
superannuation or until further orders, whichever is earlier.
[F. No. 4/4/2013-BO-I (ii)]
VIJAY MALHOTRA, Under Secy.
¹Hkkx IIó[akM 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
223
ubZ fnYyh] 31 fnlEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 108-—jk"Vªh;d`r cSad (izca/ ,oa izdh.kZ mica/)
Ldhe] 1970@1980 ds [kaM 3 ds mi&[kaM (1) vkSj [kaM 8 ds
mi&[kaM (1) ds lkFk ifBr cSaddkjh daiuh (miØeksa dk vtZu
,oa varj.k) vf/fu;e] 1970@1980 dh /kjk 9 dh mi&/kjk (3)
ds [kaM (d) }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUnzh;
ljdkj] ,rn~}kjk] cSad vkWiQ cM+kSnk ds dk;Zikyd funs'kd Jh ih-
Jhfuokl (tUe frfFk % 10-06-1956) dks muds }kjk inHkkj xzg.k
djus dh rkjh[k ls vf/of"kZrk dh vk;q izkIr dj ysus rd vFkok
vxys vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh igys gks] ;qukbVsM cSad vkWiQ bafM;k ds
izca/ funs'kd ,oa eq[; dk;Zikyd vf/dkjh ds :i esa fu;qDr
djrh gS A
¹iQk- la- 4@4@2013&chvks&I (iii)º
fot; eYgks=kk] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 31st December, 2014
S.O. 108.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 9 of The Banking
Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings)
Act, 1970/1980 read with sub-clause (1) of clause 3 and
sub-clause (1) of clause 8 of The Nationalized Banks
(Management and Miscellanceous Provisions) Scheme,
1970/1980, the Central Government, hereby appoints
Shri P. Srinivas (DoB : 10.06.1956), Executive Director, Bank
of Baroda as Managing Director and Chief Executive
Officer, United Bank of India from the date of assumption
of charge of the post up to the age of superannuation or
until further orders, whichever is earlier.
[F. No. 4/4/2013-BO-I (iii)]
VIJAY MALHOTRA, Under Secy.
ubZ fnYyh] 31 fnlEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 109-—jk"Vªh;d`r cSad (izca/ ,oa izdh.kZ micaèk)
Ldhe] 1970@1980 ds [kaM 3 ds mi&[kaM (1) vkSj [kaM 8 ds
mi&[kaM (1) ds lkFk ifBr cSaddkjh daiuh (miØeksa dk vtZu
,oa varj.k) vf/fu;e] 1970@1980 dh /kjk 9 dh mi&/kjk (3)
ds [kaM (d) }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUnzh;
ljdkj] ,rn~}kjk] lsUVªy cSad vkWiQ bafM;k ds dk;Zikyd funs'kd
Jh vfues"k pkSgku (tUe frfFk % 30-06-1957) dks muds }kjk
inHkkj xzg.k djus dh rkjh[k ls vf/of"kZrk dh vk;q izkIr dj ysus
rd vFkok vxys vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh igys gks] vksfj;aVy cSad
vkWiQ dkelZ ds izca/ funs'kd ,oa eq[; dk;Zikyd vf/dkjh ds
:i esa fu;qDr djrh gS A
¹iQk- la- 4@4@2013&chvks&I(iv)º
fot; eYgks=kk] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 31st December, 2014
S.O. 109.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 9 of The Banking
Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings)
Act, 1970/1980 read with sub-clause (1) of clause 3 and
sub-clause (1) of clause 8 of The Nationalized Banks
(Management and Miscellanceous Provisions) Scheme,
1970/1980, the Central Government, hereby appoints
Shri Animesh Chauhan (DoB : 30.06.1957), Executive
Director, Central Bank of India as Managing Director and
Chief Executive Officer, Oriental Bank of Commerce from
the date of assumption of charge of the post up to the age
of superannuation or until further orders, whichever is
earlier.
[F. No. 4/4/2013-BO-I (iv)]
VIJAY MALHOTRA, Under Secy.
ubZ fnYyh] 7 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 110-—fu{ksi chek vkSj izR;; xkjaVh fuxe
vfèkfu;e] 1961 (1961 dk 47) dh /kjk 6 dh mi&/kjk 2 ds
[kaM (ii) ds lkFk ifBr /kjk 6 dh mi&/kjk (1) ds [kaM (Ä)
}kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUnzh; ljdkj] Hkkjrh;
fj”koZ cSad ds ijke'kZ ls] ,rn~}kjk] Jh ,p- ,u- izlkn dks mudh
vf/lwpuk dh rkjh[k ls rhu o"kZ dh vof/ ds fy, vFkok vxys
vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh igys gks] fu{ksi chek vkSj izR;; xkjaVh fuxe
(MhvkbZlhthlh) ds funs'kd eaMy esa va'kdkfyd xSj&ljdkjh
funs'kd ukfer djrh gSA
¹iQk- la- 6@13@2012&chvks&I@,iQVh,l&71393º
fot; eYgks=kk] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 7th January, 2015
S.O. 110.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (e) of sub-section (1) of Section 6 read with clause
224
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(ii) of sub-section 2 of Section 6 of the Deposit Insurance
and Credit Guarantee Corporation Act, 1961 (47 of 1961),
the Central Government, in consultation with Reserve Bank
of India, hereby nominates Shri H. N. Prasad as Part Time
Non-Official Director on the Board of Directors of Deposit
Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation (DICGC), for
a period of three years from the date of his notification, or
until further orders, whichever is earlier.
[F. No. 6/13/2012-BO-I/FTS-71393]
VIJAY MALHOTRA, Under Secy.
fons'k ea=kky;
(lhihoh foHkkx)
ubZ fnYyh] 30 fnlEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 111-—jktuf;d vkSj dkSalqyj vkWfiQlj ('kiFk
vkSj iQhl) ds vf/fu;e] 1948 (1948 dk 41) dh /kjk 2 ds
[kaM (d) ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnz ljdkj ,rn~}kjk Jh ch- ds- flag]
lgk;d] rFkk Jh ,- ,e- izlkn] lgk;d] dks 30 fnlEcj 2014 ls
Hkkjr ds mPpk;ksx] ekys esa dkSalqyj lsokvksa ds fy, lgk;d
dksalqyj vf/dkjh izkf/d`r djrh gSA
¹la- Vh-&4330@1@2014º
izdk'k pUn] mi lfpo (dkSalqyj)
MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
(CPV Division)
New Delhi, the 30th December, 2014
S.O. 111.—In pursuance of the clause (a) of the
Section 2 of the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Oaths
and fees) Act, 1948 (41 of 1948), the Central Government
hereby authorises Shri B.K.Singh, Assistant and Shri A.
M. Prasad, Assistant, in High Commission of India, Male
(Maldives) to perform the Consular services as Assistant
Consular Officer with effect from 30th December, 2014.
[No. T. 4330/01/2014]
PRAKASH CHAND, Dy. Secy. (Consular)
ukxj foekuu ea=kky;
(,,vkbZ vuqHkkx)
ubZ fnYyh] 8 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 112-—dsUnz ljdkj Hkkjrh; foekuiÙku izkfèkdj.k
vf/fu;e] 1994 (1994 dk 55) esa iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs
gq,] ,rn~}kjk Jh vkj- ds- JhokLro] vkbZ,,l (ts,p % 84) dks
rRdky vkesyu vk/kj ij fnukad 2 tuojh] 2015 dh vijkg~u
ls ` 80]000—125]000 ds osrueku esa ikap o"kZ dh vof/
vFkok mudh vf/of"kZrk] vFkok vxys vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh igys
gks] Hkkjrh; foekuiÙku izkf/dj.k ds vè;{k ds :i esa fu;qDr
djrh gSA
¹la- ,oh-&24011@1@2014&,,vkbZº
ds- oh- mUuhd`".ku] voj lfpo
MINISTRY OF CIVIL AVIATION
(AAI Section)
New Delhi, the 8th January, 2015
S.O. 112.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
Section 3 of the Airports Authority of India Act, 1994
(No. 55 of 1994), the Central Government hereby appoint
Shri R. K. Srivastava, IAS (JH : 84) as Chairman, Airports
Authority of India on immediate absorption basis, with
effect from afternoon of 2nd January, 2015 in the pay scale
of Rs. 80,000—1,25,000 for a period of five years or till the
date of his superannuation, or until further orders,
whichever is the earliest.
[No. AV. 24011/1/2014-AAI]
K. V. UNNIKRISHNAN, Under Secy.
¹Hkkx IIó[akM 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
225
miHkksDrk ekeys] [kk| vkSj lkoZtfud forj.k ea=ky;
¼miHkksDrk ekeys foHkkx½
Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks
ubZ fnYyh] 15 fnlEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 113-—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks fu;e] 1987 ds fu;e 7 ds mifu;e ¼1½ ds [kaM ¼[k½ ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh; ekud
C;wjks ,rn~}kjk vf/klwfpr djrk gS fd ftu Hkkjrh; ekudksa ds fooj.k uhps vuqlwph esa fn, x, gSa os LFkkfir gks x;s gSaA
vuqlwph
Ø- LFkkfir Hkkjrh; ekud ¼dksa½ dh la[;k
LFkkfir frfFk
Hkkjrh; ekud ¼dksa½ tks fd
jí gksus dh frfFk
la- o"kZ vkSj 'kh"kZd
jí gksus gSa] vxj gS] dh la[;k
o"kZ vkSj 'kh"kZd
¼1½
¼2½
¼3½
¼4½
¼5½
1-
vkbZ ,l@vkbZ ,l vks 834&1 % 1999
15 fnlacj] 2014 vkbZ ,l 3809 % 1979
15 fnlacj] 2014
vfXu&çfrjksf/krk ijh{k.k&Hkou fuekZ.k
ds ?kVd Hkkx 1 lkekU; vis{kk,a
2-
vkbZ ,l@vkbZ ,l vks 834&4 % 2000
15 fnlacj] 2014 vkbZ ,l 3809 % 1979
15 fnlacj] 2014
vfXu&çfrjksf/krk ijh{k.k&Hkou fuekZ.k
¼igyk iqujh{k.k½
ds ?kVd Hkkx 4 Hkkj oguh; mèokZ/j
i`FkDdkjh ?kVdksa dh fof’kf"V vis{kk,a
3-
vkbZ ,l@vkbZ ,l vks 834&5 % 2000
15 fnlacj] 2014 vkbZ ,l 3809 % 1979
15 fnlacj] 2014
vfXu&çfrjksf/krk ijh{k.k&Hkou fuekZ.k
¼igyk iqujh{k.k½
ds ?kVd Hkkx 5 Hkkj oguh; {kSfrt
i`FkDdkjh ?kVdksa dh fof’kf"V vis{kk,a
4-
vkbZ ,l 1757 ¼Hkkx 1½ % 2014@vkbZ ,l vks
15 fnlacj] 2014 vkbZ ,l 1757 % 1988
15 fnlacj] 2014
148&1 % 2009 /kkfRod lkexzh&pkihZ isUMwye
¼nwljk iqujh{k.k½
l?kVV~ Hkkx 1 ijh{k.k i)fr ¼rhljk iqujh{k.k½
5-
vkbZ ,l 4651 ¼Hkkx 4½ % 2014 canjxkg vkSj
15 fnlacj] 2014 vkbZ ,l 4651 ¼Hkkx 4½ % 1989
15 fnlacj] 2014
iru dh ;kstuk vkSj :i&jhfr lafgrk Hkkx 4
¼nwljk iqujh{k.k½
lkekU; :i js[kk ds fy, fopkj ¼rhljk iqujh{k.k½
6-
vkbZ ,l 4721 % 2014 lrgh@tehu ds uhps ds
15 fnlacj] 2014 vkbZ ,l 4721 % 2000
15 fnlacj] 2014
gkbMªksbySfDVªd ikoj LVs’kuksa dh ty fudklh
¼igyk iqujh{k.k½
vkSj futZyhdj.k gsrq jhfr lafgrk ¼nwljk iqujh{k.k½
7-
vkbZ ,l 5334 % 2014 osYM ds pqEcdh; d.k }kjk
15 fnlacj] 2014 vkbZ ,l 5334 % 2003
15 fnlacj] 2014
nks"k fudkyus gsrq&jhfr lafgrk ¼rhljk iqujh{k.k½
¼nwljk iqujh{k.k½
8-
vkbZ ,l 5522 % 2014 crZuksa ds fy, LVsuysl
15 fnlacj] 2014 vkbZ ,l 5522 : 1992
15 fnlacj] 2014
bLikr pnjs vkSj ifÙk;ka&fof’kf"V
¼nwljk iqujh{k.k½
¼rhljk iqujh{k.k½
9-
vkbZ ,l 6934 % 2014 mPp v‚xh vf/kçokg
15 fnlacj] 2014 vkbZ ,l 6934 : 1998
15 fnlacj] 2014
vkSj v‚fjfQl mRIykoksa dh gkbMªksfyd fMtkbu
¼igyk iqujh{k.k½
ds fy, flQkfj’ksa ¼nwljk iqujh{k.k½
226
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
10- vkbZ ,l 10052 ¼Hkkx 1@vuqHkkx 1 ½ % 2014
15 fnlacj] 2014 vkbZ ,l 10052
15 fnlacj] 2014
lhvkbZ,lihvkj 16-1-2010 jsfM;ks O;o/kku ,oa
¼Hkkx 1@[kaM 1½ % 1999
çfrj{kk ekiu midj.k ,oa i)fr;ka&fof’kf"V
¼igyk iqujh{k.k½
Hkkx 1 jsfM;ks O;o/kku ,oa çfrj{kk ekiu midj.k
vuqHkkx 2 ekiu midj.k ¼nwljk iqujh{k.k½
11- vkbZ ,l 10635 % 2014 cka/kksa esa ÝhcksMZ vis{kk,¡&
15 fnlacj] 2014 vkbZ ,l 10635 % 1993
15 fnlacj] 2014
ekxZn’khZ fl)kar ¼nwljk iqujh{k.k½
¼igyk iqujh{k.k½
12- vkbZ ,l 12588 % 2014 Lopy okgu&rsy vkSj
15 fnlacj] 2014 vkbZ ,l 12588 % 1988
15 fnlacj] 2014
ok;q dh lgk;rk okys nkc xst&fof’kf"V
¼igyk iqujh{k.k½
13- vkbZ ,l 12884 % 2014 Lopy okgu&czsd ç.kkyh] 15 fnlacj] 2014 vkbZ ,l 12884 % 1990
15 fnlacj] 2014
Oghy flysaMjksa ds fy, jcM+ ds cwV&dk;Zdkfjrk
vis{kk,a ¼igyk iqujh{k.k½
14- vkbZ ,l@vkbZ ,l vks@Vh ,l 13278 % 2011 uSuksa 15 fnlacj] 2014
NA
NA
ç|ksfxdh&çsjf.kd ;qfXer IykTek ekl LisDVªksehVªh
ds ç;ksx ls dkcZu uSuksV;wcksa ds uewuksa esa rkfRod
v’kqf) Kkr djuk
15- vkbZ ,l 16275 % 2014@vkbZ ,l vks@
15 fnlacj] 2014
NA
NA
Vh vkj 24578 % 2012 gkbMªksehVjh&/ofud MkIyj
çksQkbyj&[kqys pkSuy esa çokg eki dh fof/k
vkSj vuqç;ksx
16- vkbZ ,l 16278 ¼Hkkx 1½ % 2014@
15 fnlacj] 2014
NA
NA
vkbZ ,l vks 15011&1 % 2009 osfYMax ,oa lEc)
çfØ;kvksa esa LokLF; rFkk lqj{kk&Q;we ,oa xSlksa
dh lSEifyax ds fy, ç;ksx’kkyk i)fr Hkkx 1
vdZ osfYMax rFkk fo’ys"k.k ds fy, Q;we ds
,ddhdj.k ds nkSjku Q;we mRltZu nj
Kkr djuk
17- vkbZ ,l 16282 % 2014@vkbZ bZ lh 61930 % 1998 15 fnlacj] 2014
NA
NA
Qkbcj v‚fIVd fp=e; çrhdfo/k;k
18- vkbZ ,l 16283 % 2014@vkbZ bZ lh 61931 % 1998 15 fnlacj] 2014
NA
NA
Qkbcj v‚fIVd&'kCnkoyh
19- vkbZ ,l 16285 % 2014@vkbZ bZ lh 61745 % 1998 15 fnlacj] 2014
NA
NA
çdkf’kd rarq T;kfefr ijh{k.k lsV ds va’kkdu ds
fy;s ,aM&Qsl Nfo fo’ys"k.k çfØ;k
20- vkbZ ,l@vkbZ bZ lh 61400&24 % 2010 ok;q
15 fnlacj] 2014
NA
NA
Vjckbu Hkkx 24 rfM+r ls lqj{kk
bl Hkkjrh; ekud dh çfr;ka Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks] ekud Hkou] 9] cgknqj’kkg tQj ekxZ] ubZ fnYyh 110 002 {ks=h;
dk;kZy;ksa % ubZ fnYyh] dksydrk] paMhx<+] psUubZ] eqEcbZ] rFkk 'kk[kk dk;kZy;ksa % vgenkckn] caxykSj] Hkksiky] Hkqous’oj] dks;Ecrwj]
¼1½
¼2½
¼3½
¼4½
¼5½
¹Hkkx IIó[akM 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
227
xqokgkVh] gSnjkckn] t;iqj] ukxiqj] iVuk] iw.ks rFkk dksfp esa fcØh gsrq miyC/k gSaA Hkkjrh; ekudksa dks http://www.standardsbis.in
}kjk baVjuSV ij [kjhnk tk ldrk gSA
[lanHkZ ih;wch@th,u 1 % 3]
dyk ,e- okfj;j] funs'kd ¼fons'kh Hkk"kk ,oa izdk'ku½
MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION
(Department of Consumer Affairs)
(BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS)
New Delhi, the 15th December, 2014
S.O. 113.—In pursuance of Clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rules 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987,
the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the second
column of Schedule hereto annexed has been established on the date indicated against it in third column. The particulars
of the standards, if any, which are given in the fourth column shall also remain in force concurrently till they are cancelled
on the date indicated against them in the fifth column.
SCHEDULE
Sl.
No. & Year of the Indian Standards
Date of
No. & Year of the Indian
Date of
No.
Established
Establishment
Standard to be cancelled,
cancellation
if any
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
1
IS /ISO 834.1 : 1999 Fire-Resistance
15 December, 2014
IS 3809 : 1979
15 December, 2014
Tests-Elements of Building Construction
Part 1 General Requirements
2
IS/ISO 834.4 : 2000 Fire-Resistance
15 December, 2014
IS 3809 : 1979
15 December, 2014
Tests-Elements of Building Construction
(First Revision)
Part 4 Specific Requirements for Load
Bearing Vertical Separating Elements
3
IS/ISO 834.5 : 2000 Fire-Resistance
15 December, 2014
IS 3809 : 1979
15 December, 2014
Tests-Elements of Building Construction
(First Revision)
Part 5 Specific Requirements for Load
Bearing Horizontal Separating Elements
4
IS 1757 (Part 1) : 2014/ISO 148.1 : 2009
15 December, 2014
IS 1757 : 1988
15 December, 2014
Metallic Materials . Charpy Pendulum
(Second Revision)
Impact Test Part 1 Test Method
(Third Revision)
5
IS 4651 (Part 4) : 2014 Planning and
15 December, 2014
IS 4651 (Part 4) : 1989
15 December, 2014
Design of Ports and Harbours-Code of
(Second Revision)
Practice Part 4 General Design
Considerations (Third Revision)
6
IS 4721 : 2014 Code of Practice for
15 December, 2014
IS 4721 : 2000
15 December, 2014
Drainage and Dewatering of Surface/
(First Revision)
Underground Hydroelectric Power
Stations (Second Revision)
7
IS 5334 : 2014 Magnetic Particle Flaw
15 December, 2014
IS 5334 : 2003
15 December, 2014
Detection of Welds-Code of Practice
(Second Revison)
(Third Revision)
228
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
8
IS 5522 : 2014 Stainless Steel Sheets and 15 December, 2014
IS 5522 : 1992
15 December, 2014
Strips for Utensils-Specification
(Second Revision)
(Third Revision
9
IS 6934 : 2014 Hydraulic Design of High
15 December, 2014
IS 6934 : 1998
15 December, 2014
Ogee Overflow and Orifice Spillways-
(First Revision)
Recommendations (Second Revision)
10
IS 10052 (Part1/Sec 1) : 2014/CISPR
15 December, 2014
IS 10052 (Part 1/Sec 1) : 1999
15 December, 2014
16.1.1 : 2010 Radio Disturbance and
(First Revision)
Immunity Measuring Apparatus and
Methods.Specification Part 1 Radio
Disturbance and Immunity Measuring
Apparatus Section 1 Measuring
Apparatus (Second Revision)
11
IS 10635 : 2014 Freeboard Requirement
15 December, 2014
IS 10635 : 1993
15 December, 2014
in Dams - Guidelines (Second Revision)
(First Revision)
12
IS 12588 : 2014 Automotive Vehicles-Oil
15 December, 2014
IS 12588 : 1988
15 December, 2014
and Air Assisted Pressure Gauges-
Specification (First Revision)
13
IS 12884 : 2014 Automotive Vehicles-
15 December, 2014
IS 12884 : 1990
15 December, 2014
Braking Systems, Rubber Boots for
Brake Wheel Cylinders-Performance
Requirements (First Revision)
14
IS/ISO/TS 13278 : 2011
15 December, 2014
NA
NA
Nanotechnologies-Determination of
Elemental Impurities in Samples of
Carbon Nanotubes Using Inductively
Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry
15
IS 16275 : 2014/ISO/TR 24578 : 2012
15 December, 2014
NA
NA
Hydrometry.Acoustic Doppler Profiler-
Method and Application for
Measurement of Flow in Open Channels
16
IS 16278 (Part.1) : 2014/
15 December, 2014
NA
NA
ISO 15011.1 : 2009 Health and Safety in
Welding and Allied Processes.
Laboratory Method for Sampling Fumes
and Gases Part 1 Determination of Fume
Emission Rate During Arc Welding and
Collection of Fumes for Analysis
17
IS 16282 : 2014/IEC 61930 : 1998 Fibre
15 December, 2014
NA
NA
Optic Graphical Symbology
18
IS16283 : 2014/IEC 61931 : 1998 Fibre
15 December, 2014
NA
NA
Optic.Terminology
19
IS 16285 : 2014/IEC 61745 : 1998 End.
15 December, 2014
NA
NA
Face Image Analysis Procedure for the
Calibration of Optical Fibre Geometry
Test Sets
20
IS/IEC 61400-24 : 2010 Wind Turbines
15 December, 2014
NA
NA
Part 24 Lightning Protection
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
¹Hkkx IIó[akM 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
229
Copies of these standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur
Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi –110002 and Regional Offices : Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch
Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune,
Kochi.
Date : 15.12.2014
[Ref : PUB/GN.1:3]
KALA M. VARIAR, Director (Foreign Languages & Publication)
ubZ fnYyh] 30 fnlacj] 2014
dk-vk- 114-—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks fu;e 1987 ds fu;e 7 ds mi&fu;e ¼1½ ds [kaM ¼[k½ ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh; ekud
C;wjks ,rn~}kjk vf/klwfpr djrk gS fd uhps vuqlwph esa fn;s x;s ekud ¼dksa½ esa la’kks/ku fd;k x;k@fd;s x;s gSaA
vuqlwph
Øe
la’kksf/kr Hkkjrh; ekud ¼dksa½ dh la[;k]
la’kks/ku dh la[;k
dk¡ye ¼3½ ds la’kks/ku dh
dk¡ye ¼3½ esa n’kkZ;s x,
la[;k o"kZ vkSj 'kh"kZd
vkSj frfFk
çfrLFkkiu frfFk
vuqlkj og ftl frfFk
rd ekud fcuk la’kks/ku
ds Fkk ykxw jgsxh
1-
vkbZ ,l 1759 % 1986 ¼nwljk iqujh{k.k½
la’kks/ku la[;k 2
30 fnlacj] 2014
30 twu] 2015
vDVwcj 2014
2-
vkbZ ,l 3196 ¼Hkkx 2½ ¼ikapok iqujh{k.k½
la’kks/ku la[;k 2
30 fnlacj] 2014
30 twu] 2015
uoacj 2014
3-
vkbZ ,l 12615 % 2011 ¼nwljk iqujh{k.k½
la’kks/ku la[;k 1
30 fnlacj] 2014
30 twu] 2015
uoacj 2014
4-
vkbZ ,l 14106 % 1996
la’kks/ku la[;k 6
30 fnlacj] 2014
30 twu] 2015
uoacj 2014
5-
vkbZ ,l 16098 ¼Hkkx 2½ % 2013
la’kks/ku la[;k 1
30 fnlacj] 2014
30 ekpZ] 2015
uoacj 2014
bl Hkkjrh; ekud dh çfr;‚a Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjksa] ekud Hkou] 9] cgknqj’kkg tQj ekxZ] ubZ fnYyh 110002 {ks=h;
dk;kZy;ksa % ubZ fnYyh] dksydrk] p.Mhx<+] psUubZ] eqEcbZ] rFkk 'kk[kk dk;kZy;ksa % vgenkckn] caxykSj] Hkksiky] Hkqous’oj] dks;Ecrwj]
xqokgkVh] gSnjkckn] t;iqj] ukxiqj] iVuk] iw.ks rFkk dksfp esa fcØh gsrq miyC/k gSaA Hkkjrh; ekudksa dks http://www.standardsbis.in
}kjk baVjuSV ij [kjhnk tk ldrk gSA
[lanHkZ ih;wch@th,u 2 % 2]
dyk ,e- okfj;j] funs'kd ¼fons'kh Hkk"kk ,oa izdk'ku½
New Delhi, the 30th December, 2014
S.O. 114.—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 ê that amendments to the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in
the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :
SCHEDULE
Sl.
No. and year of the Indian Standards
No. and year of
Date of Establishment Date till which the Standard
No.
the amendment
of the Amendment
without amendment as
at column (3)
mentioned at Column (3)
shall remain in force
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
1
IS 1759 : 1986 Specification for Powrahs Amendment No. 2
30 December, 2014
30 June, 2015
(Second Revision)
October 2014
230
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
2
IS 3196 (Part 2) : 2006 Welded Low
Amendment No. 1
30 December, 2014
30 June, 2015
Carbon Steel Cylinders Exceeding
November 2014
5 Litre Water Capacity for Low Pressure
Liquefiable Gases Part 2 Cylinders for
Liquifiable Non-Toxic Gases Other than
LPG.Specification (Fifth Revision)
3
IS 12615 : 2011 Energy Efficient
Amendment No. 1
30 December, 2014
30 June, 2015
Induction Motors-Three Phase
November 2014
Squirrel Cage (Second Revision)
4
IS 14106 : 1996 Direct Action
Amendment No. 6
30 December, 2014
30 June, 2015
Handpumps-Specification
November 2014
5
IS 16098 (Part 2) : 2013 Structured.
Amendment No. 1
30 December, 2014
30 March, 2015
Wall Plastics Piping Systems for Non.
November 2014
Pressure Drainage and Sewerage.
Specification Part 2 Pipes and Fittings
with Non-Smooth External Surface,
Type B
Copy of these Standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur
Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi.110 002 and Regional Offices:New Delhi, Kolcatta Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also
Branch Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Nagpur, Patna,
Pune, Kochi.On line purchase of Indian standard can be made at :http://www.standardsbis.in.
[Ref : PUB/GN 2:2]
KALA M. VARIAR, Director (Foreign Languages & Publication)
¼[kk| vkSj lkoZtfud forj.k foHkkx½
ubZ fnYyh] 6 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 115-—dsUnzh; ljdkj jktHkk"kk ¼la?k ds 'kkldh; iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx½ fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e 10 ds mi&fu;e
¼4½ ds vuqlj.k esa miHkksDrk ekeys] [kk| vkSj lkoZtfud forj.k ea=ky; ¼[kk| vkSj lkoZtfud forj.k foHkkx½ ds iz'kklfud
fu;a=k.kkèkhu lSaVªy jsylkbM osvjgkÅl daiuh fyfeVsM ds fuEufyf[kr dk;kZy;] ftlds 80 izfr'kr ls vf/kd deZpkjho`Un us fgUnh
dk dk;Zlkèkd Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS] dks jkti= esa vf/klwfpr djrh gS %&
lSaVªy jsylkbM osvjgkÅl daiuh fyfeVsM]
¼Hkkjr ljdkj dk m|e&feuh jRu½
Hkwry] izxfr eSnku esVªks LVs'ku fcfYMax]
ubZ fnYyh&110001
[la- bZ&11011@1@2008&fgUnh]
iz'kkar f=osnh] la;qDr lfpo
(Department of Food and Public Distribution)
New Delhi, the 6th January, 2015
S.O. 115.—In pursuance of Sub.rule (4) of rule 10 of the Official Language (Use for Official Purpose of the Union)
Rules, 1976 the Central government hereby notifies the following office of Central Railside Warehouse Company Limited
¹Hkkx IIó[akM 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
231
under the administrative control of the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution (Deptt. of Food & Public
Distribution), where of more than 80% of staff have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi.
Central Railside Warehouse Company Limited,
(A Government of India Enterprise.Mini Ratna),
Ground Floor, Pragati Maidan Metro Station Building,
New Delhi.110001.
[No. E.11011/1/2008-Hindi]
PRASHANT TRIVEDI, Jt. Secy.
ubZ fnYyh] 12 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 116-—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks fu;e 1987 ds fu;e 7 ds mifu;e ¼1½ ds [kaM ¼[k½ ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh; ekud
C;wjks ,rn~}kjk vf/klwfpr djrk gS fd uhps vuqlwph esa fn;s x;s ekud ¼dks½ esa la’kks/ku fd;k x;k@fd;s x;s gSaA
vuqlwph
Øe
la’kksf/kr Hkkjrh; ekud ¼dksa½ dh la[;k]
la’kks/ku dh la[;k
dkWye ¼3½ ds la’kks/ku
dkWye ¼3½ esa n’kkZ;s x,
la[;k o"kZ vkSj 'kh"kZd
vkSj frfFk
dh çfrLFkkiu frfFk
vuqlkj og ftl frfFk
rd ekud fcuk la’kks/ku
ds Fkk ykxw jgsxh
1
2
3
4
5
1-
vkbZ ,l 294 % 1979 ¼nwljk iqujh{k.k½
la’kks/ku la[;k 2
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
Qjojh 2014
2-
vkbZ ,l 853 % 1964 ¼Revised½
la’kks/ku la[;k 1
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
fnlacj 2013
3-
vkbZ ,l 1114 % 1964 ¼Revised½
la’kks/ku la[;k 2
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
Qjojh 2014
4-
vkbZ ,l 2760 % 1980 ¼igyk iqujh{k.k½
la’kks/ku la[;k 3
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
uoacj 2014
5-
vkbZ ,l 3029 % 1964
la’kks/ku la[;k 2
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
fnlacj 2013
6-
vkbZ ,l 3177 % 1999 ¼nwljk iqujh{k.k½
la’kks/ku la[;k 3
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
uoacj 2014
7-
vkbZ ,l 4326 % 2013 ¼rhljk iqujh{k.k½
la’kks/ku la[;k 1
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
uoacj 2014
8-
vkbZ ,l 4401 % 2006 ¼pkSFkk iqujh{k.k½
la’kks/ku la[;k 1
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
uoacj 2014
9-
vkbZ ,l 5182 ¼Hkkx 2½ % 2001
la’kks/ku la[;k 1
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
¼igyk iqujh{k.k½
uoacj 2014
10-
vkbZ ,l 7202 % 1974
la’kks/ku la[;k 1
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
uoacj 2014
11-
vkbZ ,l 12171 % 2013
la’kks/ku la[;k 1
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
¼nwljk iqujh{k.k½
vDVwcj 2014
232
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
12-
vkbZ ,l 12866 % 1989
la’kks/ku la[;k 2
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
flrEcj 2014
13-
vkbZ ,l 14287 % 1995
la’kks/ku la[;k 2
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
uoacj 2014
14-
vkbZ ,l 14766 % 2000
la’kks/ku la[;k 1
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
vçSy 2014
15-
vkbZ ,l 15524 % 2004
la’kks/ku la[;k 1
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
uoacj 2014
16-
vkbZ ,l 15851 % 2009
la’kks/ku la[;k 2
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
vDVwcj 2014
17-
vkbZ ,l 15852 % 2009
la’kks/ku la[;k 2
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
vDVwcj 2014
18-
vkbZ ,l 15853 % 2009
la’kks/ku la[;k 2
12 tuojh] 2015
12 tuojh] 2015
vDVwcj 2014
bl Hkkjrh; ekud dh çfr;‚a Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks] ekud Hkou] 9] cgknqj’kkg tQj ekxZ] ubZ fnYyh 110002 {ks=h;
dk;kZy;ksa % ubZ fnYyh] dksydrk] p.Mhx<+] psUubZ] eqEcbZ] rFkk 'kk[kk dk;kZy;ksa % vgenkckn] caxykSj] Hkksiky] Hkqous’oj] dks;Ecrwj]
xqokgkVh] gSnjkckn] t;iqj] iVuk] iw.ks rFkk dksfp esa fcØh gsrq miyC/k gSaA Hkkjrh; ekudksa dks http://www.standardsbis.in }kjk
baVjuSV ij [kjhnk tk ldrk gSA
fnukad % 12 tuojh] 2015
[lanHkZ ih;wch@th,u 1 % 4]
dyk ,e- okfj;j] funs'kd ¼fons'kh Hkk"kk ,oa izdk'ku½
New Delhi, the 12th January, 2015
S.O. 116.—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 ê that amendments to the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in
the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :
SCHEDULE
Sl.
No. and year of the Indian Standards
No. and year of
Date of Establishment Date till which the Stamdard
No.
the amendment
of the Amendment
without amendment as
at column (3)
mentioned at Column (3)
shall remain in force
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
1
IS 294 : 1979 Specification for
Amendment No. 2
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Superphosphate (Second Revision)
February 2014
2
IS 853 : 1964 Specification for Bone.
Amendment No. 1
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Meal, Raw (Revised)
December 2013
3
IS 1114 : 1964 Specification for
Ammonium Chloride, Fertilizer Grade
Amendment No. 2
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
(Revised)
February 2014
1
2
3
4
5
¹Hkkx IIó[akM 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
233
4
IS 2760 : 1980 Specification for
Amendment No. 3
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Steel Chain Slings (First Revision)
November 2014
5
IS 3029 : 1964 Specification for
Amendment No. 2
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Castorseed Cake for Fertilizer Purposes
December 2013
6
IS 3177 : 1999 Code of Practice for
Amendment No. 3
Electric Overhead Travelling Cranes
November 2014
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
and Gantry Cranes Other Than Steel
Work Cranes (Second Revision)
7
IS 4326 : 2013 Earthquake Resistant
Amendment No. 1
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Design and Construction of Buildings.
November 2014
Code of Practice (Third Revision)
8
IS 4401 : 2006 Textiles.Twisted
Amendment No. 1
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Nylon Fish.Net Twines . Specification
November 2014
(Fourth Revision)
9
IS 5182 (Part 2) : 2001 Methods for
Amendment No. 1
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Measurement of Air Pollution Part 2
November 2014
Sulphur Dioxide (First Revision)
10
IS 7202 : 1974 Specification for
Amendment No. 1
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Inspection Gauges for Checking Threads
November 2014
of Gas Cylinder Valves for Use with
Breathing Apparatus
11
IS 12171 : 2013 Cotton Bales.
Amendment No. 1
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Specification (Second Revision)
October 2014
12
IS 12866 : 1989 Plastic Translucent
Amendment No. 2
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Sheets Made From Thermo.Setting
September 2014
Polyster Resin (Glassfibre Reinforced).
Specification
13
IS 14287 : 1995Textiles . Polypropylene
Amendment No. 2
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Multifilament Netting Twines.
November 2014
Specification
14
IS 14766 : 2000 Aggregate Size
Amendment No. 1
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Distribution and Water Stability of Soil
April 2014
Aggregates.Method of Determination
15
IS 15524 : 2004 Automotive Vehicles.
Amendment No. 1
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Retreading of Tyres by the Pre.Cured
November 2014
Process.Specification
16
IS 15851 : 2009 Textiles.Polyester
Amendment No. 2
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Cotton Blended Woven Saris for
October 2014
Uniforms
17
IS 15852 : 2009 Textiles.Polyester
Amendment No. 2
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Blended Woven Shirting for Uniforms
October 2014
18
IS 15853 : 2009 Textiles . Polyester
Amendments No. 2
12 January, 2015
12 January, 2015
Blended Woven Suiting for Uniforms
October 2014
Copy of these Standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar
Marg, New Delhi.110 002 and Regional Offices:New Delhi, Kolcatta Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
234
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune,
Kochi.On line purchase of Indian standard can be made at :http://www.standardsbis.in.
Date : 12 January, 2015
[Ref. : PUB/GN.1:4]
KALA M. VARIAR, Director (Foreign Languages & Publication)
ubZ fnYyh] 12 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 117-—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks (izek.ku) fofu;e 1988 ds fu;e 4 ds mifu;e (5) ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks
,rn~}kjk vf/lwfpr djrk gS fd ftu ykblsalksa ds fooj.k uhps vuqlwph esa fn, x, gS] os Lohd`r dj fn, x, gSa %&&
vuqlwph
Øa-
ykblsal
Lohd`r djus
ykblsal/kjh dk uke o irk
Hkkjrh; ekud dk 'kh"kZ
Hkk ek
Hkkx
vuq-
o"kZ
la-
la[;k
dh frfFk o"kZ@
la[;k
ekg
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1-
2894784
01-07-2014
eSd VSd e'khujh
lceflZcy iEilSV
8034
&
&
2002
IykV ua- 371] jksM+ ua- 8] th vkbZ Mh lh]
dkBokM+k] vgenkckn&382430
2-
2897891
01-07-2014
Jh fuyksldj iEil
vksiuoSy lceflZcy
14200
&
&
1994
263 rFkk 264] 'kqHk baMfLVª;y ,LVsV]
iEilSV
lh ,y fo|ky; ds ikl]
dkBokMk flaxjok jksM]
vgenkckn&382430
3-
2893984
02-07-2014
tsulu dscyl bafM;k izk- fyfeVsM
oSyfMax dscy
9857
&
&
1990
losZ ua. 16] IykV ua- 16, ,aM ch
vgenkckn esglkuk gkbos] xkWo pksaNkjMk]
rk dMh fMfLVªDV esglkuk
4-
2894178
02-07-2014
iou iEi
lceflZcy iEilSV
8034
&
&
2002
275@,] iQSl&1] th vkbZ Mh lh] ujksMk]
vgenkckn&382430
5-
2894885
03-07-2014
dSIVu baMLVªht
eksVlZ iQkj lceflZcy
9283
&
&
2013
xBkeu ikfV;k ds ikl vgenkckn gkbos]
iEilSV
ikyuiqj] culdkaBk&385001
6-
2894986
03-07-2014
lkxj ,aVjizkbZl
lceflZcy iEilSV
8034
&
&
2002
25] iapjRuk ,LVsV]
iQkstZ rFkk cyks;j ds ihNs]
ujksMk jksM+] vgenkckn&380025
7-
2894077
04-07-2014
,lkj LVhy bafM;k fyfeVsM
Lik;jy oSyfMM ikbZil
5504
&
&
1997
27 ds ,e] lwjr gftjk jksM+]
lwjr&394270
8-
2896081
07-07-2014
,l ,p ds ikfyelZ baMLVªht
gkbZ MSaflVh ikyhFkyhu
4984
&
&
1995
IykV ua. 111@,] e;wj Mk;dSe fyfeVsM
ikbZil iQkj iksVscy okVj
ds lkeus iQsl&II] th vkbZ Mh lh ,LVsV]
liykbZl
vgenkckn&382445
¹Hkkx IIó[akM 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
235
9-
2896384
07-07-2014
olkuh ikyhelZ izk- fyfeVsM
vuIykfLVlktM ih oh lh 12818
&
&
2010
losZ ua- 488@ih rFkk 519@ih
LØhu rFkk dSflax ikbZi
th vkbZ Mh lh ,LVsV]
iQkj cksj@V;wcoSy
lkcjdkaBk] rkyksM&383215
10-
2896889
08-07-2014
eSd VSd e'khujh
vksiuoSy lceflZcy
14220
&
&
1994
IykV ua- 371]
iEilSV
jksM+ ua- 8] th vkbZ Mh lh]
dkBokMk] vgenkckn&382430
11-
2896182
08-07-2014
fgrs"k baMLVªht
vksiuoSy lceflZcy
14220
&
&
1994
27] 28&,] jfo baMfLVª;y ,LVsV]
iEilSV
vftr feyl ds ihNs]
efu;kj Vªsyj ds lkeus
jf[k;ky] vgenkckn&380023
12-
2896990
11-07-2014
ineuh ToSylZ
Lo.kZ rFkk Lo.kZ /krqvksa
1417
&
&
1999
dku;k 'kkyk jksM+]
vkHkw"k.kksa f'kYidkjh
nsoxFk ckfj;k] nksgkn&389380
'kqnrk ,oa eqgjkadu
13-
2897083
11-07-2014
U;w 'kgjkokyk ToSylZ
Lo.kZ rFkk Lo.kZ /krqvksa
1417
&
&
1999
ldZy cktkj nsoxM+ ckfj;k]
vkHkw"k.kksa f'kYidkjh
fMfLVªDV] nksgkn&389380
'kq¼rk ,oa eqgjkadu
14-
2902555
14-07-2014
t; Hkkjr eSVdkLV izk- fyfeVsM
dkcZu LVhu dkLV fcysV
2830
&
&
2012
201] nhi vikVZeSaV] nwljh eafty
buxksVl] fcysV] Cywel
okih flyoklk jksM+]
rFkk Lyscl iQkj fj&jksfyax
pkj jLrk] oylkn&396195
baVw LVhy iQkj tujy
LVdpjyZ ijil
15-
2898893
17-07-2014
'kksHkkyky ToSylZ
Lo.kZ rFkk Lo.kZ /krqvksa
1417
&
&
1999
d`".kk 'ksjh] dkjksfy;k iksy]
vkHkw"k.kksa f'kYidkjh
,e th jksM+] oMksnjk&380001
'kq¼rk ,oa eqgjkadu
16-
2899491
17-07-2014
feÙky lSD'ku fyfeVsM (;wfuV&II)
LVhy iQkj tujy
2062
&
&
2011
14] 23&pkaxksnj baMfLVª;y ,LVsV]
LVdpyZ ijil
pkaxksnj] rk lkuan&382213
17-
2900551
21-07-2014
czkbV lksyj izk- fyfeVsM
lceflZcy iEilSV
8034
&
&
2002
IykV ua- 474] 475]
jksM ua- 12 dkBokMk]
th vkbZ Mh lh] vks<o]
vgenkckn&382430
18-
2901553
24-07-2014
bySDVªksFkeZ lksyj fyfeVsM
lksyj iQySV IysV
12933
1
&
2003
IykV ua- 414@1]
dySDVj
th vkbZ Mh lh iQsl&II] oVok]
vgenkckn&382445
[la- lh ,e Mh 13%11]
MkW- ,l- ,y- ikydj] oSKkfud ^,iQ* ,oa izeq[k
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
236
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 12th January, 2015
S.O.
117.—In pursuance of sub.regulation (5) of the regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification)
Regulations 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are given
in the following schedule :
SCHEDULE
Sl.
Licences Grant Date
Name & Address of the party
Title of the Standard
IS No.
Part
Sec
Year
No.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1.
2894784
01.07.2014
Mech Tech Machinery
Submersible pumpsets
8034
—
—
2002
Plot No. 371, Road No. 8, GIDC,
Kathwada, Ahmedabad.382430
2.
2897891
01.07.2014
Shree Niloskar Pumps
Openwell submersible
14220
—
—
1994
263 & 264, Shubh Indl Estate
pumpsets
Near C. L. Vidhyalay
Kathwada.Singerya Road, Kathwada,
Ahmedabad.382430
3.
2893984
02.07.2014
Jainson Cables India Pvt. Ltd.,
Welding cables
9857
—
—
1990
Survey No. 16, Plot No. 16A & B
Ahmedabad Mehsana Highway
Village Chandarda, Ta Kadi,
Distt. Mehsana
4.
2894178
02.07.2014
Pavan Pump
Submersible pumpsets
8034
—
—
2002
275/A, Phase.1, GIDC Naroda,
Ahmedabad.382430
5.
2894885
03.07.2014
Captain Industries
Motors for submersible 9283
—
—
2013
Near Gathaman Patiya
pumpsets
Ahmedabad Highway Palanpur,
Banas Kantha.385001
6.
2894986
03.07.2014
Sagar Enterprises
Submersible pumpsets
8034
—
—
2002
25, Pancharatna Estate
B/H, Forge & Blower
Naroda Raod, Ahmedabad.380025
7.
2894077
04.07.2014
Essar Steel India Ltd.,
Spiral welded pipes
5504
—
—
1997
27KM, Surat.Hazira Road,
Surat.394270
8.
2896081
07.07.2014
SHK Polymers Industries
High density
4984
—
—
1995
Plot No. 111/A,
polyethylene pipes
Opp. Mayur Dyechem Ltd.,
for potable water
Phase.II, GIDC Estate, Vata,
supplies
Ahmedabad.382445
9.
2896384
07.07.2014
Vasani Polymers Pvt. Ltd.,
Unplasticized pvc
12818
—
—
2010
Survey No. 488/P & 519/P
screen and casing
GIDC Estate, Sabarkantha,
pipes for bore/
Talod.383215
tubewell
10.
2896889
08.07.2014
Mech Tech Machinery
Openwell submersible
14220
—
—
1994
Plot No. 371, Road No. 8, GIDC,
pumpsets
Kathwada,
Ahmedabad.382430
¹Hkkx IIó[akM 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
237
11.
2896182
08.07.2014
Hitesh Industries
Openwell submersible
14220
—
—
1994
27. 28.A, Ravi Industrial Estate
pumpsets
Behind Ajit Mills
Opp. Maniyar Trailor Rakhial,
Ahmedabad-380023
12.
2896990
11.07.2014
Padmini Jewellers
Gold and gold alloys,
1417
—
—
1999
Kanya Shala Road,
Jewellery/artefacts-
Devgath Baria, Dohad-389380
fineness and marking
13.
2897083
11.07.2014
New Shaherawala Jewellers
Gold and gold alloys,
1417
—
—
1999
Circle Bazar Devgadh
jewellery/artefacts-
Baria Dist. Dahod-389380
fineness and marking
14.
2902555
14.07.2014
Jay Bharat Metcast Pvt. Ltd.,
Carbon steel cast billet 2830
—
—
2012
201, Deep Apartment,
ingots, billets, blooms
2nd Floor Vapi.Silvassa Road,
and slabs for re-rolling
Char Rasta Vapi Valsad-396195
into steel for general
structural purposes
15.
2898893
17.07.2014
Shobhalal Jewellers
Gold and gold alloys,
1417
—
—
1999
Krishna Sheri, Karoliya Pole,
jewellery/artefacts-
M. G. Road, Vadodara-380001
fineness and marking
16.
2899491
17.07.2014
Mittal Section Limited (Unit.II)
Steel for general
2062
—
—
2011
14, 23.Changodar Ind. Estate,
Structural purposes
Changodar, Taluka Sanand-382213
17.
2900551
21.07.2014
Bright Solar Pvt. Ltd.
Submersible pumpsets
8034
—
—
2002
Plot No. 474, 475, Road No. 12
Kathwada GIDC Kathwada Odhav,
Ahmedabad-382430
18.
2901553
24.07.2014
Electrotherm Solar Ltd.,
Solar flat plate
12933
1
—
2003
Plot No. 414/1, GIDC Phase.II
collector
Vatva, Ahmedabad-382445
[No. CMD/ 13:11]
Dr. S. L. PALKAR, Scientist- ‘F’ & Head
ubZ fnYyh] 12 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 118-—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks (izek.ku) fofu;e 1988 ds fofu;e (5) ds mi&fofu;e (6) ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh;
ekud C;wjks ,rn~}kjk vf/lwfpr djrk gS fd fuEu fooj.k okys ykblsalksa dks muds vkxs n'kkZ;h xbZ rkjh[k ls jn~n@LFkfxr dj fn;k x;k gS %&&
vuqlwph
Øa-
ykblsal
ykblsal/kjh dk uke o irk
ykblsal ds varxZr oLrq@izØe lEc¼
jí djus dh frfFk
la-
la[;k
Hkkjrh; ekud dk 'kh"kZd
lh,e@,y
1-
3638569
lksuh nkDls'k dqekj t;sanzHkkbZ
Lo.kZ rFkk Lo.kZ /krqvksa ds vkHkw"k.kksa f'kYidkjh
18-07-2014
211 ds- Vh- Iyktk] jruiksy]
'kq¼rk ,oa eqgjkadu vkbZ ,l 1417 % 1999
iQqOokjk xka/h jksM ds lkeus vgenkckn&380001
2-
3856680
jksek bySfDVªdYl 60] j?kqohj ,LVsV]
ih oh lh balwysfVM dscy vkbZ ,l 694 % 1990
18-07-2014
:nzk{k dkEiySDl] 'kadj 'kkWfiax lSaVj ds lkeus]
th vkbZ Mh lh vks<o] vgenkckn&382415
[la- lh ,e Mh 13%13]
MkW- ,l- ,y- ikydj] oSKkfud ^,iQ* ,oa izeq[k
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
238
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 12th January, 2015
S.O.
118.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (6) of the regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification)
Regulations 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies that the licences particulars of which are given below
have been cancelled with effect from the date indicated against each :
SCHEDULE
Sl.
Licences
Name & Address of the Licensee
Article/Process with relevant
Date of Cancellation
No.
No. CM/L
Indian Standards covered by the
licence cancelled
1.
3638569
Soni Daxesh Kumar Jayendrabhai
Gold and gold alloys, jewellery/
18.07.2014
211, K. T. Plaza, Ratanpole, Opp Fuwara
artefacts-fineness and marking
Gandhi Road, Distt. Ahmadabad-380001
IS 1417 : 1999
2.
3856680
Roma Electrials 60, Raghuvir Estate,
PVC Insulated Cables
22.07.2014
NR. Rudraksh Complex,
IS 694 : 1990
Opp Shankar Shopping Center,
G.I.D.C. Odhav, Ahmadabad-382415
[No. CMD/13 : 13]
Dr. S. L. PALKAR, Scientist 'F' & Head
ubZ fnYyh] 12 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 119-—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks (izek.ku) fofu;e 1988 ds fu;e 4 ds mi&fu;e (5) ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks
,rn~}kjk vf/lwfpr djrk gS fd ftu ykblsalksa ds fooj.k uhps vuqlwph esa fn, x, gS] os Lohd`r dj fn, x, gSa %&&
vuqlwph
Øa-
ykblsal
Lohd`r djus
ykblsal/kjh dk uke o irk
Hkkjrh; ekud dk 'kh"kZd Hkk ek
Hkkx
vuq-
o"kZ
la-
la[;k
dh frfFk o"kZ@
la[;k
ekg
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1-
2903961
04-08-2014
iksyhdSc ok;lZ izk- fyfeVsM
dkaM;wVl iQkj bySfDVªdy 9537
3
&
1983
;wfuV&VI] IykV ua- 79@1&3] 80@1&2
buLVkys'ku
ckldk mtsVh jksM]
ckldk iapegy&389352
2-
2904054
04-08-2014
iksyhdSc ok;lZ izk- fyfeVsM
fiQfVax iQkj fjftM uku
3419
&
&
1998
;wfuV&VI] IykV ua- 79@1&3] 80@1&2
eSVSfyd dkaM;wVl
ckldk mtsVh jksM]
ckldk iapegy&389352
3-
2903456
07-08-2014
nhidHkkbZ veZrHkkbZ lksuh (xMokyk)
Lo.kZ rFkk Lo.kZ /krqvksa ds 1417
&
&
1999
3] vadqj pSEclZ] MkDVj fxj/j iVsy ekxZ] vkHkw"k.kksa f'kYidkjh 'kq¼rk
ikyuiqj culdkaVk&385001
,oa eqgjkadu
4-
2904458
08-08-2014
izxuk iEi baMLVªht
vksiuoSy lceflZcy
14220
&
&
1994
IykV ua- 4] xsV ua- 1] HkkbZthck baMfLVª;y
iEilSV
,LVsV] vfuy LVkpZ jksM+] ujksM jksM+]
vgenkckn&380025
5-
2904559
11-08-2014
izxuk iEi baMLVªht
lceflZcy iEilSV
8034
&
&
2002
IykV ua- 4] xsV ua- 1] HkkbZthck baMfLVª;y
,LVsV] vfuy LVkpZ jksM+] ujksM jksM+]
vgenkckn&380025
¹Hkkx IIó[akM 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
239
6-
2903557
11-08-2014
jkSud ySfeuSDl izk- fyfeVsM
MSdksjsfVo FkeksZlSfVax
2046
&
&
1995
losZ ua- 757@1] ,V % xkWo fiBkbZ dkByky] fluFkSfVd jsflu cksafMM
[ksMk&387630
ySfeusfVM 'khVl
7-
2912558
14-08-2014
;wukVsM iQksliQksjl fyfeVsM
iSfLVlkbZM&ck;iQSuFkfju
15939
&
&
2011
IykV ua- 310@2] th vkbZ Mh lh ,LVsV
oSVscy ikmMj
Hkk:p] vadys'oj&393002
8-
2904660
14-08-2014
ih- ,e- ToSylZ]
Lo.kZ rFkk Lo.kZ /krqvksa ds 1417
&
&
1999
303] bldku vkjdMs] lh th jksM+]
vkHkw"k.kksa f'kYidkjh 'kq¼rk
uojaxiqjk] vgenkckn&380009
,oa eqgjkadu
9-
2905561
14-08-2014
t; Hkkjr eSVdkLV izk- fyfeVsM
gkbZ LVªSaFk fMiQkeMZ LVhy
1786
&
&
2008
losZ ua- 57@2] xkWo eksjkbZ] ok;k okih]
cklZ rFkk ok;jl iQkj
rk ikjMh oylkn&396195
dkaØhV jsfuiQkslZeSaV
10-
2906260
19-08-2014
lqo.kZdyk izk- fyfeVsM
Lo.kZ rFkk Lo.kZ /krqvksa ds 1417
&
&
1999
'kksi ua- 2] th ,iQ RkFkk 102 ,iQ ,iQ]
vkHkw"k.kksa f'kYidkjh 'kq¼rk
foul vekfM;l] tks/iqj Økl jksM+]
,oa eqgjkadu
lsVsykbV] vgenkckn&380015
11-
2907363
22-08-2014
Jh ln~xq: ToSylZ
Lo.kZ rFkk Lo.kZ /krqvksa ds 1417
&
&
1999
;w&1 jksl Iyktk] LVs'ku jksM]
vkHkw"k.kksa f'kYidkjh 'kq¼rk
ckjMksyh] lwjr&394610
,oa eqgjkadu
12-
2907464
22-08-2014
iVsy vackyky lkseukFk ljdkj ToSylZ
Lo.kZ rFkk Lo.kZ /krqvksa
1417
&
&
1999
25@1] fyacw iksy] jru iksy]
ds vkHkw"k.kksa f'kYidkjh
vgenkckn&380001
'kq¼rk ,oa eqgjkadu
13-
2907767
22-08-2014
egky{eh ToSylZ ch&1 lk/uk VkolZ]
Lo.kZ rFkk Lo.kZ /krqvksa
1417
&
&
1999
ljnkj gkfLiVy ds lkeus] LVs'ku jksM+]
ds vkHkw"k.kksa f'kYidkjh
ckjMksyh] lwjr&394602
'kq¼rk ,oa eqgjkadu
14-
2907868
22-08-2014
xk;=kh ToSylZ
Lo.kZ rFkk Lo.kZ /krqvksa
1417
&
&
1999
5@4@86] 102 ukfxunkl pSEclZ]
ds vkHkw"k.kksa f'kYidkjh
cSad vkiQ bafM;k ds lkeus LVs'ku]
'kq¼rk ,oa eqgjkadu
vkuan&388001
15-
2907969
22-08-2014
ch- ,l- ToSylZ
Lo.kZ rFkk Lo.kZ /krqvksa
1417
&
&
1999
th ,iQ&3 jksud Iyktk]
ds vkHkw"k.kksa f'kYidkjh
rqylh/ke pkj jLrk ds ikl]
'kq¼rk ,oa eqgjkadu
eatyiqj+] oMksnjk&390011
16-
2909569
26-08-2014
,e- ds- baMLVªht
ih oh lh balwysfVM dscy
694
&
&
1990
12] uokc baMfLVª;y ,LVsV]
th Mh gkbZ Ldwy jksM+]
ghjk okMh] ujksMk] vgenkckn&382345
17-
2908365
27-08-2014
tykjke Liu ikbZi rFkk flesaV vkfVZdy
izhdkLV dkadfjV ikbZil
458
&
&
2003
oDlZ ,V vktsjh] th ,p cksMsyh]
(fon rFkk fonkmV
rk lka[ksMk] oMksnjk&391135
jsfuiQkslZeSaV)
[la- lh ,e Mh 13%11]
MkW- ,l- ,y- ikydj] oSKkfud ^,iQ* ,oa izeq[k
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
240
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 12th January, 2015
S.O. 119.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (5) of the regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification)
Regulations 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are given
in the following schedule :
SCHEDULE
Sl.
Licences Grant Date
Name & Address of the party
Title of the Standard
IS No.
Part
Sec
Year
No.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1.
2903961
04.08.2014
Polycab Wires Pvt. Ltd.,
Conduits for electrical
9537
3
—
1983
Unit.VI, Plot No. 79/1-3, 80/1-2 Baska
installations
Ujeti Road, Baska,
Panchamahal-389352
2.
2904054
04.08.2014
Polycab Wires Pvt. Ltd.,
Fittings for rigid non-
3419
—
—
1998
Unit.VI, Plot No. 79/1-3, 80/1-2 Baska
metallic conduits
Ujeti Road, Baska,
Panchamahal-389352
3.
2903456
07.08.2014
Dipakbhai Amrutbhai
Gold and gold alloys,
1417
—
—
1999
Soni (Gadhwala) 3, Ankur Chambers,
jewellery/artefacts-
Dr. Girdhar Patel Marg, Plalanpur,
fineness and marking
Banas Kantha-385001
4.
2904458
08.08.2014
Pragna Pum Industries
Openwell submersible
14220
—
—
1994
Plot No. 4, Gate No. 1, Bhaijibha Ind.
pumpsets
Estate, Anil Starch Road
Naroda Road, Ahmedabad-380025
5.
2904559
11.08.2014
Pragna Pump Industries
Submersible pumpsets
8034
—
—
2002
Plot No. 4, Gate No. 1 Bhaijibha Ind.
Estate, Anil Starch Road
Naroda Road, Ahmedabad-380025
6.
2903557
11.08.2014
Ronak Laminex Pvt. Ltd.,
Decorative thermosetting 2046
—
—
1995
Survey No. 757/1, At : Village : Pithai
synthetic resin bonded
Kathlal, Kheda-387630
laminated sheets
7.
2912558
14.08.2014
United Phosphorus Limited
Pesticide.bifenthrin
15939
—
—
2011
Plot No. 3101/2, GIDC Estate
wettable powder
Bharuch, Ankleshwar-393002
8.
2904660
14.08.2014
P. M. Jewellers
Gold and gold alloys,
1417
—
—
1999
303, ISCON Arcade, C. G. Road,
jewellery/artefacts-
Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009
fineness and marking
9.
2905561
14.08.2014
Jay Bharat Metcast Pvt. Ltd.,
High strength deformed
1786
—
—
2008
Survey No. 57/2, Village : Morai
steel bars and wires for
Via.Vapi, Tal : Pardi, Valsad-396195
concrete reinforcement
10.
2906260
19.08.2014
Suvarnakala Pvt. Ltd.,
Gold and gold alloys,
1417
—
—
1999
Shop No. 2. G. F. & 102 F. F., Vinus
jewellery/artefacts-
Amadeus, Jodhpur Cross Road,
fineness and marking
Satellite, Ahmedabad-380015
11.
2907363
22.08.2014
Shree Sadguru Jewellers
Gold and gold alloys,
1417
—
—
1999
U.1 Rose Plaza, Station Road,
jewellery/artefacts-
Bardoli, Surat-394610
fineness and marking
¹Hkkx IIó[akM 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
241
12.
2907464
22.08.2014
Patel Ambalal Somnath
Gold and gold alloys,
1417
—
—
1999
Sarkar Jewellers 25/1, Limbu Pole,
jewellery/artefacts.
Ratan Pole, Ahmedabad-380001
fineness and marking
13.
2907767
22.08.2014
Mahalaxmi Jewellers
Gold and gold alloys,
1417
—
—
1999
B.1 Sadhna Towers Opp Sardar
jewellery/artefacts.
Hospital, Station Road,
fineness and marking
Bardoli Surat-394602
14.
2907868
22.08.2014
Gayatri Jewellers
Gold and gold alloys,
1417
—
—
1999
5/4/86, 102 Nagindas Chambers,
jewellery/artefacts.
Opp Bank of India Station,
fineness and marking
Anand-388001
15.
2907969
22.08.2014
B. S. Jewellers
Gold and gold alloys,
1417
—
—
1999
G. F.-3 Ronak Plaza,
jewellery/artefacts.
Near Tulsidham Char Rasta,
fineness and marking
Manjalpur, Vadodara-390011
16.
2909569
26.08.2014
M. K. Industries
PVC Insulated Cables
694
—
—
1990
12, Nawab Indl. Estate
G. D. High School Road Hirawadi,
Naroda, Ahmedabad-382345
17.
2908365
27.08.2014
Jalaram Spun Pipe & Cement Artical
Precast concrete pipes
458
—
—
2003
Works At Ajari, GH Bodeli,
(with and without
TA Sankheda, Vadodara,
reinforcement)
Bodeli-391135
[No. CMD/ 13:11]
Dr. S. L. PALKAR, Scientist-‘F’ & Head
ubZ fnYyh] 12 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 120-—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks (izek.ku) fofu;e 1988 ds fofu;e (5) ds mi&fofu;e (6) ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh;
ekud C;wjks ,rn~}kjk vf/lwfpr djrk gS fd fuEu fooj.k okys ykblsalksa dks muds vkxs n'kkZ;h xbZ rkjh[k ls jn~n@LFkfxr dj fn;k x;k gS %&&
vuqlwph
Øa-
ykblsal
ykblsal/kjh dk uke o irk
ykblsal ds varxZr oLrq@izØe lEc¼
jí djus dh frfFk
la-
la[;k
Hkkjrh; ekud dk 'kh"kZd
lh,e@,y
1
2
3
4
5
1-
3683675
eSllZ ,doS'k gSYFkds;j bu dkiksZjs'ku
iSdstcan is;ty
07-08-2014
losZ ua- 138] ,u ,p 8 ,] dY;k.kxkM]
(vnj nSu iSdstM uspqjy feujy okVj)
rk ckcyk vgenkckn&382240
vkbZ ,l 14543&2004
2-
2833764
eSllZ f'koxaxk feujy okVj
iSdstcan is;ty
19-08-2014
101] y{eh fuokl] lh ,u th iEi ds lkeus]
(vnj nSu iSdstM uspqjy feujy okVj)
oklrk nsoMh jksM+] dVVjxke] lwjr&395004
vkbZ ,l 14543&2004
3-
3783679
eSllZ gkbZ VSd jcj baMLVªht
vkVkseksfVo foghdy&V;wcl iQkj
21-08-2014
IykV ua- 3110] th vkbZ Mh lh]
U;weSfVd Vk;lZ vkbZ ,l 13098 % 1991
lkjhxke] rk mejxke] oylkn&396155
4-
3662162
eSllZ Jh x.ks'k baftfu;fjax dEiuh
eksVlZ iQkj lceflZcy iEilSV
27-08-2014
lh&1@275 iQsl&1] th vkbZ Mh lh ujksMk]
vkbZ ,l 9283 % 1995
vgenkckn&382330
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
242
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
5-
3884079
eSllZ nqxkZ iEi
eksVlZ iQkj lceflZcy iEilSV
27-08-2014
04] Jh jke ,LVsV] ukuk fpyksMk] ujksMk]
vkbZ ,l 9283 % %1995
vgenkckn&382330
6-
2809060
eSllZ lj[kst LVhy baMLVªht izk. fyfeVsM
LVhy iQkj tujy LVdpjy ijel
28-08-2014
lj[kst lkuan Økl jksM+]
vkbZ ,l 2062 % 2011
Jhth os czht ds lkeus]
,u ,p jksM+ ua- 8lh] lj[kst
vgenkckn&382210
[la- lh ,e Mh 13%13]
MkW- ,l- ,y- ikydj] oSKkfud ^,iQ* ,oa izeq[k
New Delhi, the 12th January, 2015
S.O. 120.—In pursuance of sub.regulation (6) of the regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification)
Regulations 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies that the licences particulars of which are given below
have been cancelled with effect from the date indicated against each :
SCHEDULE
Sl.
Licences
Name & Address of the Licensee
Article/Process with relevant
Date of Cancellation
No.
No. CM/L
Indian Standards covered by the
licence cancelled
1.
3683675
M/s. Aquash Healthcare in Corporation
Packaged drinking water (other
07.08.2014
Survey No. 138 N. H. 8 A, Kalyanghad,
than packaged natural mineral
TA Bavla, Kalyanghad
Water IS 14543 : 2004
Distt. Ahmedabad-382240
2.
2833764
M/s. Shivganga Mineral Water
Packaged drinking water (other
19.08.2014
101, Laxmi Nivas, Opp CNG Pump.
than packaged natural mineral
Vasta Devdi Road, Katargam.
Water IS 14543 : 2004
Surat-395004
3.
3783679
M/s. HI-TEC Rubber Industries
Automotive vehicles-tubes for
21.08.2014
Plot No. 3110, G.I.D.C., Sarigam,
pneumatic tyres-
Tal Umargam, Sarigam
IS 13098 : 1991
Distt. Valsad-396155
4.
3662162
M/s. Shree Ganesh Engineering Co.
Motors for submersible
27.08.2014
C.1/275 Phase.1, G.I.D.C. Naroda,
pumpsets-
Ahmedabad-382330
IS 9283 : 1995
5.
3884079
M/s. Durga Pump
Motors for submersible
27.08.2014
04, Shree Ram Estate, Nana Chiloda,
purposes
Naroda, Ahmedabad-382330
IS 9283 : 1995
6.
2809060
M/s. Sarkhej Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd.,
Steel for general Structural
28.08.2014
Sarkhej.Sanand Cross Road, Opp. Shreeji
purposes
Weigh Bridge, N. H. Road No. 8C,
IS 2062 : 2011
Sarkhej, Ahmedabad-382210
[No. CMD/13 : 13]
Dr. S. L. PALKAR, Scientist 'F' & Head
1
2
3
4
5
¹Hkkx IIó[akM 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
243
dks;yk ea=ky;
ubZ fnYyh] 13 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 121-—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ;g izrhr gksrk gS
fd blls mikc) vuqlwph esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa ls dks;yk vfHkizkIr
gksus dh laHkkouk gS A
mDr vuqlwph esa of.kZr Hkwfe ds {ks= esa varfoZ"V djus
okyk js[kkad la[;kad bZlh,y@vkjthvks,e@th,e¼vkbZ@lh½@
,l;wvkjoh@,y,lhD;w@14&15@41] rkjh[k 26 flrEcj] 2014
dk fujh{k.k funs'kd rduhdh ¼izpkyu½] bZLVuZ dksyQhYM~l
fyfeVsM] ladrksfM+;k] Mkd?kj fn'ksjx<+] ftyk c}Zoku] if'peh
caxky&713 333 ;k eq[; egk izca/kd ¼xos’k.kk izHkkx½] dsUnzh;
[kuu ;kstuk vkSj fMtkbu laLFkku fyfeVsM] xksanokuk Iysl]
dkads jksM] jk¡ph ds dk;kZy; esa ;k mik;qDr] ftyk xksM~Mk
¼>kj[kaM½ ds dk;kZy; esa ;k dks;yk fu;a=d] 1] dkmafly
gkml LVªhV] dksydkrk&700001 ds dk;kZy; eas fd;k tk
ldrk gS(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] dks;yk /kkjd {ks= ¼vtZu vkSj
fodkl½ vf/kfu;e] 1957 ¼1957 dk 20½ dh /kkjk 4 dh mi&
/kkjk ¼1½ }kjk iznRr 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, mDr vuqlwph
esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa dks;ys dk iwosZ{k.k djus ds vius vk’k; dh
lwpuk nsrh gSA
mDr vuqlwph esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) dksbZ O;fDr&
(i)
mDr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 4 dh mi&/kkjk ¼3½ ds
vèkhu dh xbZ dkjZokbZ ls gqbZ {kfr ;k laHkkfor {kfr
vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 ds v/khu fdlh uqdlkuh ds
fy, izfrdj dk nkok dj ldsxk ( ;k
(ii)
mDr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 13 dh mi&/kkjk ¼1½ ds
vèkhu lekIr gks xbZ iwosZ{k.k vuqKfIr;ksa ds laca/k esa
;k mDr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 13 dh mi&/kkjk ¼4½
ds v/khu lekIr gks x, [kuu iV~Vs ds fy,
izfrdj dk nkok dj ldsxk vkSj mDr vf/kfu;e
dh /kkjk 13 dh mi /kkjk ¼1½ ds [kaM ¼i½ ls [kaM ¼iv½
esa fofufnZ"V enksa ds laca/k esa mixr O;; dks
nf’kZr djus ds fy, mDr Hkwfe ls lacaf/kr lHkh
ekufp=ksa] pkVksZa vkSj vU; nLrkostksa dks]
bl vf/klwpuk ds jkti= esa izdk’ku dh rkjh[k ls uCcs fnu ds
Hkhrj funs'kd¼izpkyu½] bZLVuZ dksyQhYM~l fyfeVsM] ladrksfM+;k]
Mkd?kj fn'ksjx<+] ftyk c}Zoku&713 333] if'peh caxky ds
dk;kZy; esa ifjnRr dj ldsxk A
vuqlwph
yyefV;k dksy [kuu CykWd ¼pj.k&X½
ftyk&xksM~Mk] >kj[kaM
¼js[kkad la[;kad bZlh,y@vkjthvks,e@th,e¼vkbZ@lh½@
,l;wvkjoh@ ,y,lhD;w@ 14&15@41]
rkjh[k 26 flrEcj] 2014 ½
Ø- ekStk@
Fkkuk
xzke
ftyk
{ks=
{ks=
fVIif.k;ka
la- xzke
la[;k
gsDVs;j
,dM+
esa
esa
¼yxHkx½ ¼yxHkx½
1-
MdSrk yyefV;k
44
xksM~Mk
13-79
34-05
Hkkx
dqy {ks= %
13-79
34-05
dks;yk /kkjd {ks= ¼vtZu vkSj fodkl ½ vf/kfu;e] 1957
dh èkkjk 4 dh mi&/kkjk¼1½ ds v/khu }kjk yyefV;k dks;yk
[kuu CykWd ¼pj.k&X½ ds varxZr vf/klwfpr fd, tkus okys
{ks= dk lhek o.kZu A
d1&d2
;g js[kk ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ,oa ekStk yksgf.kM;k
la[;k 45 dh iwohZ lka>k ekStk lhek ij fLFkr fcUnq
^d1^ ls “kq: gksdj ekStk MdSrk dh [kljk la[;k
227] 226] 233 vkSj 235 dh mRrjh lhek ,oa [kljk
la[;k 235 dh if'peh ,oa mRrjh lhek ls xqtjrh
gqbZ iqu% [kljk la[;k 451 dh mRrjh lhek ls gksrs
gq, ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ds [kljk la[;k 451 ds
mRrj&if'peh dksus ij fLFkr fcUnq ^d2^ ij feyrh
gS A
d2&d3
;g js[kk ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ds [kljk la[;k
451 ds mRrj&if'peh dksus ij fLFkr ^d2^ fcUnq ls
“kq: gksdj ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ds [kljk la[;k
451 ds if”peh lhek] [kljk la[;k 453 ,oa 454
ds mRrjh lhek rFkk [kljk la[;k 454] 455] 522]
528] 520] 519] 518] 517] 516 ,oa 531 dh if'peh
lhek ls xqtjrh gqbZ ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ds
[kljk la[;k 531 ds nf{k.k&if'peh dksus ij fLFkr
fcUnq ^d3^ ij feyrh gS A
d3&d4
;g js[kk ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ds [kljk la[;k
531 ds nf{k.k&if'peh dksus ij fLFkr ^d3^ fcUnq ls
“kq: gksdj [kljk la[;k 531 vkSj 532 dh nf{k.kh
lhek ls xqtjrh gqbZ ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ds
[kljk la[;k 532 ds nf{k.k lhek ij fLFkr fcUnq
^d4^ ij feyrh gS A
d4&d5
;g js[kk ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ds [kljk la[;k
532 dh nf{k.kh lhek ij fLFkr ^d4^ fcUnq ls “kq:
gksdj [kljk la[;k 534 ds if'peh lhek ,oa [kljk
la[;k 619 dh mRrjh lhek ls xqtjrs gq, ekStk
MdSrk la[;k 44 ds [kljk la[;k 619 ds
nf{k.k&if'peh dksus ij fLFkr fcUnq ^d5^ ij feyrh
gS A
244
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
d5&d6
;g js[kk ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ds [kljk la[;k
619 ds mRrj&if'peh dksus ij fLFkr ^d5^ fcUnq ls
“kq: gksdj [kljk la[;k 619]622 ,oa 623 dh
if”peh lhek ls xqtjrs gq, ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44
ds [kljk la[;k 623 ds nf{k.k&if'peh dksus ij
fLFkr fcUnq ^d6^ ij feyrh gS A
d6&d7
;g js[kk ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ds [kljk la[;k
623 ds nf{k.k&if'peh dksus ij fLFkr ^d6^ fcUnq ls
“kq: gksdj [kljk la[;k 624 dh mRrjh lhek ls
xqtjrs gq, ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ds [kljk la[;k
624 dh mRrj&if'peh lhek ij fLFkr fcUnq ^d7^
ij feyrh gS A
d7&d8
;g js[kk ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ds [kljk la[;k
624 dh mRrj&if'peh lhek ij fLFkr ^d7^ fcUnq
ls “kq: gksdj ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ,oa ekStk
yyefV;k la[;k 43 dh lka>k lhek rFkk ekStk
MdSrk la[;k 44 ds [kljk la[;k 624 dh if'peh
lhek ls xqtjrs gq, ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ,oa ekStk
yyefV;k la[;k 43 dh lka>k lhek ij fLFkr ekStk
MdSrk la[;k 44 ds [kljk la[;k 624 dh
nf{k.k&if'peh lhek ij fLFkr fcUnq ^d8^ ij feyrh
gS A
d8&d9
;g js[kk] ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 vkSj ekStk yyefV;k
la[;k 43 dh lka>k ekStk lhek ij] ekStk MdSrk
la[;k 44 ds [kljk la[;k 624 dh nf{k.k&if'peh
lhek ij fLFkr ^d8^ fcUnq ls “kq: gksdj ekStk
MdSrk la[;k 44 ds [kljk la[;k 624 ds nf{k.kh
lhek ls xqtjrs gq, ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 dh lhek
ij fLFkr [kljk la[;k 624 ds nf{k.k&iwohZ dksus ij
fLFkr fcUnq ^d9^ ij feyrh gS A
d9&d1
;g js[kk ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 dh lhek ij fLFkr
[kljk la[;k 624 ds nf{k.k&iwohZ dksus ij fLFkr
^d9^ fcUnq ls “kq: gksdj ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ,oa
ekStk yksgf.kM;k la[;k 45 dh iwohZ lka>k lhek ls
xqtjrh gqbZ] ekStk MdSrk la[;k 44 ,oa ekStk
yksgf.kM;k la[;k 45 dh iwohZ lka>k lhek ij fLFkr
fcUnq ^d1^ ij feyrh gS A
[Qk- la- 43015@14@2014&ihvkjvkbZMCY;w&I]
nksfefud MqaxMqax] voj lfpo
MINISTRY OF COAL
New Delhi, the 13th January, 2015
S.O. 121.—Whereas it appears to the Central
Government that coal is likely to be obtained from the land
mentioned in the Schedule annexed hereto.
The plan bearing number ECL/RGOM/GM(I/C)/
SURV/LACQ/14.15/41, dated the 26th September,2014
containing of the areas of land described in the said
Schedule may be inspected at the office of the Director
Technical (Operation), Eastern Coalfields Limited,
Sanctoria, P.O. Dishergarh, District. Burdwan, West Bengal-
713 333 or at the office of the Chief General
Manager(Exploration Division), Central Mine Planning and
Design Institute Limited, Gondwana Place, Kanke Road,
Ranchi or at the office of the Deputy Commissioner, District
Godda (Jharkhand), or at the office of the Coal Controller,
1, Council House Street, Kolkata – 700 001;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred
by sub.section (1) of section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas
(Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957),
(hereinafter referred to as the said Act), the Central
Government hereby gives notice of its intention to prospect
for coal from the land described in the said Schedule.
Any person interested in the land described in the
afore mentioned Schedule may —
(i)
claim compensation under section 6 of the said
Act for any damage caused or likely to be
caused by any action taken under sub-section
(3) of section 4 thereof ; or
(ii)
claim compensation under sub-section (1) of
section 13 of the Act in respect of prospecting
licence ceasing to have effect or under sub-
section (4) of section 13 of the Act for mining
lease ceasing to have effect and deliver all
maps, charts and other documents relating to
the land to show the expenditure incurred in
respect of items specified in clauses (i) to (iv)
of sub-section (1) of section 13 of the said
Act,
to the office of the Director Technical (Operation), Eastern
Coalfields Limited, Sanctoria, P.O. Dishergarh, District.
Burdwan, West Bengal-713 333 within a period of ninety
days from the date of publication of this notification in the
Official Gazette.
SCHEDULE
Lalmatia Coal Mining Block (Phase – X)
District – Godda, Jharkhand
( plan bearing number ECL/RGOM/GM(I/c)/SURV/
LACQ/14-15/41, dated the 26th September,2014)
Sl.
Mouza/
Thana
Village
District
Area in
Area in Remarks
No. Village
Number
Hectares
Acres
approxi.
approxi
mately
mately
1.
Dakaita Lalmatia
44
Godda
13.79
34.05
Part
Total Area
13.79
34.05
¹Hkkx IIó[akM 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
245
Boundary description of the area falling in Lalmatia Coal
Mining Block (Phase – X), to be notified under sub-section
(1) of section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition
and Development) Act, 1957.
A1 – A2
Line starts from point no. A1 situated on
eastern common mouza boundary of Dakaita
no. 44 and Lohandia no. 45, passes along
northern boundary of plot no. 227,226,233 and
235 of mouza Dakaita, western and northern
boundary of plot No. 235, again passes along
northern boundary of plot No. 451 and meets
at point no. A2 situated at north western corner
of plot no. 451 of mouza Dakaita no. 44.
A2 – A3
Line starts from point no. A2 situated on north
western corner of plot No. 451 of mouza Dakaita
no. 44, passes along western boundary of plot
No. 451 of mouza Dakaita no. 44,northern
boundary of plot No. 453 and 454, western
boundary of plot No. 454,455, 522, 528, 520,
519,518,517,516 and 531and meets at point
no. A3 situated at south-western corner of
plot No. 531 of mouza Dakaita no. 44.
A3 – A4
Line starts from point no. A3 situated at south-
western corner of plot no.531 of mouza Dakaita
no. 44, passes along southern boundary of
plot no. 531 and 532 and meets at point no. A4
situated at southern boundary of plot No. 532
of mouza Dakaita No. 44.
A4 – A5
Line starts from point no. A4 situated at
southern boundary of plot no.532 of mouza
Dakaita no. 44, passes along western
boundary of plot no. 534, northern boundary
of plot no.619 and meets at point no. A5
situated at north-western corner of plot No.
619 of mouza Dakaita No. 44.
A5 – A6
Line starts from point no. A5 situated at north-
western corner of plot No. 619 of mouza Dakaita
No. 44, passes along western boundary of plot
no. 619,622 and 623 and meets at point no. A6
situated at south-western corner of plot No.
623 of mouza Dakaita No. 44.
A6 – A7
Line starts from point no. A6 situated at south-
western corner of plot No. 623 of mouza Dakaita
No. 44, passes along northern boundary of
plot No. 624 and meets at point No. A7 situated
on north-western boundary of plot No. 624 of
mouza Dakaita No. 44.
A7 – A8
Line starts from point no. A7 situated on north-
western boundary of plot No. 624 of mouza
Dakaita no. 44, passes along common mouza
boundary of Lalmatia No. 43 and Dakaita no.
44 and western boundary of plot no. 624 and
meets at point no. A8 situated south-western
boundary of plot No. 624 of mouza Dakaita
No. 44, on common mouza boundary of mouza
Dakaita no. 44 and Lalmatia no. 43.
A8 – A9
Line starts from point no. A8 situated south-
western boundary of plot No. 624 of mouza
Dakaita No. 44, on common mouza boundary
of mouza Dakaita No. 44 and Lalmatia No. 43,
passes along southern boundary of plot No.
624 of mouza dakaita No. 44 and meets at point
No. A9 situated at south-eastern corner of plot
No. 624 on mouza boundary of Dakaita No.
44.
A9 – A1
Line starts from point No. A9 situated at south-
eastern corner of plot No. 624 on mouza
boundary of Dakaita No. 44, passes along
eastern common mouza boundary of Dakaita
No. 44 and Lohandia No. 45 and meets at point
No. A1 situated on eastern common mouza
boundary of Dakaita No. 44 and Lohandia
No. 45.
[ F.No. 43015/14/2014.PRIW.I]
DOMINIC DUNGDUNG, Under Secy.
ubZ fnYyh] 15 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 122-—dsUæh; ljdkj dks ;g çrhr gksrk gS
fd] blls mikc) vuqlwph esa of.kZr ifj{ks= dh Hkwfe ls dks;yk
vfHkçkIr fd, tkus dh laHkkouk gS(
vkSj] mDr vuqlwph esa of.kZr Hkwfe ds {ks= ds varxZr vkus
okys js[kkad la[;k lh& 1¼bZ½AAA@thvkj@909&1014] rkjh[k
1 vDVwcj] 2014 dk fujh{k.k] osLVuZ dksyQhYM~l fyfeVsM
¼jktLo foHkkx½] dksy bLVsV] flfoy ykbZUl] ukxiqj&440001
¼egkjk"Vª½ ;k eq[; egkçca/kd ¼[kkst çHkkx½] dsUæh; [kku
;kstuk ,oa fMtkbu laLFkku] xksaMokuk Iysl] dkads jksM]
jkaph&834001 ;k dks;yk fua;=d] 1] dkmafly gkml LVªhV]
dksydkrk&700 001 ds dk;kZy; esa ;k ftyk dysDVj] fNUnokM+k
¼e/; çns’k½ ds dk;kZy; esa fd;k tk ldrk gS(
vr% vc dsUæh; ljdkj] dks;yk /kkjd {ks= ¼vtZu vkSj
fodkl½ vf/kfu;e] 1957 ¼1957 dk 20½ ¼ftls blesa blds
i’pkr~ mDr vf/kfu;e dgk x;k gS ½ dh /kkjk 4 dh mi/kkjk
¼1½ }kjk 'kfDr;ksa dk ç;ksx djrs gq, mDr vuqlwph esa of.kaZr
Hkwfe ls dks;ys dk iwosZ{k.k djus ds vius vk’k; dh lwpuk nsrh
gS(
mDr vuqlwph esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) dksbZ O;fDr &
(i)
mDr vf/klwpuk dh /kkjk 4 dh mi&/kkjk ¼3½ ds
vèkhu dh x;h fdlh dk;Zokgh ls gqbZ ;k gksus okyh
246
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
laHkkfor fdlh {kfr ds fy, vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6
ds v/khu çfrdj dk nkok dj ldsxk( vFkok
(ii)
mDr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk ¼13½ dh mi&/kkjk ¼1½ ds
v/khu iwosZ{k.k vuqKfIr;ksa ds çHkkoghu gksus ;k
mDr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 13 dh mi&/kkjk ¼4½ ds
v/khu [kuu iês çHkkoghu gksus ds laca/k esa çfrdj
dk nkok dj ldsxk vkSj mls mDr vf/ku;e dh
/kkjk 13 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds [kaM (i) ls [kaM (iv)
esa fofufnZ"V enksa dh ckcr~ mixr O;; dks minf’kZr
djus ds fy, iwoksZDr Hkwfe ls lacaf/kr lHkh ekufp=ksa]
pkVksaZ vkSj vU; nLrkostksa dks ifjnRr dj ldsxk]
bl vf/klwpuk ds jkti= esa çdk’ku dh rkjh[k ls uCcs fnu
ds Hkhrj] {ks=h; egkçca/kd] osLVuZ dksyQhYM~l fyfeVsM] isap
{ks=] iksLV v‚fQl ijkfl;k] rglhy ijkfl;k] ftyk fNUnokM+k
¼e/; çns’k½ ;k egkçca/kd ¼Hkwfe vkSj jktLo½] osLVuZ dksyQhYM~l
fyfeVsM] Hkwfe vkSj jktLo foHkkx] dksy bZLVsV] flfoy ykbZUl]
ukxiqj& 440 001 ¼egkjk"Vª½ dks Hkstsaxs A
vuqlwph
fNUnk vksiudkLV ekbZu
isap {ks=
ftyk fNUnokM+k ¼e/; çns’k½
[js[kkad la[;k lh& 1¼bZ½AAA@thvkj@909&1014] rkjh[k 1
vDVwcj] 2014]
Ø- xzke dk iVokjh
rglhy
ftyk
{ks= fVIif.k;ka
la-
uke
lfdZy
¼gsDVj
la[;k
esa½
Hkkx 1Hk 1-
lsfB;k
24
ijkfl;k
fNUnokM+k 1-894
Hkkx
Hkkx 1e 2-
lsfB;k
24
ijkfl;k
fNUnokM+k 2-039
Hkkx
3-
fNUnk
23
ijkfl;k
fNUnokM+k 29-621
Hkkx
dqy {ks= % 33-554 gsDVj ¼yxHkx½
;k 82-91 ,dM+ ¼yxHkx½
xzke lsfB;k dh lhek {ks= ds vUnj vkus okys IykV la[;kad%
251@1] 251@2 ¼ljdkjh½] 256@1& 256@2-
xzke fNUnk dh lhek {ks= ds vUnj vkus okys IykV la[;kad %
63 ¼ljdkjh½] 67] 68] 69@1& 69@2& 69@3& 69@4&
69@5& 69@6& 69@7& 69@8& 69@9& 69@10] 70 ¼ljdkjh
lM+d½ 71@1& 71@2& 71@3& 71@4& 71@5& 71@6&
71@7] 72] 73@1& 73@2& 73@3& 73@4& 73@5& 73@6&
73@7] 74] 75] 76] 77] 95] 96] 97] 98] 99@1& 99@2] 100]
101] 102] 103] 104@1& 104@2] 105] 106] 107@1& 107@2&
107@3] 108] 109] 110] 111 ¼ljdkjh½] 112] 113@1& 113@2&
113@3& 113@4& 113@5& 113@6& 113@7& 113@8]
114@1] 114@3] 114@4] 115@1] 115@2] 115@3] 115@4]
115@5-
lhek o.kZu ¼Hkkx 1Hk½ %
M-&p&N&M-% js[kk xzke lsfB;k esa fcUnq ^M-*ls vkjaHk gksrh gS
vkSj fcUnq ^p*] ^N* ds ikl ls xqtjrh gqbZ
vkjafHkd fcUnq ^M-* ij feyrh gS A
lhek o.kZu ¼Hkkx 1e½%
d & [k %
js[kk xzke fNUnk esa fcUnq ^d* ls vkjaHk gksrh gS
vkSj xzke fNUnk vkSj xzke lsfB;k dh lfEefyr
xzke lhek ij fcUnq ^[k* ij feyrh gS A
[k & x %
js[kk xzke lsfB;k ls gksdj xqtjrh gS vkSj xzke
lsfB;k vkSj xzke fNUnk dh lfEefyr xzke lhek
ij fcUnq ^x* ij feyrh gS A
x&?k&d %
js[kk xzke fNUnk esa fcUnq ^?k* ds ikl ls gksdj
xqtjrh gS vkSj vkjafHkd fcUnq ^d* ij feyrh gS A
[Qk- la- 43015@16@2014&ihvkjvkbZMCY;w&I]
nksfefud MqaxMqax] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 15th January, 2015
S.O. 122.—Whereas, it appears to the Central
Government that Coal is likely to be obtained from the
land in the locality described in the Schedule annexed
hereto ;
And Whereas, the plan bearing number C.1(E)III/
GR/909.1014, dated the 1st October, 2014 of the area
described in the said Schedule may be inspected at the
office of the Western Coalfields Limited (Revenue
Department), Coal Estate, Civil Lines, Nagpur– 440 001
(Maharashtra) or at the office of the Chief General Manager
(Exploration Division), Central Mine Planning and Design
Institute, Gondwana Place, Kanke Road, Ranchi – 834 001
or at the office of the Coal Controller, 1, Council House
Street, Kolkata – 700 001 or at the office of the District
Collector, Chhindwara (Madhya Pradesh);
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred
by sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas
(Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957),
(hereinafter referred to as the said Act), the Central
Government hereby gives notice of its intention to prospect
for coal from lands described in the said Schedule ;
Any persons interested in the land described in the said
Schedules may —
(i)
claim compensation under section 6 of the said
Act for any damage caused or likely to be
¹Hkkx IIó[akM 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
247
caused by any action taken under sub-section
(3) of Section 4 thereof ; or
(ii)
claim compensation under sub-section (1) of
Section 13 of the said Act in respect of
prospecting license ceasing to have effect or
under sub-section (4) of section 13 of the said
Act for mining lease ceasing to have effect
and deliver all maps, charts and other
documents relating to the aforesaid lands to
show the expenditure incurred in respect of
items specified in clauses (i) to (iv) of sub-
section (1) of section 13 of the said Act,
to the Office of the Area General Manager, Western
Coalfields Limited, Pench Area, Post Office Parasia, Tahsil
Parasia, District Chhindwara (Madhya Pradesh) or General
Manager (Land and Revenue), Western Coalfields Limited,
Land and Revenue Department, Coal Estate, Civil Lines,
Nagpur – 440 001 (Maharashtra) within a period of ninety
days from the date of publication of this notification in the
Official Gazette.
SCHEDULE
CHHINDA OPENCAST MINE
PENCH AREA
DISTRICT CHHINDWARA (MADHYA PRADESH)
[ Plan Bearing number C.1(E)III/GR/909-1014,
dated the 1st October, 2014]
Sl.
Name of
Patwari
Tahsil
District
Area (in
Remarks
No.
Village
Circle
hectares)
number
Part
1.
SETHIA
24
Parasia
Chhindwara
1.894
Part
1X
Part
2.
SETHIA
24
Parasia
Chhindwara
2.039
Part
1Y
3. CHHINDA
23
Parasia
Chhindwara
29.621
Part
Total area : 33.554 hectares (approximately)
or 82.91 acres (approximately)
Plot numbers within Boundary in village Sethia :
251/1, 251/2 (Government), 256/1- 256/2.
Plot number within Boundary in village Chhinda:
63 (Government), 67, 68, 69/1- 69/2- 69/3- 69/4- 69/5-69/6-
69/7- 69/8- 69/9- 69/10, 70 (Government Road) 71/1- 71/2-
71/3- 71/4- 71/5- 71/6- 71/7, 72, 73/1- 73/2- 73/3- 73/4- 73/5-
73/6- 73/7, 74, 75, 76, 77, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99/1- 99/2, 100, 101,
102, 103, 104/1- 104/2, 105, 106, 107/1- 107/2- 107/3, 108,
109, 110, 111 (Government), 112, 113/1- 113/2- 113/3- 113/4-
113/5- 113/6- 113/7- 113/8, 114/1, 114/3, 114/4, 115/1, 115/2,
115/3, 115/4, 115/5.
Boundary description (1 X) :
E-F-G-E :
Line starts from Point ‘E’ in village Sethia and
passes near Point ‘F’-‘G’ and meets at starting
Point ‘E’.
Boundary description (1 Y) :
A – B :
Line start from Point ‘A’ in village Chhinda
and meets at Point ‘B’ on common village
boundary of villages Chhinda and Sethia.
B – C :
Line passes through village Sethia and meets
at Point ‘C’ on common village boundary of
villages Sethia and Chhinda.
C.D.A :
Line passes through village Chhinda and
passes nearby Point ‘D’ and Meets at starting
Point ‘A’.
[ F.No. 43015/16/2014-PRIW-I ]
DOMINIC DUNGDUNG, Under Secy.
vkns'k
ubZ fnYyh] 16 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 123-—dks;yk /kkjd {ks= ¼vtZu vkSj fodkl½
vf/kfu;e] 1957 ¼1957 dk 20½ ¼ftls blesa blds i'pkr~ mDr
vf/kfu;e dgk x;k gS½ dh /kkjk 9 dh mi&/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu
tkjh dh xbZ Hkkjr ljdkj ds dks;yk ea=ky; dh vfèklwpuk
la[;kad dk- vk- 1443] rkjh[k 6 ebZ] 2014] tks Hkkjr ds
jkti=] Hkkx II] [kaM 3] mi&[kaM ¼AaAa½] rkjh[k 17 ebZ] 2014
esa izdkf'kr gksus ij] mDr vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa
of.kZr Hkwfe vkSj Hkwfe esa ;k ml ij ds Hkw&lrg vf/kdkj ¼ftls
blesa blds i'pkr~ mDr Hkwfe dgk x;k gS½ mDr vf/kfu;e dh
/kkjk 10 dh mi/kkjk ¼a1½ ds v/khu] lHkh foYyaxeksa ls eqDr gksdj]
vkR;akfrd :i ls dsUnzh; ljdkj esa fufgr gks x, Fks;
vkSj] dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ;g lek/kku gks x;k gS fd lkmFk
bZLVuZ dksyQhYM~l fyfeVsM] lhir jksM] Mkd?kj la[;k 60]
ftyk& fcykliqj&495006 ¼NRrhlx<+½ ¼ftls blesa blds i”pkr~
mDr ljdkjh dEiuh dgk x;k gS½] ,sls fuca/kuksa vkSj “krksZa dk
tks dsUnzh; ljdkj bl fufeRr vf/kjksfir djuk mfpr le>s]
vuqikyu djus ds fy;s rS;kj gS;
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] mDr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 11 dh
mi/kkjk ¼1½ }kjk iznRr “kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] ;g funs'k
nsrh gS fd bl izdkj fufgr mDr 102-181 gsDVj ¼yxHkx½ ;k
252-49 ,dM+ ¼yxHkx½ Hkwfe vkSj ml ij ds Hkw&lrg vf/kdkj]
rkjh[k 17 ebZ] 2014 ls dsUnzh; ljdkj esa bl izdkj fufgr cus
jgus dh ctk;] fuEufyf[kr fuca/kuksa vkSj “krkasZ ds v/khu jgrs
gq,] mDr ljdkjh dEiuh esa fufgr gks tk,axs] vFkkZr~%&
248
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1-
mDr ljdkjh dEiuh] mDr vf/kfu;e ds mica/kksa ds
vèkhu ;Fkk vo/kkfjr izfrdj] C;kt] uqdlku vkSj oSlh gh enksa
dh ckcr~ fd, x, lHkh lank;ksa dh dsUnzh; ljdkj dks izfriwfrZ
djsxh;
2-
mDr ljdkjh dEiuh }kjk “krZ ¼1½ ds v/khu] dsUnzh;
ljdkj dks lans; jdeksa dk vo/kkj.k djus ds iz;kstu ds fy;s
mDr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 14 ds v/khu ,d vf/kdj.k dk xBu
fd;k tk,xk rFkk ,sls fdlh vf/kdj.k vkSj ,sls vf/kdj.k dh
lgk;rk djus ds fy;s fu;qDr O;fDr;ksa ds laca/kksa esa mixr lHkh
O;;] mDr dEiuh }kjk ogu fd;s tk;saxs vkSj blh izdkj fufgr
mDr Hkwfe esa ;k ml ij ds vf/kdkj ds fy;s ;k mlds laca/k
esa tSls vihy vkfn lHkh fof/kd dk;Zokfg;ksa dh ckcr mixr]
lHkh O;; Hkh] blh izdkj mDr ljdkjh dEiuh }kjk ogu fd;s
tk,axs;
3-
mDr ljdkjh dEiuh] dsUnzh; ljdkj ;k mlds
in/kkfj;ksa dh] ,sls fdlh vU; O;; ds laca/k esa] {kfriwfrZ djsxh
tks bl izdkj fufgr mDr Hkwfe esa ;k ml ij ds vf/kdkjksa ds
ckjs esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj ;k mlds in/kkfj;ksa }kjk ;k muds
fo:) fdUgha dk;Zokfg;ksa ds laca/k esa vko”;d gks ;
4-
mDr ljdkjh dEiuh dks] dsUnzh; ljdkj ds iwoZ vuqeksnu
ds fcuk] mDr Hkwfe vkSj Hkwfe esa ;k mlds Åij bl izdkj fufgr
vf/kdkj dks fdlh vU; O;fDr dks varfjr djus dh “kfDr ugha
gksxh ; vkSj
5-
mDr ljdkjh dEiuh] ,sls funs'kksa vkSj “krkasZ dk] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj }kjk] tc dHkh vko';d gks] mDr Hkwfe ds
fof'k"V {ks=ksa ds fy;s fn, tk,a ;k vf/kjksfir dh tk,] ikyu
djsxhA
[Qk-la- 43015@05@2011&ihvkjvkbZMCY;w&I]
nksfefud MqaxMqax] voj lfpo
ORDER
New Delhi, the 16th January, 2015
S.O. 123.—Whereas on the publication of the
notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of
Coal number S.O. 1443, dated the 6th May, 2014 published
in the Gazette of India, Part – II, Section – 3, Sub-section
(ii), dated the 17th May, 2014 issued under Sub-section (i)
of Section 9 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and
Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957) (hereinafter referred
to as the said Act), the lands and the surface rights in or
over the said land described in the Schedule appended to
the said notification (hereinafter referred to as the said
land) vested absolutely in the Central Government free
from all encumbrances under sub-section (1) of Section 10
of the said Act.
And whereas the Central Government is satisfied
that the South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road,
Post Box No. 60, District Bilaspur-495006 (hereinafter
referred to as the Government Company) is willing to
comply with such terms and conditions as the Central
Government thinks fit to impose in this behalf.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the power conferred
by sub-section (1) of section 11 of the said Act, the Central
Government hereby direct that the land measuring 102.181
hectares (approximately) or 252.49 acres (approximately)
and the surface rights in or over the said lands so vested
shall with effect from the 17th May, 2014 instead of
continuing to so vest in the Central Government shall vest
in the Government Company subject to the following terms
and conditions namely:.
1.
The Government Company shall reimburse to the
Central Government all payments made in respect of
compensation, interest, damages and the like as determined
under the provisions of the said Act;
2.
A Tribunal shall be constituted under section 14 of
the said Act for the purpose of determining the amounts
payable to the Central Government by the Government
Company under conditions (1) and all expenditure incurred
in connection with any such tribunal and persons
appointed to assist the tribunal shall be borne by the
Government Company and similarly, all expenditure
incurred in respect of all legal proceedings like appeals
etc. for or in connection with the rights in or over the said
lands so vesting shall also be borne by the Government
Company;
3.
The Government Company shall indemnify the
Central Government or its officials against any other
expenditure that may be necessary in connection with any
proceedings by or against the Central Government or its
officials regarding the rights in or over the said lands so
vesting;
4.
The Government Company shall have no power to
transfer the said lands to any other persons without the
previous approval of the Central Government; and
5.
The Government Company shall abide by such
direction and conditions as may be given or imposed by
the Central Government for particular areas of the said
lands as and when necessary.
[F. No. 43015/ 05/ 2011 – PRIW-I]
DOMINIC DUNGDUNG, Under Secy.
¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
249
Je vkSj jkstxkj ea=ky;
vkns’k
ubZ fnYyh] 9 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 124.—tcfd ,QlhvkbZ ds çca/ku ls lacafèkr
fu;ksäkvksa rFkk mlds deZdkjksa ds e/; vkS|ksfxd fookn fnukad
26-10-2004 ds lela[;d vkns'k }kjk U;k;fu.kZ;u gsrq dsUæh;
ljdkj vkS|ksfxd U;k;kfèkdj.k&lg&Je U;k;ky; la[;k 1]
ubZ fnYyh dks Hkstk x;k FkkA
vkSj tcfd lacaf/kr i{kksa us ljdkj dks bl ekeys dks
U;k;fu.kZ;u gsrq jk"Vªh; U;k;kf/kdj.k dks Hkstus ds çfrosnu
fn, D;ksafd bl fookn esa 'kkfey ekeyk fofHkUu jkT;ksa esa
LFkkfir ,QlhvkbZ ds fMiksa ls lacaf/kr gSA
vkSj tcfd ekuuh; fnYyh mPp U;k;ky; us fjV ;kfpdk
la[;k 3792@2004 esa ljdkj dks bl fookn dks jk"Vªh;
vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k esa Hkstus rFkk fopkjkFkZ fo"k;ksa dks
la'kksf/kr djus dk funs'k fn;k gSA
vkSj tcfd dsUæh; ljdkj us vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e]
1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 7[k }kjk çnÙk 'kfä;ksa dk ç;ksx
djrs gq, ,d jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k xfBr fd;k
ftldk eq[;ky; eqEcbZ esa j[kk x;k vkSj U;k;ewfrZ Jh ?ku';ke
nkl] rRdkyhu ihBklhu vf/kdkjh] lhthvkbZVh la[;k 1] eqEcbZ
dks blds ihBklhu vf/kdkjh ds :i esa fu;qä fd;k vkSj mä
vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 10 dh mi&/kkjk ¼1d½ }kjk çnÙk 'kfDr;ksa
dk ç;ksx djrs gq, mä vkS|ksfxd fookn dks fnukad
10-11-2005 ds vkns'k }kjk fuEufyf[kr la'kksf/kr fopkjkFkZ fo"k;ksa
ds lkFk U;k;fu.kZ;u gsrq mijksä jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd
U;k;kf/kdj.k dks lkSaik x;k %&
ÞD;k fnukad 01-07-2002 ds ifji= uksfVl rFkk fnukad
19-01-2004 ds ifji= la[;k 1 ,oa 2 }kjk Hkkjrh; [kk|
fuxe }kjk 6½ rFkk 8 ?k.Vksa ds e/; le;ksifj dk;Z ds
fy, vius [kk| j[k&j[kko dkexkjksa ds le;ksifj osru
dh njksa dks lkekU; osru njksa ds 1-25 xq.kk ls 1-1 xq.kk
de djus rFkk blds vfrfjä lacaf/kr jkT;ksa ds nqdku
,oa çfr"Bku vf/kfu;e ds vuqlkj 8 ?k.Vksa ls vf/kd dk;Z
ds fy, 1-1 xq.kk de djuk oS/kkfud ,oa U;k;ksfpr gS\
;fn ugha] rks deZdkj fdruh jkgr ds ik= gSa\ß
vkSj tcfd U;k;ewfrZ Jh ?ku';ke nkl us fnukad
06-02-2006 dks mä jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k dk inHkkj
NksM+ fn;k(
vkSj tcfd dsUæ ljdkj us fnukad 03-01-2011 ds vkns'k
}kjk jk"Vªh; U;k;kf/kdj.k dks iquxZfBr fd;k rFkk U;k;ewfrZ
Jh xkSjh 'kadj ljkZQ dks bldk ihBklhu vf/kdkjh fu;qä fd;k(
vkSj tcfd U;k;ewfrZ Jh xkSjh 'kadj ljkZQ us fnukad
07-09-2012 dks iapkV tkjh djds lanHkZ la[;k ,uVhch&1@2005
ds varxZr ekeys dks fuiVk;k(
vkSj tcfd Hkkjrh; [kk| fuxe ¼,QlhvkbZ½ ds çca/ku us
fjV ;kfpdk la[;k 2013 dh 10823 nk;j djds ,uvkbZVh]
eqEcbZ ds fnukad 07-09-2012 ds iapkV dks ekuuh; mPp
U;k;ky; ckEcs ds le{k pqukSrh nh(
vkSj tcfd ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky;] ckEcs us fjV ;kfpdk
la[;k 2013 dh 10823 esa fnukad 22-04-2014 ds vius vkns’k
}kjk fnukad 22-04-2014 lanHkZ la[;k ,uVhch&1@2005 dks
iyV fn;k rFkk jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k] eqEcbZ dks fjV
;kfpdk la[;k 2013 dh 10823 esa ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; ds
fnukad 22-04-2014 ds vkns'k esa mYys[k ds çdk'k esa fo"k;
fu/kkZfjr djus dk funs’k fn;k(
vkSj tcfd U;k;ewfrZ Jh xkSjh 'kadj ljkZQ us viuh
lsokfuo`fÙk ij mä jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k dk inHkkj
NksM+ fn;k(
vr% vc ,d jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k dh LFkkiuk
dh tkrh gS ftldk eq[;ky; eqEcbZ esa gksxk vkSj ftlds
ihBklhu vf/kdkjh lhthvkbZVh&lg&Je U;k;ky; la- 1] eqEcbZ
ds ihBklhu vf/kdkjh] lR;iwr esgjks=k gksaxs rFkk mi;qZä fookn
dks U;k;&fu.kZ;u ds fy, jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k dks
bl funsZ’k ds lkFk lanfHkZr fd;k tkrk gS fd U;k;ewfrZ
Jh lR;iwr esgjks=k bl ekeys esa fjV ;kfpdk la[;k 2013 dh
10823 esa ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky;] ckEcs ds fnukad 22-04-2014
ds vkns'k esa fn, x, funs'kksa ds vuqlkj vkxs dkjZokbZ djsaxs rFkk
rnuqlkj bl ekeys dks fuiVk,axsA
[la- ,y&22012@359@2003&vkbZvkj ¼lh&II½]
eks- tkfgn 'kjhQ] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT
ORDER
New Delhi, the 9th January, 2015
S.O. 124.—Whereas an industrial dispute between
employers in relation to Management of FCI and their
workmen was referred for adjudication to Central
Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No.1,
New Delhi vide order of even number dated 26.10.2004.
And whereas the parties concerned made
representations to the Government for referring the matter
for adjudication to National Tribunal as the issue involved
in the dispute pertains to depots of FCI located at various
States;
And whereas the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in
W.P. No. 3792/2004 has given a direction to the Government
250
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
to refer the dispute to a National Industrial Tribunal and
to modify the terms of reference.
And whereas the Central Government, in exercise of
the powers conferred by Section 7 B of the I.D. Act, 1947
(14 of 1947), constituted a National Industrial Tribunal
with the Head Quarters at Mumbai and appointed Justice
Shri Ghanshyam Dass, the then Presiding Officer, CGIT
No.1, Mumbai as its Presiding Officer, and in exercise of
the powers conferred by Sub-section (1 A) of Section 10
of the Industrial Disputes Act, referred the said Industrial
Dispute to the said National Tribunal for adjudication with
following revised / modified terms of reference vide order
dated 10.11.2005:-
“Whether the action of the Food Corporation of
India in reducing the rates of Overtime wages of its
food handling workers from 1.25 times to 1.1 times
of the normal rates of wages for overtime work
between 6 ½ and 8 hours and further from as per the
Shops & Establishment Act of the respective states
to 1.1 times for work beyond 8 hours, both by Circular
Notice dated 1.7.2002 and Circular Nos. 1 & 2 both
dated 19.1.2004 is legal and justified? If not, to what
relief the workmen are entitled?”
And whereas Justice Shri Ghanshyam Dass
relinquished the charge of the said National Industrial
Tribunal on 06.02.2006;
And whereas Central Government vide order dated
03.01.2011 reconstituted the National Tribunal and
appointed Justice Shri Gauri Shanker Sarraf as its Presiding
Officer;
And whereas Justice Gauri Shanker Sarraf disposed
of the dispute under Reference No. NTB-1/2005 by way of
Award dated 7th September, 2012;
And whereas the Management of Food Corporation
of India (FCI) challenged the Award dated 07.09.2012 of
NIT, Mumbai before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature
at Bombay by filing Writ Petition No. 10823 of 2013;
And whereas the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature
at Bombay vide their order dated 22.04.2014 in Writ Petition
No. 10823 of 2013 set aside the award dated 22.04.2014 in
Ref. No NTB-1/2005 and directed the National Industrial
Tribunal, Mumbai to decide the reference in the light of
what is stated in the order dated 22.04.2014 of the Hon’ble
High Court in Writ Petition No. 10823 of 2013;
And whereas Justice Gauri Shanker Sarraf
relinquished the charge of the said National Industrial
Tribunal on his retirement;
Now, therefore, a National Industrial Tribunal is
constituted with Headquarters at Mumbai with Justice
Shri Satya Poot Mehrotra, Presiding Officer of CGIT-cum-
Labour Court No.1, Mumbai as its Presiding Officer and
the above said dispute is referred to the said National
Industrial Tribunal for adjudication with a direction that
Justice Shri Satya Poot Mehrotra shall proceed in the
matter as per the directions given by the Hon,ble High
Court of Judicature at Bombay vide order dated 22.04.2014
in Writ Petition No. 10823 of 2013 and dispose of the same
accordingly.
[No. L-22012/359/2003-IR(C-II)]
Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer
vkns’k
ubZ fnYyh] 14 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 125.—tcfd dsUæh; ljdkj dk er gS fd
ctkt bySfDVªdYl fyfeVsM ds çca/ku vkSj muds dkexkjksa ds
chp vkS|ksfxd fookn fo|eku gS %
rFkk tcfd xqtjkr ds ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky;] vgenkckn
us fofo/k flfoy vkosnu la- 1943@2003 rFkk fofo/k flfoy
vkosnu la- 1711@2003 esa funs’k fn;k fd vkS|ksfxd fookn
vf/kfu;e] 1947 ds mica/kksa ds varxZr ekeys ij fopkj fd;k
tk, vkSj mi;qä fu.kZ; fy;k tk,(
rFkk tcfd ,d ls vf/kd jkT; esa fLFkr ctkt bySfDVªdYl
fyfeVsM ds LFkkiuksa ds blls lac) vFkok çHkkfor gksus dh
laHkkouk gS(
rFkk tcfd dsUæh; ljdkj dk er gS fd mä fookn dk
U;k;&fu.kZ;u jk"Vªh; U;k;kf/kdj.k }kjk fd;k tk,(
rFkk tcfd dsUæh; ljdkj us vkS|ksfxd fookn
vfèkfu;e] 1947¼1997 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 7[k }kjk çnÙk 'kfä;ksa
dk ç;ksx djrs gq, Je ea=ky; ds fnukad 06-09-2004 ds
vkns’k la- ,y&42012@144@2004&vkbZvkj¼lh&II½ ds ek/;e
ls jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k xfBr fd;k ftldk eq[;ky;
eqEcbZ esa j[kk x;k rFkk U;k;k/kh’k ,l- lh- ik.Ms dks bldk
ihBklhu vf/kdkjh fu;qä fd;k rFkk mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 10
dh mi&/kkjk¼1d½ }kjk çnÙk 'kfä;ksa dk ç;ksx djrs gq, mä
vkS|ksfxd fookn dks U;k; fu.kZ;u gsrq mä jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd
U;k;kf/kdj.k dks Hkst fn;k(
rFkk tcfd U;k;k/kh’k Jh ,l- lh- ik.Ms us 8-9-2004 dks
mi;qZä jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k dk inHkkj R;kx fn;k(
rFkk tcfd dsUæh; ljdkj us fnukad 10-11-2005 ds
vkns’k ds ek/;e ls jk"Vªh; U;k;kf/kdj.k dk iquxZBu fd;k
rFkk U;k;kèkh’k Jh ?ku’;ke nkl dks bldk ihBklhu vf/kdkjh
fu;qä fd;k(
rFkk tcfd U;k;k/kh’k Jh ?ku’;ke nkl us 06-02-2006
dks mä jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k dk inHkkj NksM+ fn;k(
¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
251
rFkk tcfd dsUæh; ljdkj us fnukad 3-1-2011 ds vkns’k
ds ek/;e ls jk"Vªh; U;k;kf/kdj.k dk iquxZBu fd;k rFkk
U;k;kèkh’k Jh xkSjh 'kadj ljkZQ dks bldk ihBklhu vf/kdkjh
fu;qä fd;k(
rFkk tcfd U;k;k/kh’k Jh xkSjh 'kadj ljkZQ us fnukad
20-09-2011 dks fu.kZ; nsdj fookn dk fuiVku fd;k rFkk
U;k;k/kh’k Jh xkSjh 'kadj ljkZQ us 30-06-2013 dks viuh
lsokfuo`fÙk ij mä jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k dk inHkkj
NksM+ fn;k(
rFkk tcfd eSllZ ctkt bySfDVªdYl fyfeVsM vkSj
muds dkexkjksa ds chp ekStwnk fooknksa ds lanHkZ esa vuqeksnu
laca/kh vkosnuksa vkSj f’kdk;rksa dk fuiVku djus ds fy, jk"Vªh;
vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k xfBr fd;k tkuk visf{kr gS(
vr%] blfy, ,d jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k dh
LFkkiuk dh tkrh gS ftldk eq[;ky; eqacbZ esa gksxk vkSj
ftlds ihBklhu vf/kdkjh lhthvkbZVh la[;k 1] eqacbZ ds
ihBklhu vf/kdkjh U;k;k/kh’k Jh lR;iwr esgjks=k gksaxs rFkk
mi;qZä fookn dks U;k; fu.kZ;u ds fy, mä jk"Vªh;
vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k dks bl funs’k ds lkFk Hkstk tkrk gS fd
U;k;k/kh’k Jh lR;iwr egjks=k ekeys esa dk;Zokgh djsaxs rFkk
rnuqlkj bldk fuiVku djsaxsA
[la- ,y&42012@144@2004&vkbZvkj ¼lh&II½]
tksgu Vksiuks] voj lfpo
ORDER
New Delhi, the 14th January, 2015
S.O. 125.—Whereas the Central Govt. is of the
opinion that an industrial dispute exists between the
management of Bajaj Electricals Limited and their workmen :
And whereas the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat at
Ahmedabad in Misc. Civil Application No.1943/2003 in
Misc. Civil Application No.1711/2003 gave a direction to
consider the matter under the provisions of Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 and take appropriate decision;
And whereas the establishments of Bajaj Electricals
Limited situated in more than one State are likely to be
interested in, or affected;
And whereas the Central Government is of the
opinion that the said dispute should be adjudicated by a
National Tribunal;
And whereas the Central Government in exercise of
the powers conferred by Section 7 B of the I.D. Act, 1947
(14 of 1997) constituted a National Industrial Tribunal vide
Ministry of Labour Order No.L-42012/144/2004-IR(C-II)
dated 6.9.2004 with Headquarters at Mumbai and
appointed Justice Shri S.C. Pandey as its Presiding Officer
and in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section
(1A) of Section 10 of the said Act, referred the said Industrial
Dispute to the said National Industrial Tribunal for
adjudication;
And whereas Justice Shri S.C. Pandey relinquished
charge of the above National Industrial Tribunal on
8.9.2004;
And whereas Central Government vide order dated
10.11.2005 reconstituted the National Tribunal and
appointed Justice Shri Ghanshyam Dass as its Presiding
Officer;
And whereas Justice Shri Ghanshyam Dass
relinquished the charge of the said National Industrial
Tribunal on 06.02.2006;
And whereas Central Government vide order dated
3.1.2011 reconstituted the National Tribunal and appointed
Justice Shri Gauri Shanker Sarraf as its Presiding Officer;
And whereas Justice Shri Gauri Shanker Sarraf
disposed of the dispute by way of Award dated 20.9.2011
and Shri Gauri Shanker Sarraf relinquished the charge of
the said National Industrial Tribunal on his retirement on
30.06.2013;
And whereas the National Industrial Tribunal is
required to be constituted to deal with the Approval
Applications and complaints in reference disputes exists
between M/s. Bajaj Electricals Limited and their workmen;
Now therefore, a National Industrial Tribunal is
constituted with Headquarters at Mumbai with Justice Shri
Satya Poot Mehrotra, Presiding Officer of CGIT No.1,
Mumbai as its Presiding Officer and the above said dispute
is referred to the above said National Industrial Tribunal
for adjudication with a direction that Justice Shri Satya
Poot Mehrotra shall proceed in the matter and dispose of
the same accordingly.
[No. L-42012/144/2004-IR(C-II)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
vkns’k
ubZ fnYyh] 14 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 126.—tcfd dsUæh; ljdkj dk er gS fd
ctkt bySfDVªdYl ds çca/ku vkSj muds dkexkjksa ds chp
vkS|ksfxd fookn fo|eku gS%
rFkk tcfd vkS|ksfxd fookn esa jk"Vªh; egRo dk çlax
fufgr gS rFkk ,slh ç—fr dk Hkh gS fd blls lac) vFkok
çHkkfor gksus dh laHkkouk gS(
252
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
rFkk tcfd dsUæh; ljdkj us vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e]
1947 ¼1997 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 7[k }kjk çnÙk 'kfä;ksa dk
ç;ksx djrs gq, Je ea=ky; ds fnukad 08-05-1997 ds vkns’k
la- ,y&51016@01@1996&vkbZvkj ¼vkbZ,eih&II½ ds ek/;e
ls jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;k/khdj.k xfBr fd;k ftldk eq[;ky;
eqEcbZ esa j[kk x;k rFkk U;k;k/kh’k vkj- ,l- oekZ dks bldk
ihBklhu vf/kdkjh fu;qä fd;k rFkk mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 10
dh mi&/kkjk ¼1d½ }kjk çnÙk 'kfä;ksa dk ç;ksx djrs gq, mä
vkS|ksfxd fookn dks U;k; fu.kZ;u gsrq mä jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd
U;k;k/khdj.k dks Hkst fn;k(
rFkk tcfd blds ifj.kkeLo:i dsUæh; ljdkj us jk"Vªh;
U;k;k/khdj.k dk iquxZBu fd;k vkSj U;k;k/kh’k Jh tfLVl ,l-
lh- ik.Ms] lsokfuo`Ùk mPp U;k;ky; tt] e/; çns’k dks bldk
ihBklhu vf/kdkjh fu;qä fd;k(
rFkk tcfd U;k;k/kh’k Jh tfLVl ,l- lh- ik.Ms us
fnukad 20 Qjojh] 2004 dks fu.kZ; nsdj fookn dk fuiVku
fd;k rFkk Jh ,l- lh- ik.Ms us viuh lsokfuo`fÙk ij mä
jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;k/khdj.k dk inHkkj NksM+ fn;k(
rFkk tcfd eSllZ ctkt bySfDVªdYl fyfeVsM vkSj
muds dkexkjksa ds chp ekStwnk fookn ds lanHkZ esa vuqeksnu ds
vkosnuksa vkSj f’kdk;rksa dk fuiVku djus ds fy, jk"Vªh;
vkS|ksfxd U;k;k/khdj.k xfBr fd;k tkuk visf{kr gSA
vr%] vc ,d jk"Vªh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k dh LFkkiuk
dh tkrh gS ftldk eq[;ky; eqacbZ esa gksxk vkSj ftlds
ihBklhu vf/kdkjh lhthvkbZVh& lg&Je U;k;ky; la[;k 1 ds
ihBklhu vf/kdkjh U;k;ewfrZ Jh lR;iwr esgjks=k gksxsa rFkk
mi;qZä fookn dks U;k; fu.kZ;u ds fy, mä jk"Vªh;
vkS|ksfxd U;k;k/khdj.k dks Hkstk tkrk gS fd tfLVl Jh lR;iwr
egjks=k ekeys esa dk;Zokgh djsaxs rFkk rnuqlkj bldk fuiVku
djsaxsA
[la- ,y&51016@01@96&vkbZvkj ¼vkbZ,eih&II½
¼[akM QkbZy½]
o;kbZyk :axlqax] mi lfpo
ORDER
New Delhi, the 14th January, 2015
S.O.
126.—Whereas the Central Govt. is of the
opinion that an industrial dispute existed between the
management of Bajaj Electricals and their workmen:
And whereas the industrial dispute involves
question of national importance and also is of such nature
that are likely to be interested in or affected;
And whereas the Central Government in exercise of
the powers conferred by Section 7 B of the I.D. Act, 1947
(14 of 1997) constituted a National Industrial Tribunal vide
Ministry of Labour Order No. L—51016/01/1996-IR(IMP-
II) dated 08.05.1997 with Headquarters at Mumbai and
appointed Justice R. S. Vermaas its Presiding Officer and
in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-Section (1A)
of Section 10 of the said Act, referred the said Industrial
Dispute to the said National Industrial Tribunal for
adjudication;
And whereas consequently, the Central Government
reconstituted the National Tribunal and appointed Justice
Shri Justice S. C. Pandey, retired High Court Judge, Madhya
Pradesh, as its Presiding Officer;
And whereas Justice Shri Justice S. C. Pandey
disposed off the dispute by way of Award dated 20th
February, 2004 and Shri S. C. Pandey relinquished the
charge of the said National Industrial Tribunal on his
retirement;
And whereas the National Industrial Tribunal is
required to be constituted to deal with the Approval
Applications and complaints in reference disputes exists
between M/s. Bajaj Electricals Limited and their workmen;
Now, therefore, a National Industrial Tribunal is
constituted with Headquarters at Mumbai with Justice
Shri Satya Poot Mehrotra, Presiding Officer of CGIT-cum-
Labour court No.1, Mumbai as its Presiding Officer and
the above said dispute is referred to the said National
Industrial Tribunal for adjudication with a direction that
Justice Shri Satya Poot Mehrotra shall proceed in the
matter and dispose of the same accordingly.
[No. L-51016/01/96-IR (IMP-II) (Part File)]
VAYAILA RUNGSUNG, Dy. Secy.
ubZ fnYyh] 9 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 127-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjr lapkj
fuxe fyfeVsM vkSj nwljksa ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj
muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] psUubZ ds
iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 10@2013) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh;
ljdkj dks 08@01@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&40012@26@2012&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 9th January, 2015
S.O.
127.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 10/2013)
of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial
Dispute between the employers in relation to the
¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
253
management of the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited &
Others, and their workmen, which was received by the
Central Government on 08/01/2015.
[No. L-40012/26/2012-IR(DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR
COURT, CHENNAI
Wednesday, the 17th December, 2014
Present :
K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI,
Presiding Officer
Industrial Dispute No. 10/2013
(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 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.
and another and their workman)
BETWEEN :
Sri G. D. Sathish Kumar
: 1st Party/Petitioner
AND
1.
The Executive Engineer (E) : 2nd Party/1st Respondent
BSNL Electrical Division-II,
Block-3/D3, RGMTTC
GST Road, Meenambakkam
Chennai-600027
2.
M/s. Air Cool Engineers
: 2nd Party/2nd Respondent
(Contractor), No. 24,
Deivanayagam Street,
Nungambakkam
Chennai-600034
Appearance :
For the 1st Party/Petitioner :
M/s. S. Anbalagan,
Advocates
For the 2nd Party/
:
M/s. P. Arulmudi,
1st Management
Advocates
For the 2nd Party/
:
M/s. N. Nithianandam,
2nd Management
Advocates
AWARD
The Central Government, Ministry of Labour &
Employment vide its Order No. L-40012/26/2012-IR (DU)
dated 23.01.2013 referred the following Industrial Dispute
to this Tribunal for adjudication.
The schedule mentioned in that order is :
“Whether the action of the management of BSNL
and their Contractor M/s. Aircool Engineers in
terminating the services of Sri G.D. Sathish Kumar
and R. Kartick w.e.f. 06.05.2012 is legal and justified?
If not, to what relief the workmen are entitled?”
2.
On receipt of the Industrial Dispute this Tribunal
has numbered it as ID 10/2013 and issued notice to both
sides. Both parties have entered appearance through their
counsel and filed Claim and Counter Statements
respectively.
Though the reference pertains to two workmen viz.
Sathish Kumar and Karthik. Karthik is said to have waived
his claim. The Claim Statement is filed only by Sathish
Kumar.
3.
The averments in the Claim Statement filed by the
petitioner in brief are these:
The petitioner has completed ITI Course in AC
Mechanic Trade. The First Respondent has several
telephone exchanges, administrative offices and AC plants
for its smooth functioning. It is engaged in
telecommunication services, internal telephone lines,
cables, maintenance of telephone services, etc. The First
Respondent has AC Package Units in Cuddalore at six
centres. The maintenance of those AC Package Units were
given to Contractors periodically by the First Respondent.
The petitioner was engaged by the First Respondent for
maintenance works in AC Plant at Cuddalore Main
Exchange through a Contractor, in the year 2006. The
petitioner was continuously in the above unit under various
Contractors. Though the Contractors have changed, the
petitioner continued to work. The petitioner is to maintain
the temperature of the AC unit at a particular level, check
the temperature every one hour and is to rectify problems
if any, that arise in the circuits and is also to change the
fan leaf etc. for the smooth functioning of the unit. Thus
the employment of the petitioner is perennial in nature.
The entire service of the petitioner was controlled by
the Sub-Divisional Engineer or other Officers of the First
Respondent. They used to instruct the petitioner regarding
the work to be done. They used to recommend action
against the Contract Workers if they committed any
misconduct. The Second Respondent was the successful
bidder in the e-tender process floated for selecting
maintainer of AC Plants coming under the jurisdiction of
the First Respondent. He was allowed contract for two
years for the period from January 2012. The petitioner
was given duty at Cuddalore Main Branch. He had to
work for 12 hours but he was not paid any overtime
allowance. The Second Respondent has refused to pay
minimum wages as per law also. When the petitioner started
demanding minimum wages the Second Respondent
started issuing salary in cash after getting signature in
blank vouchers. On 05.06.2012 the Second Respondent
has informed the petitioner that he has been terminated
from service. The petitioner has learnt that the contract
has been awarded to the Second Respondent without
verifying whether the Second Respondent is having a valid
license. Since the work performed by the petitioner is
perennial in nature and the engagement is against the
254
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
provisions of CLRA Act, the contract between the First
and Second Respondent is sham and bogus and the
petitioner’s termination is illegal and unjustified. An order
may be passed holding that the contract between the
Respondents is sham and bogus and directing the First
Respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service with back
wages and other attendant benefits.
4.
The First Respondent has filed Counter Statement
contending as follows:
Maintenance of AC Package units of the First
Respondent were entrusted to various Contractors from
time to time. The First Respondent has never engaged the
petitioner directly. There was no employer-employee
relationship between the petitioner and the First
Respondent. The petitioner had worked under various
Contractors from time to time. The Contractor had been
engaging skilled person exclusively for repair of the AC
Package Units. The claim of the petitioner that he was
rectifying the problems of the unit is not correct. Being
the principal employer the First Respondent can only
ensure that the petitioner was drawing not less than
minimum wages fixed by the Central Labour Authority for
contractual workers from time to time. The job of the
petitioner was to switch off and switch on the Package AC
units which is not skilled in nature. At present the
comprehensive maintenance of Package ÄC units is
entrusted to the Second Respondent. The performance
of the petitioner is known to the Contractor only. The
contention that the contract has been awarded to the
Second Respondent without verifying whether he has valid
license is denied. Since the petitioner was only contract
labour under different Contractors from time to time, the
question of reinstatement of the petitioner by the First
Respondent does not arise. He is not entitled to any relief.
5.
The Second Respondent has filed Counter Statement
contending as follows:
The First Respondent is having seven TR AC
Package units for various telephone exchanges under ESD,
Cuddalore Apart from the regular work force, the First
Respondent engages private contractors for executing the
work in the AC Package Units. The Contractors in turn
engage contract workers for the work. The First
Respondent was in the practice of awarding contract
periodically for a specified period. The Second
Respondent was awarded the contract for a period from
17.01.2011 to 16.12.2013 for comprehensive maintenance
of 7 TR Package units for various telephone exchanges
for ESD, Cuddalore. The Second Respondent is having
valid license under CLRA Act. The contract workers
engaged by the Second Respondent are paid wages as
fixed under Minimum Wages Act. The petitioner was
engaged as contract worker by the Second Respondent
for the execution of the work. He was working as an
unskilled worker. He stopped reporting for duty on his
own from 05.06.2012 without informing the Second
Respondent. The work done by the petitioner is not
perennial in nature. It is incorrect to state that the petitioner
was made to work for 12 hours and was not paid overtime
allowance. So also the averment that he was not paid
minimum wages also is not correct. The petitioner is not
entitled to any relief.
6.
The evidence in the case consists of oral evidence
of WW1 and MW1 and documents marked as Ext. W1 to
Ext. W13 and Ext. M1 and Ext. M2.
7.
The points for consideration are:
(i)
Whether the action of the Respondents in
terminating the service of the petitioner is legal and
justified?
(ii)
Whether the petitioner is entitled to be reinstated in
the service of the First Respondent?
The Points
8.
According to the petitioner he has worked for the
First Respondent under different Contractors for the
maintenance work of Air-Condition Plants at Cuddalore.
According to him though the Contractors have changed
periodically, he was working continuously under the First
Respondent. His work was to maintain the temperature of
the AC unit at a particular level, check the temperature
every one hour, rectify problems if any and maintain the
unit. According to him, though salary was paid by the
Contractors, he was controlled by the Sub-Divisional
Engineer, Cuddalore or other Officers of the Respondent.
They were giving instructions to him as to what is to be
done. They were recommending action to be taken against
the contract workers if they committed any misconduct.
The Second Respondent who was awarded the contract
for the period from January 2012 to December 2013 has
given him duty at Cuddalore alongwith the second
petitioner whose name was waived from the Claim
Statement on his request. Though, duty was round the
clock only two persons were allotted in the unit of
Cuddalore and the petitioner was forced to work 12 hours
a day even without any overtime allowance. According to
the petitioner the work done by him was perennial in
nature. The Second Respondent is said to have threatened
him when he demanded minimum wages. He is said to
have informed the petitioner on 05.06.2012 that he has
been terminated from service. According to the petitioner
his engagement was against the provisions of CLRA Act
also. He has contended that the contract between the First
and Second Respondent is sham and bogus and the action
of the First and Second Respondent in terminating his
service is illegal and unjustified. He is seeking an order to
reinstate him in service with back wages and other benefits.
9.
The case that is advanced by First Respondent is
that there was never employer-employee relationship
¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
255
between the petitioner and the First Respondent. The
Second Respondent also has stated in the Counter
Statement that he has engaged the petitioner for work, he
being the Contractor for two years for the maintenance of
AC Package Units at Cuddalore and other six centres.
10.
The petitioner has given evidence as WW1 asserting
his case that he started to work with the First Respondent
through a Contractor in the year 2006 and that he was
throughout working for the First Respondent even though
the Contractors changed periodically during this time.
11.
It could be seen from the Counter Statement filed by
the First Respondent that the case of the petitioner that
he was working for the First Respondent throughout from
2006 is not denied. The only case is that it was as engaged
by the Contractor he was working and there was no
employer-employee relationship between them.
12.
During his examination the Second Respondent has
admitted that the petitioner was employed by him at the
time of execution of the contract between him and the
First Respondent itself. He has further admitted that the
petitioner was working with the previous contractor also
for the First Respondent. He has also admitted that there
was issue between him and the petitioner in the matter of
minimum wages and it was brought before the Regional
Labour Commissioner. He was asked to pay difference in
wages, overtime wages and compensation. According to
him he has filed appeal against this order and he has
obtained a stay of the execution of the order also. The
case of the petitioner is that the Second Respondent has
been threatening him in this respect and ultimately he was
not allowed to continue in the work.
13.
In support of his contention that the contract
between the First and Second Respondents is bogus, one
argument that is advanced by the counsel for the petitioner
is that the Second Respondent has no license under CLRA
Act to enter into the contract. The Second Respondent
has produced Ext.M1 said to be the certificate of
registration under the CLRA Act. It is pointed out by the
counsel for the petitioner that this document will not show
that the Second Respondent has got necessary license.
According to him, in the absence of license produced by
the Second Respondent, Ext.M2 the contract between the
First and Second Respondent for maintenance of the
seven AC units of the First Respondent is to be treated as
sham and nominal. The counsel has referred to the decision
of the Karnataka High Court in FOOD CORPORATION
OF INDIA LORRY WORKERS UNION VS. FOOD
CORPORATION OF INDIA reported in 1987 1 LLJ 407 and
also decision of the Gujarat High Court in FOOD
CORPORATION OF INDIA EMPLOYEES UNION VS.
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND OTHERS reported
in 1990 1 GLR 384 where it was held that a worker who
works for a principal employer to whom the provisions of
the CLRA Act are attracted is to be treated as the worker
of the employer unless the establishment has secured a
certificate of registration and it had employed contract
labour through a licensed Contractor. However, these
decisions are against the dictum laid down by the Apex
Court in this respect. In the decisions in NATIONAL
THERMAL POWER CORPORATION AND OTHERS
VS. BADRI SINGH THAKUR AND OTHERS reported in
2009 1 LLJ 198 and MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF
GREATER MUMBAI VS. SHRAMIK SANGH AND
OTHERS reported in 2002 2 LLJ 544 it has been laid down
that the conclusion that the contract was sham or it was
only a camouflage cannot be arrived at as a matter of law
for non-compliance of the provisions of CLRA Act but a
finding must be recorded based on evidence particularly
when disputed, by a industrial adjudicator. So the argument
that the contract between the First and Second
Respondents is sham and nominal in the absence of license
for the Second Respondent is not available for the
petitioner.
14.
Irrespective of whether registration certificate was
obtained by the principal employer under CLRA Act or
whether license was obtained by the Contract under the
said Act, based on evidence, it is to be decided whether
the contract is sham and nominal. One aspect that has
been pointed out by the counsel on behalf of the petitioner
is that the work done by the petitioner is perennial in
nature. On going through the counter statement of the
Respondents, it could be seen that there is not even a
contention for the Respondents that the work is not
perennial in nature. The duty of the petitioner and such
others engaged for the First Respondent was maintenance
of AC Package Units. Of course, there is a contention for
the Respondents that the petitioner was not doing any
skilled work but he was only switching of and switching
on the AC units. According to the Respondents,
maintenance used to be done by some other person. At
the same time though the petitioner has contended in the
Claim Statement itself that he has completed ITI in AC
Mechanic trade, this is not specifically denied in the
Counter Statements. Even assuming that the petitioner
was not doing any maintenance work it is very much clear
that the work was perennial in nature. Unless the AC units
are working non-stop the First Respondent would not be
able
to
provided
uninterrupted
service
of
telecommunications. The petitioner has alleged in the
Claim Statement that even though the units are to function
round the clock only two persons including him were
engaged at Cuddalore and he was forced to work 12 hours
a day even without any overtime allowance. It is very
much clear from the admission of MW1 itself that the
petitioner had been working 12 hours a day. He has stated
during his cross-examination that apart from the usual
8 hours the workers will be working four hours overtime
also. This admission by the Second Respondent makes it
clear that the AC units were working round the clock and
256
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
the petitioner and his co-worker had to work continuously
for 24 hours. It is clear from this that the work done by the
petitioner was perennial in nature.
15.
Now the question to be considered is who was
controlling and supervising the petitioner and who was
supervising him. It could be seen from the very averment
in the claim Statement that wages used to be paid to him
by the Contractor. Himself and others have proceeded
against the Second Respondent for not paying minimum
wages. However, there is sufficient evidence to show that
the control of the petitioner was by the First Respondent
itself. As already stated the petitioner had been working
with the First Respondent irrespective of the change in
contract and change in the Contractors. The petitioner
has started to work with the First Respondent in the year
2006. Even though different Contractors came and left, he
continued to work for the First Respondent until he was
prevented from work by the Second Respondent. This
would show that the engagement of the petitioner was in
fact not on the basis of the contract but he was accepted
by the First Respondent throughout as a worker, whoever
was the Contractor. In Ext.W6 the reply given by the First
Respondent under the Right to Information Act, the First
Respondent has stated that though only 15 workers are
engaged and so contract need not be covered under the
Provident Fund and ESI Acts, they are taking care of the
above benefits in respect of the persons engaged. This
would show that the First Respondent was directly taking
care of the affairs of those who were engaged.
16.
The Second Respondent has stated during his cross-
examination that there were 10 workers at Cuddalore under
him and the petitioner was employed as AC Operator. He
had claimed that the petitioner was working under his
instruction. However he was the Contractor for four other
units also. He also stated that there was no need for day-
to-day instructions for the workers since their duty was
only to switch on and switch of the AC units. At the same
time he admitted that the security staff of the First
Respondent, the Junior Engineer and the Assistant
Engineer of the unit will be checking whether the workers
were reaching in time at the place of work. This would
show that whatever control required was exercised by the
Officers of the First Respondent and not the Second
Respondent. It could be seen that in spite of the perennial
nature of the work the First Respondent was executing
contract with different persons as a camouflage only to
deny the deserving benefits to the petitioners and others
of his kind. It is very much clear from the evidence that
unless the AC units are made to work continuously the
First Respondent would not be able to function. This very
perennial nature of the work would show that the contracts
were meant only as camouflage.
17.
The petitioner had worked with the First Respondent
continuously from the year 2006 though nominally under
different Contractors. Since the contract between the First
and Second Respondent is found to be camouflage the
petitioner is to be treated as a worker directly employed
by the First Respondent. He seems to have been turned
out of work for no valid reason. So he is entitled to be
reinstated in service by the First Respondent. However,
the petitioner would not be entitled to any back wages.
18.
In view of my discussion above, the First Respondent
is directed to reinstate the petitioner in service within a
month.
An award is passed accordingly.
K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer
Witnesses Examined:
For the 1st Party/Petitioner
: WW1, Sri G. D. Sathish
Kumar
For the 2nd Party/Management : MW1, Sri K. Veera
Documents Marked:
On the petitioner’s side
Ex.No.
Date
Description
Ex.W1
04.03.2010
Service certificate issued to the
petitioner
Ex.W2
01.04.2010
Difference of wages –
comparative statement
Ex.W3
12.05.2010
Letter by BSNL
Ex.W4
23.06.2011
Application filed under RTI
Ex.W5
04.07.2011
Circular by the Ministry of
Labour
Ex.W6
10.08.2011
Reply given under RTI
Ex.W7
22.05.2012
Strike Notice given by the
Union
Ex.W8
22.05.2012
Telegram sent to various
authorities
Ex.W9
06.06.2012
Letter by the petitioner to the
1st Respondent about sudden
removal
Ex.W10
18.06.2012
Minutes of the proceedings of
the Labour Officer
Ex.W11
04.09.2012
Conciliation failure report
Ex.W12
05.11.2012
Application under Minimum
Wages Act by Union
Ex.W13
09.10.2013
Letter by the Department of
BSNL
¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
257
On the Management’s side
Ex.No.
Date
Description
Ex.M1
07.07.2011
Certificate of Registration for
CLRA Act 1970 issued to the
2nd Respondent
Ex.M2
07.12.2011
Agreement entered into
between the 1st Respondent
and the 2nd Respondent
ubZ fnYyh] 9 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 128-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj fiQykSjs
vkSjksf'kYia] foYyqiqje ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds
deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;
ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] psUubZ ds iapkV
(lanHkZ la[;k 48@2013) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj
dks 08@01@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&42011@09@2013&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 9th January, 2015
S.O.
128.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 48/2013)
of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial
Dispute between the employers in relation to the
management of the Filaure Auroshilpam, Villupuram and
their workman, which was received by the Central
Government on 08/01/2015.
[No. L-42011/09/2013-IR(DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR
COURT, CHENNAI
Tuesday, the 16th December, 2014
Present : K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer
Industrial Dispute No. 48/2013
(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 Filaure Auroshilpam and their
workman)
BETWEEN :
Sri A. Segaran & Other
:
1st Party/Petitioner
Filaure Auroshilpam Employees
AND
The Executive Manager
:
2nd Party/Respondent
Filaure Auroshilpam
No. VM-214-Auroville
Villupuram
Appearance :
For the 1st Party/
:
M/s. Ramapriya Gopalakrishnan,
Petitioner
Advocate
For the 2nd Party/
:
M/s. Subhang Nair & Prahalad
Management
Bhat, Advocates
AWARD
The Central Government, Ministry of Labour &
Employment vide its Order No. L-42011/09/2013-IR (DU)
dated 12.04.2013 referred the following Industrial Dispute
to this Tribunal for adjudication.
The schedule mentioned in that order is:
“Whether the following demands made by the group
of workmen employed in Filaure Auroshilpam, a unit
under Auroville Foundation are legal and justified?
(i) Minimum guarantee wages of Rs. 8,000/- per
month and conversion of piece rate wages to time
rate wages (ii) Dearness Allowance from 01.01.2011
and (iii) House Rent Allowance of Rs. 3,000/-. To
what relief the concerned workmen are entitled?”
2.
On receipt of the Industrial Dispute this Tribunal
has numbered it as ID 48/2013 and issued notices to both
sides. Both sides have entered appearance through their
counsel and filed Claim and Counter Statement
respectively. The petitioner has filed rejoinder in answer
to the Counter Statement.
3.
The averments in the Claim Statement filed by the
petitioner in brief are these:
The petitioners are workmen of Filaure Auroshilpam,
the Respondent establishment. The Respondent is
engaged in the business of manufacture and export of
readymade garments. It has been engaged in the business
for the last 30 years. The unit of the Respondent is located
in the industrial zone in Auroville Township in Villupuram
District. The industry of the Respondent is predominantly
export oriented. The garments manufactured in the
industry are exported to the United Kingdom, Germany,
France and other foreign countries. They are sold in a
boutique in Auroville also. The Respondent industry
makes profit of several crores of rupees every month. There
are 46 regular workers in the factory. the petitioners are
working in the Tailoring Unit of the concern. They have
been working in the units for period ranging from 8 to
31 years. They are involved in the work of stitching
different types of garments. They work for 6 days a week
with work hours from 0830 AM to 0500 PM. The
258
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Management has been treating the petitioners in a
discriminatory manner in the matter of pay and benefits.
While other workmen engaged in the factory are paid on
time rate basis, the workmen in the Tailoring unit alone are
paid on a piece rate basis. They are not paid allowances
such as House Rent Allowance, Dearness Allowance, etc.
Other statutory benefits also were denied to them. They
were given the benefit of Provident Fund only from
1991. ESI coverage started only in the year 2005. The
petitioners had requested the Respondent to pay them
wages on time rate basis. But the Respondent did not
oblige. On 12.06.2012 the petitioners raised demands such
as fixation of Basic Pay @ Rs. 8,000/- per month, payment
of Dearness Allowance, abolition of the piece rate method
and payment on time rate basis, payment of 30 days a
month, payment of full wages for the period of layoff,
payment of House Rent Allowance of Rs. 3,000/- per month,
City Allowance @ Rs. 100/- per month, Rs. 3000/- per annum
as LTC and Rs., 5,000/- per annum as education allowance
and Identity Card and proper wage receipts. On 08.11.2012
they raised additional demands of annual increment of 8%
of basic pay, traveling allowance of Rs. 1,500/- per month.
Medical allowance of Rs. 2,000/- per month, washing
allowance of Rs. 1000/- per month, attendance register
allowance of Rs. 500/-, one day of casual leave for every
15 days, death relief of Rs. 5,00,000/-, provision of three
sets of uniform annually and payment of Rs. 4,000/- per
month as Interim Relief. The conciliation proceedings
ended in failure and the matter has been referred to this
Tribunal on the basis of the failure report sent by the
Labour Commissioner. The wages of other workmen in the
Respondent Industry range between Rs. 19,000/- and Rs.
22,000/- a month. The gross wage of the petitioners range
between Rs. 7,000/- and Rs. 12,000/-. The piece rate system
of payment to the petitioners was violative of the law. It is
implemented by the Management in an arbitrary manner.
The work target is unilaterally fixed by the Management
without ascertaining from the workmen whether it is
feasible for them to meet the target. Because of the piece
rate system adopted by the Management, the petitioners
receive a low amount only every month. Prices of essential
commodities have increased year after year. The purpose
of Dearness Allowance is to neutralize the rise in the cost
of living. The benefit should be given to persons such as
the petitioners who are drawing low wages. The petitioners
are entitled to Time Rate Wages and Dearness Allowance.
They are also entitled to House Rent Allowance. An order
may be passed accordingly.
4.
The Respondent has filed Counter Statement
contending as follows:
Six of the petitioners have resigned from the
respondent’s establishment. So claim cannot be brought
on their behalf. The person who is representing the
petitioners is not competent to do so. The Auroville
Foundation has no direct control over the activities of the
Respondent unit. The unit of the Respondent was started
in 1970. It was registered as a Trust in 1991. It joined
Employees Provident Fund in the year 1991. ESI clinic was
opened in the locality in the year 2005 and the Respondent
had obtained registration immediately bringing all its
employees under this scheme. Prior to this, the Respondent
had been providing medical treatment to all employees
free of cost at Auroville centre. Medical leave was provided
to the employees even before the ESI scheme came into
force. The unit was profitable upto 2011. While running
on profit the Respondent had, in addition to the statutory
bonus, paid ex-gratia bonus amounting to more than 20%
of the wages to all employees with more than 10 years of
service. Prevailing economic situation in Germany where
the only export customer of the Respondent is based had
made it difficult for the Indian businessmen including
Respondent to remain competitive. In spite of this wage
increase was given to the employees in 2005. The
Respondent had notified wage increase of 10% as in the
previous year. However, the petitioners have demanded
increase of 15% in the wages. They have gone on a
lightning strike from 12.04.2012. They even tried to
intimidate the employees who continued to work. During
the conciliation proceedings, petitioners 6 to 11 resigned
from the Company and accepted settlement. The
settlement binds all the workmen who are parties to the
dispute. The allegation of discrimination in wage rates are
baseless. Piece rate system among the workers of the
tailoring unit is required for several reasons. This will
provide encouragement of higher production. Since rate
per unit is fixed, it is easy to prepare estimates and budgets.
Piece rate system is beneficial to both the employees as
well as the employer. Piece rate could not be applied to
other employees such as cutters, checkers, packers, office
staff, etc. Piece rate system is widely employed by Garment
Production Units in India as a standard for tailoring as it
maximizes efficiency and helps maintain the industry’s
effectiveness in the competitive global market The other
garment units in the area also employ piece rate system
for tailoring. All the tailors in the Respondent’s unit are
paid in excess of minimum wages for tailoring as directed
by Government of Tamil Nadu. The contention that the
tailors including the petitioners are discriminated and
exploited is not correct. The petitioners are not entitled to
the relief claimed.
5.
In the rejoinder filed the petitioners have denied the
averments in the Counter Statement and had reiterated
their case in the Claim Statement.
6.
The evidence in the case consists of oral evidence
of WW1, WW2 and MW1 and documents marked as
Ext.W1 to Ext.W76 and Ext.M1 to Ext.M18.
7.
The points for consideration are:
(i)
Whether the demands made by the petitioners are
legal and justified?
¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
259
(ii)
What if any are the reliefs to which the petitioners
are entitled?
The Points
8.
Though there are eleven petitioners in the ID, only
the first three petitioners are now proceeding with the
dispute. The other petitioners have settled the dispute
with the Respondent Management.
9.
All the petitioners are working as Tailors in the
Respondent Establishment which is at Auroville in
Villupuram District. The first petitioner is said to have joined
the respondent institution in 1998, the second petitioner
in 1982 and the third petitioner in 1992. These three
petitioners and the other petitioners have raised demands
including minimum guarantee wage @ Rs. 8,000/-,
conversion of piece rate wage to time rate wage, dearness
allowance from 01.01.2011 and HRA @ Rs. 3,000/- per
month. Some of the petitioners other than the first three
petitioners have settled their dispute with the Respondent
during the conciliation proceedings and others
subsequently. So the first three petitioners only remain in
the array for contesting the matter.
10.
The payment of wages at the respondent’s
institution is on piece rate basis so far as the tailors
including the petitioners are concerned. According to the
petitioners they are discriminated by providing piece rate
wages while the other employees in the establishment are
paid on time rate basis. It is also alleged that they are not
paid dearness allowance, HRA, etc. The payment on piece
rate basis is said to be unilaterally fixed by the Management
without ascertaining from the workmen whether it is
feasible for them to meet the target. The target for the
tailors is said to be fixed without any regard to the well-
being of the workmen and without considering their age.
It is alleged by the petitioners that the work load fixed for
them is so high and it is impossible for them to complete
the entire work load and earn the stipulated daily wage
every day. Against this it is contended by the Respondent
that wage at piece rate has been fixed after a scientific
assessment. It is further stated that piece rate system will
provide encouragement for higher production by
rewarding efficient workers in a suitable way. It is further
stated that it is easy to prepare quotations, estimates and
budgets at piece rate system. It is also pointed out by the
Respondent that the piece rate system will be beneficial to
both the employer and the employee. It is claimed by the
Respondent that the wage paid at the respondent
institution is much more than what is fixed as minimum
wages by Govt. of Tamil Nadu and the wages paid generally
in the industry and particularly in the establishment nearby
in the area. There is also a contention for the Respondent
that business has slackened since export customers for
which it was mainly dependent has reduced to one thereby
reducing the business and income of the establishment.
11.
Is the wages that is payable to the petitioners at
such a low rate, far lesser than what is prevalent in the
area and in the industry? On behalf of the petitioners the
one who is acting as the representative has been examined.
However, it has come out in evidence that he is an outsider
to the industry and does not know anything about the
same. The other person who has given evidence is the
second petitioner. In the affidavit filed by him, he has
reiterated the case in the Claim Statement. He has stated in
the affidavit that the target fixed by the Respondent used
to vary depending upon the type of garment to be stitched
and at the beginning of each day, himself and other
workmen in the tailoring unit used to be informed about
the target for the day or the work load for the day. He has
further stated that the work load fixed was so high that it
was impossible for them to complete the entire work load
and earn the entire stipulated daily wage each day.
According to him, because of the piece rate system
adopted by the Management the actual wages paid to him
each month used to be very low.
12.
Against the evidence on behalf of the petitioners
there is the evidence of MW1, the executive of the
Respondent. He has stated that piece rate system is more
beneficial to both employer and employee and this is
recognized by a majority of the employees of the
Respondent also. He has further stated that piece rate
system cannot be applied to employee whose work is not
of a repetitive nature and output of the workers is beyond
their control. He has stated that this cannot be made
applicable to the other employees of the establishment
such as pattern makers, cutters, checkers, packers, office
staff, watchmen, etc. According to him, rate for each piece
of new item used to be set by having tailors stitch the new
item under the supervision and timed by the member of
the Management. On this basis it was decided how many
pieces can be stitched in a day allowing time for lunch,
snacks and breaks. Piece rate was then set on the basis
that a reasonable number produced in a day will earn the
employee the determined daily wage they receive for leave
days. In the process feed-back from the tailors was taken
into account also.
13.
The counsel for the petitioner has argued that it is
necessary in the modern society that wage is fixed in such
a manner that a person should be able to meet his daily
requirements and to have some amount of comfort also.
The counsel has referred to the decision of the Apex Court
in EXPRESS NEWSPAPER PRIVATE LTD AND ANOTHER
VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS AND OTHER
CASES reported in AIR 1958 SC 578 (1) in this respect. In
this the Apex Court has classified wages into three broad
categories viz. the living wage, the fair wage and the
minimum wage. A living wage should be sufficient to meet
the normal needs of the average employee, regarded as a
human being in a civilized society. The Apex Court has
also held that while fixing the wages the capacity of the
260
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
industry to pay is one of the essential circumstances to be
taken into consideration except in cases of bear
subsistence or minimum wage where the employer is bound
to pay the same irrespective of such capacity. The capacity
of the industry is to be considered on an industry-cum-
region basis after taking a fair cross-section of the industry.
While measuring the capacity of the industry the elasticity
of the demand for the product, the possibility of tightening
of the organization so that the industry could pay higher
wages without difficulty and the possibility of increasing
the efficiency of the lowest paid workers resulting in
increase in production also should be taken into account.
Thus it could be seen from the above decision that aspects
from the point of the employee as well as the employer are
to be taken into account while deciding what is the amount
that is payable as wages with which an employee can live
with some reasonable degree of comfort.
14.
It has been pointed out by the counsel for the
Respondent that fixing of wages at piece rate is not
something unknown in employer-employee relationship
and has been accepted in several establishments. He has
pointed out that in the tailoring industry this has especially
been accepted because of the nature of work. He has
referred to the decision in SILVER JUBILEE TAILORING
HOUSE AND OTHERS VS. CHIEF INSPECTOR OF SHOPS
AND ESTABLISHMENTS AND ANOTHER reported in
1974 3 SCC 498 in this respect in which the system was
referred to with approval.
15.
Payment of wages at piece rate system cannot be
frowned upon as one not acceptable compared to time
rate system. This certainly has advantages from the point
of view of the employer as well as the employee. If this
system is adopted a worker who is enthusiastic and is
willing to put in more effort will be able to earn more wages
than in time rate system. He will be able to earn more than
his fellow workers. In this way piece rate system acts as
an incentive to the workers to give more from their part to
the industry and at the same time more for themselves.
This becomes beneficial to the employer also since he is
able to produce more and do more business. The objection
raised on behalf of the petitioners against the piece rate
system certainly could not be approved in view of the
advantages rather than disadvantages for the system. It
has been pointed by the counsel for the petitioner that at
piece rate system a person will have to work without rest
to earn the wages fixed for him. In fact in piece rate system
it is for the worker to decide what is the turnover of work
to be.
16.
Certainly, the rate fixed for each piece should be
sufficient. It should be done in such a manner that the
worker is getting sufficient wages for the work done. So
also it should be in accordance with the price the employer
would be getting for each piece. Even though the
petitioners have claimed in the Claim Statement that the
rate fixed for each piece is not in proper manner, the
petitioners have not cared to give the details of the rates.
What are the particular items stitched or what is the rate
for each such items are not given by the petitioners. There
is only a general statement that the rate is not fixed in a
proper manner and the employees are forced to work more
because of this. In the absence of proof of the rates fixed
for each item or any proof of the rate fixed in the industry
in the area for such items for the purpose of comparison
the evidence given in this respect is insufficient to discard
piece rate system which was in vogue for a long time.
17.
When the available materials are taken into account
it could be seen that the wages paid by the Respondent is
not low when compared to the payment made to such
workers in other establishments of the kind that have
accepted time rate system. The petitioners themselves did
not bring much evidence for the purpose of comparison.
One of the document produced by them is Ext.W53, the
wage bill of a tailor of another similar establishment in the
area. As seen from this, this worker is seen paid Rs. 8,372/
- for the month of December, 2011. There is also Ext.W57,
the wage slip for the month of August 2012, the total of
which comes to Rs. 10,130/- including Rs. 736/- paid for
overtime work. The Respondent has produced Ex.M1, the
wage slip for September 2012 in respect of a tailor of
“Rangoli”, another Auroville establishment which shows
that he was paid Rs. 10,551/- including Rs. 1,226/- for
overtime work. Ext.M2 is the wage slip of the first petitioner
for the month of October 2012 which shows that he has
received Rs. 10,927/- as wages in this month. Ext.M3 to
Ext.M5 are the registers of wages for the months of March
2012 and March 2013 respectively. In March 2011 the first
petitioner has earned more than Rs. 10,900/- as wages. In
the next two years almost this much is the earning for the
month. The third petitioner also has earned this much
during the period. However, the wage earned by the second
petitioner seems to be much lower. He has earned a little
above Rs 6,000/- in March 2011 and less than Rs. 6,000/- in
March 2012. However in March 2013, his earnings is more
than Rs. 7,000/-. The third petitioner has earned more than
Rs. 11,000/- in March 2013.The other tailors other than the
second petitioner also maintain almost a consistent rate
ranging between about Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 11,000/- Thus
it could be seen that the earnings so far as the tailors are
concerned is almost the same, but for the difference except
in the case of second petitioner, when compared with the
earnings from the establishment that has adopted time
rate system. So piece rate system could not be treated as
faulty when compared to time rate system. So there is no
need to discard this system.
18.
Ext.M3 to M5 would show the wages for the other
workers who are paid at time rate basis also. The counsel
for the petitioner has been trying to compare the wages
paid to these employees with the wages paid to the tailors
including the petitioners. However, it could be seen from
¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
261
the registers that those workers who are getting more
amount are pattern maker, checking master, export manager,
etc. who would necessarily be in a higher position than
that of the tailors so their wages could not be compared
with that of the petitioners. The petitioners were not able
to make out a case to discard piece rate system.
19.
Another demand on the part of the petitioners is
that they should be allowed dearness allowance on the
amount received by them. It has been argued on behalf of
the Respondent that though payment to the petitioners is
not made bifurcating salary, dearness allowance, etc. they
are paid taking into account these aspects also. He has
referred to the wages received by the workers in other
establishments in the area and has pointed out that even
on time rate basis they are receiving only lesser wages
than what is paid by the Respondent. He has also referred
to the GO of the Tamil Nadu Govt. fixing wages for the
workers in tailoring industry. As seen from this the wages
payable at Zone-B including municipalities is Rs. 2,137 for
Grade-I and Rs. 2,033 for Grade-II. There is also provision
for payment of Rs. 3.8 as dearness allowance for each
point. Even if calculated on the basis of this, the wages
paid to the petitioners could not be said to be low, though
not very high. So it is to be taken that the amount that is
now received by the petitioners is fixed taking into account
cost of living as well.
20.
The next demand is for House Rent Allowance. It
has been admitted by the counsel for the petitioners that
none of the labour legislations provide for payment of
House rent Allowance. According to the counsel even in
the absence of any such law it is prevalent in the industrial
world to pay house rent allowance to the workers. In the
absence of any evidence regarding such payment to other
workers of similar establishments in the area it will not be
proper to allow House Rent Allowance.
21.
Apart from the above, the Respondent seems to be
running in bad times at present. The account sheet of the
years 2009 to October 2014 were produced by the
Respondent. During the earlier years business seems to
have been running to Rs. 2.00 crores. However, because
of recession business had dwindled. In the year 2013
annual business has reduced to Rs. 94.00 lakhs. During
2014 upto the date on which documents were produced
business is for Rs. 25.00 lakhs only. During his examination
MW1 has even got a case that the establishment is already
closed since it was not able to get any orders from the
customers abroad. What the Supreme Court has stated in
the decision referred to earlier is that the financial position
of the employer also has to be taken into account while
fixing the wages and other amenities. Certainly, the present
financial position of the Respondent does not call for a
wage increase.
22.
The amount that the petitioners are now receiving
in all probability will satisfy the definition given by the
Supreme Court regarding fair wage in the sense that it is
more than the minimum wage though it could not be termed
the living wage which comes under the definition of the
wage which is sufficient to allow the petitioners to live in
some comfort. Certainly, it is not that the amount received
by them will enable them to meet all their requirements
above their basic necessicities. However, the time at which
the petitioners have raised the dispute does not seem to
be the proper one. In the present situation the Respondent
could not be said to be an institution which is fairing well.
It could be seen from the records produced by the
Respondent during sunny days the Respondent have been
considerate of the employees and had been giving them
bonus at much more than the statutory rate. They seem to
have been making yearly wage revisions also. In 2010 there
was a wage revision of 15%. In 2011 and 2012 it was 10%
and in 2013 it was 13%. Ex-gratia bonus payments of more
than 20% of wages were made to those employees of more
than 10 years service.
23.
The counsel for the Respondent has pointed out
that all other petitioners other than petitioners one, two
and three have accepted settlement. He has stated that
the Respondent is ready to offer the same terms of
settlement to the above petitioners as well.
24.
It has been argued by the counsel for the Respondent
that the Memorandum of Settlement marked as Ext.M9
signed with other petitioners is binding on the petitioners
also in view of Section-18(3) of the Industrial Disputes
Act. On the other hand it has been argued by the counsel
for the petitioner that it is individual settlement and is not
by recognized union and therefore Section-18(3) has no
application to the case. This sub-section states that a
settlement arrived in the course of conciliation proceedings
under the Act or an arbitration award in a case where
notification has been issued under Sub-Section 3(a) of
Section-10(a) or an award of a Labour Court, Tribunal or
National Tribunal, shall be binding on all the parties to the
industrial dispute and all other parties summoned to appear
in the proceedings as parties to the dispute. The counsel
for the Respondent has referred to the decision
NATIONAL ENGINEEREING INDUSTRIES LTD. VS.
STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS reported in 2000
1 SCC 371 in this respect. It has been held by the Apex
Court in this that Sub-Sections (1) and (3) of Section-18
divide settlements into two categories viz. (i) those arrived
at outside the conciliation proceedings and (ii) those
arrived at in the course of conciliation proceedings and a
settlement which belongs to the first category has limited
application and merely binds the parties to the agreement
but the settlement belonging to the second category has
an extended application since it is binding on all parties to
the industrial dispute, to all others who are summoned to
appear in the conciliation proceedings and to all persons
employed in the establishment or part of the establishment
as the case may be to which the dispute related on the
262
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
date of the dispute and to all others who joined the
establishment thereafter.
25.
Though it has been stated by the counsel for the
petitioner that the settlement has been entered into by the
concerned petitioners directly and not through the Union
and therefore Section-18(3) of the Act will not be applicable
to the present case, I do not find any distinction made in
the Section whether the party is the Union or the
individual workman concerned. The section merely states
that if the settlement has been arrived at in the course of
conciliation proceedings under the Act, the same shall be
binding on all the parties to the dispute and even on
all other parties summoned to appear in the proceedings
as parties to the dispute unless they were summoned
without proper cause. However, Section-18(3) of the Act
is not relevant or applicable in the present case for the
reason that the settlement entered into by petitioners 6 to
11 seems to be on some other issue they have raised
subsequently, as could be seen from Ext.M9. It could be
seen from this that the concerned petitioners had wanted
to resign from the establishment and they have raised
dispute claiming resignation compensation. It was on the
basis of such dispute raised by them the settlement was
entered into by the Respondent and each of the petitioners
6 to 11 individually. What is fixed by the settlement is the
compensation payable on account of the resignation of
the concerned petitioners. The issues raised in the present
dispute were not considered in the conciliation for the
purpose of arriving at Ext. M9 settlement. So in any case
there is no question of the said settlement becoming
binding on other petitioners.
26.
However, in view of Ext. M9 settlement entered into
by the Respondent and petitioners 6 to 11 and subsequent
settlement entered into by the Respondent with petitioners
4 and 5 the dispute has been practically nonest. Out of the
11 petitioners who have raised the dispute only 3 now
remains. All others have withdrawn from the dispute raised
by them and had entered into settlement with the
Respondent. This fact also weighs very much against the
case of petitioners 1 to 3 who alone are those now
contesting the case.
27.
In view of my discussion above I find that the
petitioners are not entitled to any relief. The reference is
answered against them.
An award is passed accordingly.
K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer
Witnesses Examined:
For the 1st Party/Petitioner
:
WW1, Sri K. Mohandas
WW1, Sri K. Pavadai
For the 2nd Party/Management :
MW1, Sri Michael Tait
Documents Marked:
On the petitioner’s side
Ex.No.
Date
Description
Ex.W1
June 1998
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W2
August 1999
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W3
May 2000
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W4
August 2001
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W5
January 2002
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W6
Sept. 2003
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W7
June 2005
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W8
Oct. 2005
Wage slip of K. Segaran
Ex.W9
2005
ESI Cards of the petitioners
Ex.W10
Feb. 2006
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W11
June 2008
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W12
June 2009
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W13
June 2010
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W14
30.11.2010
Letter of appointment issued
by Vimkar Contractors Works
Pvt. Ltd.
Ex.W15
Feb. 2011
Wage slip of K. Krishnamurthy
Ex.W16
Feb. 2011
Wage slip of S. Veerappan
Ex.W17
May 2011
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W18
Aug. 2011
Wage slip of A. Segaran
Ex.W19
March 2012
Wage slip of M. Selvam
Ex.W20
March 2012
Wage slip of N. Munuswamy
Ex.W21
March 2012
Wage slip of S. Manjini
Ex.W22
March 2012
Wage slip of P. Velmurugan
Ex.W23
March 2012
Wage slip of A. Periyasamy
Ex.W24
March 2012
Wage slip of G. Munusamy
Ex.W25
March 2012
Wage slip of V. Dhandapani
Ex.W26
12.06.2012
Authorization in Form F given
by the petitioners to Mr. K.
Mohandass
Ex.W27
12.06.2012
Petition given to the Assistant
Labour
Commissioner
(Central), Puducherry
Ex.W28
29.08.2012
Petition submitted by the
petitioners to the Assistant
Labour
Commissioner
(Central), Puducherry
¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
263
Ex.W29
12.09.2012
Letter of the petitioners to the
Assistant
Labour
Commissioner (Central),
Puducherry
Ex.W30
Oct. 2012
Wage slip of A. Segaran
Ex.W31
08.11.2012
Additional petition submitted
by the petitioners to the
Assistant
Labour
Commissioner (Central),
Puducherry
Ex.W32
17.01.2013
Failure report issued by the
Assistant
Labour
Commissioner, Puducherry
Ex.W33
Feb. 2013
Wage slip of A. Segaran
Ex.W34
12.04.2013
Òrder of reference issued by
the Government of India
Ex.W35
April 2013
Wage slip of R. Pandian, worker
of Godrej Consumer Products,
Puducherry
Ex.W36
Sept. 2013
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W37
Sept. 2013
Wage slip of A. Segaran
Ex.W38
06.11.2013
Letter sent by A. Segaran, K.
Pavadai and K. Krishnamurthy
to
the
Respondent
Management under registered
post acknowledgement due
Ex.W39
14.11.2013
Returned envelope containing
the aforesaid letter
Ex.W40
Nov. 2008
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W41
March 2002
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W42
June 2002
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W43
July 2004
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W44
16.07.2005
College fee receipt of P.
Padmanabhan, Son of A.
Pavadai
Ex.W45
Oct. 2006
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W46
May 2007
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W47
Feb. 2009
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W48
April 2009
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W49
Aug. 2009
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W50
09.10.2009
Fee details of K. Chitra,
daughter of K. Krishnamurthy
Ex.W51
Nov. 2009
Wage slip of K. Pavadai
Ex.W52
11.10.2011
Electricity
bill
of
K.
Krishnamurthy (in the name of
his wife, K. Padma) for August
2011
Ex.W53
Dec. 2011
Wage bill of S. Chandrasekhar
of Rangoli, Auroshilpam
Ex.W54
10.05.2012
Electricity
bill
of
K.
Krishnamurthy (in the name of
his wife, K. Padma) for March
2012
Ex.W55
12.06.2012
Electricity
bill
of
K.
Krishnamurthy (in the name of
his wife, K. Padma) for April
2012
Ex.W56
29.06.2012
College for receipt of P.
Partheepan, S/o A. Pavadai
Ex.W57
Aug 2012
Wage bill of S. Chandrasekar
of Rangoli, Auroshilpam
Ex.W58
Sep. 2012
Wage bill of S. Chandrasekar
of Rangoli, Auroshilpam
Ex.W59
14.02.2013
Water bill of A. Segaran
Ex.W60
16.04.2013
Water bill of K. Krishnamurthy
(in the name of his wife, K.
Padma) for the period from
Oct.-Dec. 2012
Ex.W61
29.05.2013
Electricity
bill
of
K.
Krishnamurthy (in the name of
his wife, K. Padma) for March
2013
Ex.W62
19.06.2013
Experience certificate issued
by Agaram Enterprises Pvt.
Ltd. to P. Elumalai
Ex.W63
18.07.2013
Fee details of K. Chitra,
daughter of K. Krishnamurthy
Ex.W64
14.08.2013
Electricity bill of A. Segaran
Ex.W65
Aug. 2013
Wage bill of Jagathapraban, a
worker of P.L. Haulwel Trailors
Ltd., Puducherry
Ex.W66
02.09.2013
Water bill of K. Krishnamurthy
(in the name of his wife, K.
Padam) for January to June
2013
Ex.W67
18.09.2013
Electricity bill of A. Segaran
Ex.W68
19.11.2013
Cooking gas bill of K.
Krishnamurthy
Ex.W69
04.12.2013
Cooking gas bill of K.
Krishnamurthy
Ex.W70
09.12.2013
Rice bill of A. P
avadai
Ex.W71
10.12.2013
Grocery bill of A. Pavadai
Ex.W72
13.12.2013
Cooking gas bill of A. Segaran
264
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Ex.W73
27.12.2013
Cooking gas bill of A. Segaran
Ex.W74
27.12.2013
Grocery bill of A. Segaran
Ex.W75
08.11.2013
Industrial Dispute raised by the
petitioners against the alleged
closure
Ex.W76
11.02.2014
Rejoinder statement filed by
the petitioners in the said
Industrial Dispute
On the Management’s side
Ex.No.
Date
Description
Ex.M1
Sept. 2012
Wage details of an employee
in Rangoli Auroshilpam,
Auroville
Ex.M2
Oct. 2012
Wage details of Mr. A. Segaran
for the month of October, 2012
Ex.M3
March 2011
Register of wages for the
month of March 2011
Ex.M4
March 2012
Register of wages for the
month of March 2012
Ex.M5
March 2013
Register of wages for the
month of March 2013
Ex.M6
14.01.2005
Details of bonus payments
made during Pongal in 2005
Ex.M7
05.11.2010
Details of half-yearly bonus
payments
made
during
13.11.2012 Deepavali and
Pongal for the year 2010-12
Ex.M8
01.04.2010
Details of export sales
transactions
of
Filaure
Auroshilpam
Ex.M9
22.11.2012
Memoranda of Settlement
under Section 12(3) of the
Industrial Disputes, Act, 1947
Ex.M10
31.10.2013
Letter addressed by the
Respondent
to
Mr. V.
Dhandapani offering the final
settlement as per the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947
Ex.M11
31.10.2013
Letter addressed by the
Respondent to Mr. M. Selvam
offering the final settlement as
per the Industrial Disputes
Act, 1947
Ex.M12
12.11.2013
Letter addressed to the
Respondent by the 4th
Petitioner relinquishing claims
Ex.M13
12.11.2013
Letter addressed to the
Respondent by the 5th
Petitioner relinquishing claims
Ex.M14
10.12.2004
Revision of Minimum wages
for employment in Tailoring
Industry
Ex.M15
22.11.2012
Memorandum of Settlement
under Section 12(3) of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Ex.M16
31.10.2013
Intimation of closure of
“Filaure” and Statement of
Reasons for closure
Ex.M17
12.11.2013
Letter addressed to the
Respondent by the 4th
Petitioner relinquishing claims
Ex.M18
12.11.2013
Letter addressed to the
Respondent by the 5th
Petitioner relinquishing claims
ubZ fnYyh] 9 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 129-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjr lapkj
fuxe fyfeVsM vkSj nwljksa ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj
muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] psUubZ ds iapkV
(lanHkZ la[;k 30@2013) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj
dks 08@01@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&40011@30@2012&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 9th January, 2015
S.O.
129.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 30/2013)
of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial
Dispute between the employers in relation to the
management of the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited &
Others, and their workmen, which was received by the
Central Government on 08/01/2015.
[No. L-40011/30/2012-IR(DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR
COURT, CHENNAI
Wednesday, the 17th December, 2014
Present : K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer
¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
265
Industrial Dispute No. 30/2013
(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 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.
and another and their workman)
BETWEEN :
The District Secretary
:
1st Party/Petitioner
Tamil Manil Telecom Contract
Union
Labour Union
C/o Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.
Cuddalore
AND
1. The Executive Engineer (E)
:
2nd Party/1st Respondent
BSNL Electrical Division-II,
Block-3/D3
RGMTTC GST Road,
Meenambakkam Chennai-600027
2. M/s Air Cool Engineers
:
2nd Party/2nd Respondent
(Contractor)
No. 24, Deivanayagam Street,
Nungambakkam
Chennai-600034
Appearance :
For the 1st Party/Petitioner
:
M/s. S. Anbalagan,
Advocates
For the 2nd Party/
:
M/s. P. Srinivasan,
1st Management
Advocates
For the 2nd Party/
:
M/s. N. Nithianandam,
2nd Management
Advocates
AWARD
The Central Government, Ministry of Labour &
Employment vide its Order No. L-40011/30/2012-IR(DU)
dated 28.02.2013 referred the following Industrial Dispute
to this Tribunal for adjudication.
The schedule mentioned in that order is :
“Whether the action of the management of BSNL
and their Contractor, M/s. Air Cool Engineers in
terminating the service of Sri C. Ramanathan w.e.f.
05.09.2012 is legal and justified? If not, what relief
the workman is entitled to?”
2.
On receipt of Industrial Dispute this Tribunal has
numbered it as ID 30/2013 and issued notices to both sides.
Both sides have entered appearance through their counsel
and filed Claim and Counter Statement respectively.
3.
The averments in the Claim Statement filed by the
petitioner in brief are these:
The Petitioner Union is espousing the cause of the
workman, Sri C. Ramanathan employed under the
Respondents. Ramanathan, the concerned workman has
joined the First Respondent as Lineman/Helper on
16.07.2003. He has Diploma in ITI Electrician Trade. The
First Respondent has numerous Telephone Exchanges,
Administrative Offices and AC Plants for its smooth
functioning. The maintenance of AC Package Units were
given to Contractors periodically by the First Respondent.
Initially the First Respondent had engaged Ramanathan,
the concerned workman directly for doing pillar work, cable
laying, data entry, etc. He was later engaged by the First
Respondent through the Contractor by name Cooltech
Contractors for maintenance work in the AC Plant of the
1st Respondent at Virudhachalam. The concerned workman
was working continuously in the above unit under various
Contractors. Though the Contractors changed
periodically, the concerned workman continued to work
under the First Respondent. He was to maintain the
temperature of AC unit, check the temperature every one
hour and rectify in case of any problem. The employment
was perennial in nature. Till his termination, the concerned
workman had rendered unblemished service to the
satisfaction of the First Respondent. The Second
Respondent was awarded the contract for two years from
January 2012 to January 2013. The concerned workman
was given duty at Virudhachalam plant. Though the duty
was to be for 8 hours only, the concerned workman was
forced to work 12 hours continuously and yet overtime
allowance was not paid. If any other workman was absent
he had to continue his work for 24 hours or even till the
reliever came. The Second Respondent has refused to pay
minimum wages as per law. Earlier the Second Respondent
used to deposit the wages in the bank account of the
workman. When he demanded minimum wages he started
paying salary in cash after getting signature in blank
vouchers. On 03.09.2012 the Second Respondent called
the concerned workman and informed him that he has been
terminated from service. When he went for work on the
next day, the Sub-Divisional Engineer informed that he
has been substituted by another person. Since the work
performed by the concerned workman was perennial in
nature and the engagement was against the provisions of
CLRA Act and the contract between the First and Second
Respondent being sham and bogus, the termination is
illegal and unjustified. An award may be passed holding
that the contract is sham and bogus, that the action of the
Management and Contractor in terminating the services
of the workman is illegal and unjustified and consequently
directing the First Respondent to reinstate the workman
in service with backwages and all other attendant benefits.
4.
The Second Respondent has filed Counter Statement
contending as follows:
The concerned workman is a contractual worker
working under various Contractors from time to time.
266
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
The Contractor had been engaging skilled person to
repair AC Package Units. The claim of the workman that
he was rectifying the problems is not correct. There was
no employer-employee relationship between the workman
and the First Respondent. The job of the workman was
switching off and switching on the AC Package Units which
does not require any skill. The First Respondent did not
engage the workman directly. Being the principal employer
the First Respondent can only ensure that the workman is
drawing not less than minimum wages as fixed by the
Central Labour Authority for contractual workers from time
to time. It is incorrect to state that the Second Respondent
to whom the contract was awarded has no valid license.
The petitioner is not entitled any relief against the First
Respondent.
5.
The Second Respondent has filed Counter Statement
contending as below:
The First Respondent engages private contractors
for executing the work in its seven AC Package Units and
the Contractor in turn engages contract workers in
accordance with the provisions of CLRA Act. The Second
Respondent was awarded the work by contract dated
07.12.2011 for a period of two years. The Second
Respondent is having valid license under the CLRA Act.
The contract workers engaged by the Second Respondent
are paid wages as fixed under the Minimum Wages Act
and given other benefits also. The concerned worker was
engaged as a contract worker alongwith other workers for
execution of the work. He was working as an unskilled
worker. He stopped reporting from duty from 05.09.2012
without informing the Second Respondent. The nature of
work of the concerned workman was not perennial as
alleged in the Claim Statement. The petitioner is not entitled
to any relief.
6.
The evidence in the case consists of oral evidence
of WW1 and MWs 1 and 2 and documents marked as
Ext.W1 to Ext.W11 and Ext.M1 to Ext.M3.
7.
The point for consideration is:
Whether the concerned workman is entitled to be
reinstated in the service of the First Respondent?
The Point
8.
According to the petitioner Ramanathan, the
concerned workman has worked for the First Respondent
under different Contractors for the maintenance work of
Air-Condition Plants at Viruddachalam. According to him
though the Contractors have changed periodically, he was
working continuously under the First Respondent. His
work was to maintain the temperature of the AC unit at a
particular level, check the temperature every one hour,
rectify problems if any and maintain the unit. According
to the petitioner, even though salary was paid by the
Contractors, the worker was controlled by the Sub-
Divisional Engineer or other Officers of the Respondent.
They were giving instructions to him as to what is to be
done. They were recommending action to be taken against
the contract workers if they committed any misconduct.
The Second Respondent who was awarded the contract
for the period from January 2012 to December 2013 has
given him duty at Viruddachalam. Though, duty was round
the clock only two persons were allotted in the unit of
Viruddachalam and the concerned worker was forced to
work 12 hours a day even without any overtime allowance.
According to the petitioner the work done by Ramanathan,
the workman was perennial in nature. The Second
Respondent is said to have threatened him when he
demanded minimum wages. He is said to have informed
Ramanathan on 03.09.2012 that he has been terminated
from service. According to the petitioner the engagement
was against the provisions of CLRA Act also. The
petitioner has contended that the contract between the
First and Second Respondent is sham and bogus and the
action of the First and Second Respondent in terminating
the service of Ramanathan is illegal and unjustified. He is
seeking an order to reinstate him in service with back
wages and other benefits.
9.
The case that is advanced by the First Respondent
is that there was never employer-employee relationship
between Ramanathan and the First Respondent. The
Second Respondent also has stated in the Counter
Statement that he has engaged the concerned workman
for work, he being the Contractor for two years, for the
maintenance of AC Package Units at Cuddalore and other
six centres.
10.
The Union Secretary has given evidence as WW1
asserting that the concerned workman started to work with
the First Respondent through a Contractor in the year
2006 and that he was throughout working for the First
Respondent even though the Contractors changed
periodically during this time. The concerned workman has
also given evidence as WW2, asserting the case in the
petition.
10.
It could be seen from the Counter Statement filed by
the First Respondent that the case of the petitioner that
Ramanathan was working for the First Respondent
throughout from 2006 is not denied. The only case is that
it was as engaged by the Contractors he was working and
there was no employer-employee relationship between
them.
11.
During his examination the Second Respondent has
admitted that there was issue between him and the
workman in the matter of minimum wages and it was
brought before the Regional Labour Commissioner. He
was asked to pay difference in wages, overtime wages
and compensation. According to him he has filed appeal
against this order and he has obtained a stay of the
¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
267
execution of the order also. The case of the workman is
that the Second Respondent has been threatening him in
this respect and ultimately he was not allowed to continue
in the work.
12.
In support of his contention that the contract
between the First and Second Respondents is bogus, one
argument that is advanced by the counsel for the petitioner
is that the Second Respondent has no license under CLRA
Act to enter into the contract. The Second Respondent
has produced Ext.M1 said to be the certificate of
registration under the CLRA Act. It is pointed out by the
counsel for the petitioner that this document will not show
that the Second Respondent has got necessary license.
According to him, in the absence of license produced by
the Second Respondent, Ext.M2 the contract between the
First and Second Respondent for maintenance of the
seven AC units of the First Respondent is to be treated as
sham and nominal. The counsel has referred to the decision
of the Karnataka High Court in FOOD CORPORATION
OF INDIA LORRY WORKERS UNION VS. FOOD
CORPORATION OF INDIA reported in 1987 1 LLJ 407 and
also decision of the Gujarat High Court in FOOD
CORPORATION OF INDIA EMPLOYEES UNION VS.
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND OTHERS reported
in 1990 1 GLR 384 where it was held that a worker who
works for a principal employer to whom the provisions of
the CLRA Act are attracted is to be treated as the worker
of the employer unless the establishment has secured a
certificate of registration and it had employed contract
labour through a licensed Contractor. However, these
decisions are against the dictum laid down by the Apex
Court in this respect. In the decisions in NATIONAL
THERMAL POWER CORPORATION AND OTHERS VS.
BADRI SINGH THAKUR AND OTHERS reported in 2009
1 LLJ 198 and MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER
MUMBAI VS. SHRAMIK SANGH AND OTHERS reported
in 2002 2 LLJ 544 it has been laid down that the conclusion
that the contract was sham or it was only a camouflage
cannot be arrived at as a matter of law for non-compliance
of the provisions of CLRA Act but a finding must be
recorded based on evidence, particularly when disputed
by an industrial adjudicator. So the argument that the
contract between the First and Second Respondents is
sham and nominal in the absence of license for the Second
Respondent is not available for the petitioner.
13.
Irrespective of whether registration certificate was
obtained by the principal employer under CLRA Act or
whether license was obtained by the Contract under the
said Act, based on evidence, it is to be decided whether
the contract is sham and nominal. One aspect that has
been pointed out by the counsel on behalf of the petitioner
is that the work done by the concerned workman is
perennial in nature. On going through the counter
statement of the Respondents, it could be seen that there
is not even a contention for the Respondents that the
work is not perennial in nature. The duty of the concerned
workman and such others engaged for the First
Respondent was the maintenance of AC Package Units.
Of course, there is a contention for the Respondents that
the petitioner was not doing any skilled work but he was
only switching of and switching on the AC units. According
to the Respondents, maintenance used to be done by some
other person. At the same time though the petitioner has
contended in the Claim Statement itself that he has
completed ITI in AC Mechanic trade, this is not specifically
denied in the Counter Statements. Even assuming that the
petitioner was not doing any maintenance work it is very
much clear that the work was perennial in nature. Unless
the AC units are working non-stop the First Respondent
would not be able to provide uninterrupted service of
telecommunications. The petitioner has alleged in the
Claim Statement that even though the units are to function
round the clock only two persons including the concerned
workman were engaged at Viruddachalam and he was
forced to work 12 hours a day even without any overtime
allowance. It is very much clear from the admission of
MW1 itself that the petitioner had been working 12 hours
a day. He has stated during his cross-examination that
apart from the usual 8 hours the workers will be working
four hours overtime also. This admission by the Second
Respondent makes it clear that the AC units were working
round the clock and the concerned workman and his co-
worker had to work continuously for 24 hours. It is clear
from this that the work done by the petitioner was perennial
in nature.
14.
Now the question to be considered is who was
controlling and supervising the workman and who was
paying him. It could be seen from the very averment in the
claim Statement that wages used to be paid to him by the
Contractor. Himself and others have proceeded against
the Second Respondent for not paying minimum wages.
However, there is sufficient evidence to show that the
control of the workman was by the First Respondent itself.
As already stated the concerned workman had been
working with the First Respondent irrespective of the
change in contract and change in the Contractors. He has
started to work with the First Respondent in the year 2006.
Even though different Contractors came and left, he
continued to work for the First Respondent until he was
prevented from work by the Second Respondent. This
would show that the engagement of the workman was in
fact not on the basis of the contract but he was accepted
by the First Respondent throughout as a worker, whoever
was the Contractor. In Ext.W6 the reply given by the First
Respondent under the Right to Information Act, the First
Respondent has stated that though only 15 workers are
engaged and so contract need not be covered under the
Provident Fund and ESI Acts, they are taking care of the
above benefits in respect of the persons engaged. This
268
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
would show that the First Respondent was directly taking
care of the affairs of those who were engaged.
15.
The Second Respondent has stated during his cross-
examination that there were 10 workers at Cuddalore under
him and the concerned workman was employed as AC
Operator. He had claimed that the workman was working
under his instruction. However he was the Contractor for
four other units also. He also stated that there was no
need for day-to-day instructions for the workers since
their duty was only to switch on and switch of the AC
units. This would show that he is not exercising any control
over the workman. This would also show that whatever
control required was exercised by the Officers of the First
Respondent and not the Second Respondent. It could be
seen that in spite of the perennial nature of the work the
First Respondent was executing contract with different
persons as a camouflage only to deny the deserving
benefits to the concerned workman and others of his kind.
It is very much clear from the evidence that unless the AC
units are made to work continuously the First Respondent
would not be able to function. This very perennial nature
of the work would show that the contracts were meant
only as camouflage.
16.
The concerned workman had worked with the First
Respondent continuously from the year 2006 though
nominally under different Contractors. Since the contract
between the First and Second Respondent is found to be
camouflage the concerned workman is to be treated as a
worker directly employed by the First Respondent. He
seems to have been turned out of work for no valid reason
so he is entitled to be reinstated in service by the First
Respondent. However, he would not be entitled to any
back wages.
17.
In view of my discussion above, the First Respondent
is directed to reinstate Ramanathan, the concerned
workman in service within a month.
An award is passed accordingly.
K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer
Witnesses Examined:
For the 1st Party/Petitioner
: WW1, Sri S. Anandhan
WW2, Sri C. Ramanathan
For the 2nd Party/Management : MW1, Sri K. Veera
Documents Marked:
On the petitioner’s side
Ex.No.
Date
Description
Ex.W1
20.05.2009
Notification issued by Central
Government regarding revision
of minimum rates of wages
Ex.W2
12.05.2010
Letter of the First Respondent
adopting the notification dated
20.05.2009
Ex.W3
26.04.2012
Reply given by the First
Respondent
Ex.W4
03.10.2012
Reply filed by BSNL before
Asstt. Commissioner of
Labour
Ex.W5
05.11.2012
Application filed by Minimum
Wages Act by the Union
Ex.W6
22.05.2012
Strike Notice issued by the
Union
Ex.W7
29.05.2012
Letter by Asstt. Commissioner
of Labour to the First
Respondent
Ex.W8
03.12.2012
Failure report
Ex.W9
20.11.2009
Service Certificate issued by
the First Respondent
Ex.W10
-
Attendance Register
Ex.W11
-
Bank Statement of the
petitioner
On the Management’s side
Ex.No.
Date
Description
Ex.M1
07.07.2011
Certificate of registration for
CLRA Act 1970 issued to the
2nd Respondent
Ex.M2
29.09.2011
Tender notification issued by
the 1st Respondent
Ex.M3
07.12.2011
Agreement entered into
between the 1st Respondent
and the 2nd Respondent.
ubZ fnYyh] 12 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 130-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj fMiQsUl
bafLVV~;wV vkWiQ ck;ks&,uthZ] gYnokuh ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa
vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;&1] paMhx<+
ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 94@2014) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 12@01@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&14012@18@2014&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 12th January, 2015
S.O.
130.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
269
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 94/2014)
of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court-1, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the
Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to
the management of the Defence Institute of Bio-Energy,
Haldwani, and their workmen, which was received by the
Central Government on 12/01/2015.
[No. L-14012/18/2014-IR(DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,
PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR
COURT-1, CHANDIGARH.
Case No I.D 94/2014
Shri Siwn Singh Routela
C/O Diwan singh Routela son of
Shri Pratap Singh Routela,
Resident of Village Chharayat,
P.O. Manpur North Haldwani,
Nainital.
...Workman
Versus
1. The Director,
Defence Institute of Bio-Energy,
Haldwani.
...Respondent
Appearances :
For the workman
:
None
For the management
:
Shri Umesh Chander Joshi
AWARD
Passed on 18.12.2014
Central Govt. vide notification No.L-14012/18/2014
(IR(DU), dated 04.07.2014 has referred the following
dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:
“Whether the action of the management of
M/s. Milan Thapa Security Agency over the issue
of alleged illegal termination of services of Shri Siwn
Singh Routela w.e.f. 1.06.2013 is legal and justified?
If not, what relief the workman are entitled to?”
2.
On receipt of the reference, the notices were issued
to the parties. None has put up appearance on behalf of
the workman nor any claim statement has been filed by
him. The representative of the management is present.
Already many opportunities have been given to the
workman but none has put up appearance. In views of the
above, this Tribunal has no option otherwise then to return
the reference for non-prosecution. Accordingly, the
reference is returned as such.
Chandigarh.
18.12.2014
S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 12 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 131-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjr lapkj
fuxe fyfeVsM] iQjhnkckn ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj
muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;&1] paMhx<+
ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 118@2013) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 12@01@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&40011@53@2013&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 12th January, 2015
S.O.
131.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 118/
2013) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court-1, Chandigarh now as shown in the
Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers
in relation to the management of the Bharat Sanchar Nigam
Limited, Faridabad and their workmen, which was received
by the Central Government on 12/01/2015.
[No. L-40011/53/2013-IR(DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,
PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR
COURT-I, CHANDIGARH
Case No. ID 118 of 2013 . Reference
No. L-40011/53/2013/IR(DU)dated 29.10.2013
Shri Shiv Kumar son of Shri Amilala
C/o Shri Hoob Lal Yadav,
General Secretary Mercantile
Employees Association ,
530-Near Prem Public School,
Dayal Nagar PO Amar Nagar,
Faridabad-121007 (Haryana).
...Workman
Versus
1. The General Manager,
BSNL, Telephone Exchange,
Sector-15-A, Faridabad.
...Respondent
Appearances :
For the Workman
:
None
For the Management
:
None
270
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
AWARD
Passed On:-30.12.2014
Government of India Ministry of Labour vide
notification No. L-40011/53/2013/IR(DU)dated 29.10.2013
has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for
adjudication:
Term of Reference:
“Whether the action of the management of Bharat
Sanchar Nigam Ltd. ( BSNL), Faridabad, Haryana
in terminating the services of Shri Amar Singh son
of Shri Shiv Kumar son of Amilala, ex-peon w.e.f. 06-
04-2012 is legal and justified? To what relief the
workman is entitled to and from what date?”
2.
Case repeatedly called. Despite repeated
opportunities, none appeared for the workman nor any
claim statement has been filed. The case was received
from the Ministry of Labour in the month of October 2013.
From the very first date, neither workman nor any of his
representatives appeared. A letter dated 4.12.2013
addressed to the Ministry of Labour has been received
from the workman for transferring his case from CGIT-I,
Chandigarh to CGIT-II, Delhi. Since then neither workman
appeared nor any claim statement has been filed by him.
In the circumstances no purpose would be served in
keeping the case pending with this court. In view of the
above, the present reference is returned for want of
prosecution.
3.
Reference is answered accordingly.
Chandigarh.
30.12.2014
S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 12 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 132-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjr lapkj
fuxe fyfeVsM] iQjhnkckn ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj
muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;&1] paMhx<+
ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 117@2013) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 12@01@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&40011@60@2013&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 12th January, 2015
S.O.
132.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 117/
2013) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court-1, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure
in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation
to the management of the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited,
Faridabad and their workmen, which was received by the
Central Government on 12/01/2015.
[No. L-40011/60/2013-IR(DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,
PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR
COURT-I, CHANDIGARH
Case No. ID 117 of 2013 . Reference
No. L-40011/60/2013/IR(DU)dated 28.10.2013
Shri Amar Singh
son of Shri Bhule Ram
C/o Shri Hoob Lal Yadav,
General Secretary Mercantile
Employees Association ,
530-Near Prem Public School,
Dayal Nagar PO Amar Nagar,
Faridabad-121007 (Haryana).
...Workman
Versus
1. The General Manager,
BSNL, Telephone Exchange,
Sector-15-A, Faridabad.
...Respondent
Appearances :
For the Workman
:
None
For the Management
:
None
AWARD
Passed On:-30.12.2014
Government of India Ministry of Labour vide
notification No. L-40011/60/2013/IR(DU) dated 28.10.2013
has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for
adjudication:
Term of Reference:
“Whether the action of the management of Bharat
Sanchar Nigam Ltd. ( BSNL), Faridabad, Haryana
in terminating the services of Shri Amar Singh son
of Shri Bhule Ram, ex-guard w.e.f. 01-09-2002 is legal
and justified? To what relief the workman is entitled
to and from what date?”
2.
Case repeatedly called. Despite repeated
opportunities, none appeared for the workman nor any
claim statement has been filed. The case was received
from the Ministry of Labour in the month of October 2013.
From the very first date, neither workman nor any of his
representatives appeared. A letter dated 4.12.2013
addressed to the Ministry of Labour has been received
¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
271
from the workman for transferring his case from CGIT-I,
Chandigarh to CGIT-II, Delhi. Since then neither workman
appeared nor any claim statement has been filed by him.
In the circumstances no purpose would be served in
keeping the case pending with this court. In view of the
above, the present reference is returned for want of
prosecution.
3.
Reference is answered accordingly.
Chandigarh.
30.12.2014
S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 12 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 133-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ehBs ikuh esa
,DokdYpj] Hkqous'oj ds dsUnzh; laLFkku ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼
fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd
fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky;]
Hkqous'oj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 9@2009) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS]
tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 12@01@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&42011@4@2006&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 12th January, 2015
S.O.
133.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 9/2009)
of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court, Bhubaneswar now as shown in the Annexure in the
Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to
the management of the Central Institute of Freshwater
Aquaculture, Bhubaneswar and their workmen, which was
received by the Central Government on 12/01/2015.
[No. L-42011/4/2006-IR(DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT
BHUBANESWAR
Present : Shri PRADEEP KUMAR, Presiding Officer,
C.G.I.T.-cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar.
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO. 9/2009
L-42011/4/2006 -IR(DU), dated 13.02.2009
Date of Passing Award – 22nd day of December, 2014
Between :
The Director,
Central Institute of Freshwater
Aquaculture, Kausalyaganga,
Bhubaneswar-2
1st Party-Management
AND
The General Secretary,
Central Fisheries Research
Employees Association,
Kausalyaganga, Bhubaneswar
2nd Party-Union.
Appearances :
1. Shri P. K. Sethy
For the 1st Party
Asst. Administrative Officer Management
2. Shri S. C. Khuntia
For the 2nd Party- Union
AWARD
The Government of India in the Ministry of Labour
& Employment has referred the present dispute existing
between the employers in relation to the Management of
The Director, Central Institute of Freshwater
Aquaculture,Bhubaneswar and their workman represented
through the General Secretary, Central Fisheries Research
Association,Bhubaneswar in exercise of the powers
conferred under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-
section 2(A) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act,
1947 vide their Letter No. L-41011/4/2006-IR(DU), dated
16.11.2007 to this Tribunal for adjudication pursuant to
orders of the Hon’ble High Court of Odisha in writ petition
No. 8101/2007. The dispute as referred to has been
mentioned under the schedule of the order of reference
which is quoted below.
“Whether the demand of the Central Fisheries
Research Employees Association for allotment of a
room for carrying out their union activities, from the
management of Central Institute of Freshwater
Aquaculture, is legal and justified? If yes, to what
relief the workmen are entitled to”
2.
Before going into the merits of the case, it is pertinent
to interpret the schedule of reference. The matter is to
answer the legality and justification of the demand of the
Central Fisheries Research Employees Association (in
short “CFREA”) for allotment of a room in their favour by
the Management of Central Institute of Freshwater
Aquaculture (CIFA) to undertake their union activities. It
appears that the parties have pleaded not in accordance
with the terms of reference and this tribunal cannot go
beyond the terms of reference. This Tribunal enjoys the
jurisdiction to matters of industrial disputes only which is
coming under the definition of Section 2(k) of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (In short “the Act”). Section 2(k) of
the Act defines as follows.
“Industrial Dispsute” 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
272
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 17, 2015/PAUSA 27, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
employment, or with the conditions of labour, of
any persons.
3.
The above referred dispute for non-allotment of a
room in favour of the 2nd party union to carry out their
union activities is not connected with the employment or
non-employment, or the terms of employment, or with the
conditions of labour, of any persons. Since, the dispute
doesnot satisfy the conditions laid down in Section 2(k)
of the Act, the same cannot be treated as an industrial
dispute.
4.
Accordingly, the dispute cannot be adjudicated as
this Tribunal lacks jurisdiction. Hence, the matter is
returned back to the Ministry unanswered.
PRADEEP KUMAR, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 12 tuojh] 2015
dk-vk- 134-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjr lapkj
fuxe fyfeVsM] vksfM'kk ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds
deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;
ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] Hkqous'oj ds iapkV
(lanHkZ la[;k 11@2010) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj
dks 12@01@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&40012@92@2009&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 12th January, 2015
S.O.
134.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 11/2010)
of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court, Bhubaneswar now as shown in the Annexure in the
Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to
the management of the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited,
Odisha and their workman, which was received by the
Central Government on 12/01/2015.
[No. L-40012/92/2009-IR(DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT
BHUBANESWAR
Present : Shri PRADEEP KUMAR, Presiding Officer,
C.G.I.T.-cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar.
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO. 11/2010
L-40012/92/2009 -IR(DU), dated 31.05.2010
Date of Passing Award – 11th Day of December, 2014
Between :
The Sub-Divisional Officer,
Telecom, BSNL,
Salepur, Odisha
1st Party-Management.
And
Shri Vikash Chandra Mohapatra,
S/o-Laxmidhar Mohapatra,
Village-Arei, PO-Samitanga,
Via-Kishan Nagar, Salepur,
Odisha
2nd Party-Workman.
Appearances :
1. Shri Mahendranath Pradhan
For the 1st Party
SDE(Legal)
Management
2. Shri Vikash Chandra
For the 2nd Party
Mohapatra
Workman
AWARD
The Government of India in the Ministry of Labour
& Employment has referred the present dispute existing
between the employers in relation to the Management of
the Sub-Divisional Officer, Telecom, BSNL, Salepur,
Odisha, and their workman Shri Vikash Chandra Mohapatra
in exercise of the powers conferred under clause (d) of
sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of section 10 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) vide their Letter
No. L-40012/92/2009 -IR(DU), dated 31.05.2010 to this
Tribunal for adjudication. The dispute as referred to has
been mentioned under the schedule of the letter of reference
which is quoted below.
“Whether the action of the management of Sub-
Divisional Officer, BSNL, Salepur, in terminating the
services of Shri Vikas Ch. Mohapatra w.e.f. April
2009 is legal and justified? If not, what relief the
workman is entitled to?”
2.
The 2nd party woekman (herein after referred to as
“the 2nd party”) through his statement of claim and rejoinder
has stated that he was initially engaged by the SDO, BSNL,
Salepur w.e.f. 02.07.1995 as helper. There, he was doing
various works relating to erection of electric poles, digging
of cable trench, duties of night watchman and OFC cable
repairing under a lineman with a monthly remuneration of
Rs. 500/- to Rs. 600/-. The name of the 2nd party finds place
in the list of workers at Seriel No. 162 in general list and
seriel No. 3 of Salepur Sub-Division vide letter No. E-6(13)
part/2001-2002/5 dated 12.07.2001 containing the subject
“information regarding engagement of Casual Mazdoor in
your Sub-Division”.
3.
As per the directions of the SDO(Telecom), Salepur,
the 2nd party obtained experience certificates from the
telecom officials under whom he was working as a helper.
¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 17] 2015@ikS"k 27] 1936
273
The experience certificates shows the duties performed
by the 2nd party like NTC, Cable Work, load pile erection
and watchman. He worked continuously since 1995 till
01.04.2009 and has completed more than 240 days of
continuous duty in each calendar year with effect from
the year 1998 to 2010. The 1st party terminated the services
of the 2nd party without following the principles of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (herein after referred to as
“the Act”) and engaged a new workman in his place namely
Shri Bijay Kumar Kandi. The 2nd party also strongly
objected the written statement filed by the 1st party citing
the reasons inter alia the same is signed and verified by an
unauthorized person. Accordingly, the 2nd party prayed
for his reinstatement with full back wages.
4.
The 1st Party Management (herein after referred to
as “the 1st party”) on the other hand in his written statement
has denied all the facts stated in the statement of claim of
the 2nd party. The 1st party has contended that there is no
record available with them that the 2nd party was ever an
workman employed under them. The 1st party also denied
of having any record with them about the letter No. E-
6(13)part/2001-02/5 dated 12.07.2001 which is alleged to
have been issued to them by the Area Manager
Telecom(city), Cuttack-cum-Chairman of the Committee.
Rather the 1st party has complained that the 2nd party has
provided such document to the 1st party which is a forged
one. The 1st party also filed certain documents alongwith
his written statement.
5.
The 1st party also denied the genuineness of the
experience certificates issued to the 2nd party and made it
clear that the 2nd party has never been issued with any
experience certificate. Moreover, no official of the telecom
department has ever signed any such experience certificate.
6.
On perusal of the record, the following issues were
framed.
a.
Whether the action of the management of Sub-
Divisional Officer, BSNL, Salepur in terminating
the services of Shri Vikar, Ch. Mohapatra w.e.f.
April, 2009 is legal and justified?
b.
If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?
7.
The 1st party has examined two witnesses on its
behalf and proved no documents. The 2nd party also
examined two witnesses and proved 06 (six) documents in
support of its case. I have heard oral arguments from the
side of both the parties. I have also perused the written
notes of arguments submitted by the parties.
FINDINGS
Issue No. 1
8.
It is very much clear from the statements made by
the 2nd party about his engagement with the 1st party as a
helper are true as per the evidence adduced and documents
proved. The 2nd party being a casual mazdoor/helper under
the 1st party, his name found place in the list of casual
mazdoors prepared by the 1st party for the consideration
of his candidature for his regular employment under the
management. The documents proved by the 2nd party are
very much lying with the 1st party as the 1st party has
produced those documents alongwith his written
statement. Moreover, it is quite unfortunate on the part of
the 1st party to deny the letter No. E-6(13)part /2001-02/5
dated 12.07.2001 issued to him by the Asst. Manager,
Telecom (city), Cuttack. Hence, the statements made by
the 1st party seems to be misleading and disbelievable.
9.
On the other hand, the 2nd party proved his case
through the documents filed by him as well as the
evidences adduced on its behalf. But, the 2nd party failed
to prove the fact of his engagement with the 1st party for
more than 240 days in the calendar year preceding the
date of his termination from services. However, since the
2nd party was engaged under the 1st party as a helper/
casual mazdoor, the outright termination of services of the
2nd party by 1st party without following the principles
enumerated in the Act is illegal and unjustified.
Issue No. 2
10.
In view of the above facts, the 1st party is directed to
restore the previous engagement of the 2nd party. Since,
the 2nd party has not extended any service to the 1st party
with effect from the date of his termination from services,
the 1st party is further directed to pay the 2nd party 25% of
the wages from the date of his disengagement till the date
of restoration of services of the 2nd party within a period of
three months from the date of publication of award in the
Gazette of India failing which the 1st party shall pay simple
interest @ 12% per annum against the wages applicable
to him. The 1st party is further directed to consider the
candidature of the 2nd party in case of any regular vacancy
suitable to the 2nd party arises in future.
11.
The reference is answered accordingly in favour of
the 2nd party workman.
PRADEEP KUMAR, 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.