467 GI/2015

(459)

foÙk ea=kky;

(jktLo foHkkx)

(fgUnh vuqHkkx&2)

ubZ fnYyh] 21 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 202-—dsUnzh; ljdkj] jktHkk"kk (la?k ds 'kkldh;

iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx) fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e 10 ds mifu;e

(4) ds vuqlj.k esa jktLo foHkkx ds v/hu lhek 'kqYd] eaqcbZ

vapy&1 vk;qDrky; dks] ftuds 80 izfr'kr ls vf/d deZpkfj;ksa

us fgUnh dk dk;Z lk/d Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS] vf/lwfpr djrh

gS A

¹iQk- la- bZ&11017@1@2015&,Mh (fgUnh&2)º

pUnzHkku ukjukSyh] funs'kd (jktHkk"kk)

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department of Revenue)

(HINDI SECTION-2)

New Delhi, the 21st January, 2015

S.O.

202.—In pursuance of sub rule (4) of rule 10

of the Official Languages (Use for Official Purpose of the

Union) Rules, 1976 the Central Government hereby notifies

the Commissionerate Custom, Mumbai, Zone-1 under the

Department of Revenue, where more than 80% staff have

acquired the working knowledge of Hindi.

[F. No. E-11017/1/2015-AD (Hindi-2)]

CHANDERBHAN NARNAULI, Director (OL)

izkf/dkj ls izdkf'kr

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

lkIrkfgd

WEEKLY

la-

6]

ubZ fnYyh] iQjojh 1—iQjojh 7] 2015] 'kfuokj@ek?k 12—ek?k 18] 1936

No. 6]

NEW DELHI, FEBRUARY 1—FEBRUARY 7, 2015, SATURDAY/MAGHA 12—MAGHA 18, 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—[k.M 3—mi&[k.M (ii)

PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)

Hkkjr ljdkj ds ea=kky;ksa (j{kk ea=kky; dks NksM+dj) }kjk tkjh fd, x, lkafof/d vkns'k vkSj vf/lwpuk,a

Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India

(Other than the Ministry of Defence)

jftLVªh la- Mh- ,y- (,u) 04@0007@2003µ05

REGD. NO. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05

460

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ubZ fnYyh] 21 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 203-—dsUnzh; ljdkj] jktHkk"kk (la?k ds 'kkldh;

iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx) fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e 10 ds mifu;e

(4) ds vuqlj.k esa jktLo foHkkx ds v/hu dsUnzh; mRikn 'kqYd

vk;qDrky;] fr:vuariqje ds dsUnzh; mRikn 'kqYd lgk;d vk;qDr

dk;kZy;] dksYye eaMy dks] ftuds 80 izfr'kr ls vf/d deZpkfj;ksa

us fgUnh dk dk;Z lk/d Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS] vf/lwfpr djrh

gS A

¹iQk- la- bZ&11017@1@2015&,Mh (fgUnh&2)º

pUnzHkku ukjukSyh] funs'kd (jktHkk"kk)

New Delhi, the 21st January, 2015

S.O.

203.—In pursuance of sub rule (4) of rule 10

of the Official Languages (Use for Official Purpose of the

Union) Rules, 1976 the Central Government hereby notifies

the Office of Assistant Commissioner Central Excise,

Kollam Mandal of Central Excise Commissionerate

Thiruvanathapuram under the Department of Revenue,

where more than 80% staff have acquired the working

knowledge of Hindi.

[F. No. E-11017/1/2015-AD (Hindi-2)]

CHANDERBHAN NARNAULI, Director (OL)

(foÙkh; lsok,a foHkkx)

ubZ fnYyh] 2 iQjojh] 2015

dk-vk- 204-—dsUnzh; ljdkj] jktHkk"kk (la?k ds 'kkldh;

iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx) fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e 10 ds mi&fu;e

(4) ds vuqlj.k esa layXu vuqca/ esa mfYyf[kr fuEufyf[kr cSadksa

dh lwphc¼ 'kk[kkvksa@dk;kZy;ksa dks] ftuds 80 % ls vf/d

deZpkfj;ksa us fganh dk dk;Zlk/d Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS] vfèklwfpr

djrh gSA

Øa- la- cSdksa ds uke

'kk[kkvksa dh la[;k

1-

LVsV cSad vkWiQ chdkusj ,aM t;iqj

110

2-

bafM;u cSad

81

3-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

123

4-

iatkc ,aM fla/ cSad

75

5-

Hkkjh; fjtoZ cSad

06

dqy

395

¹iQk- la-&11016@1@2015&fga- (vf/-)º

MkW osn izdk'k nwcs] la;qDr funs'kd (jkHkk)

jktHkk"kk fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e 10 (4) ds varxZr

vfèklwfpr fd, tkus okys LVsV cSad vkWiQ chdkusj ,aM

t;iqj dk;kZy;ksa@'kk[kkvksa dh lwph

Øekad

'kk[kk dk uke vkSj irk

la-

(1)

(2)

1-

chdkusj chNoky vkS- {ks-

irk % chNoky vkS- {ks-]

ftyk& chdkusj ¼jktLFkku½

fiu&334002

2-

[kkjk 'kk[kk

irk % vkS|ksfxd {ks=] [kkjk]

ftyk& chdkusj ] jktLFkku

fiu % 342037

3-

chdkusj —f"k mit eaMh

irk % ds;w,e dSail]

ftyk& chdkusj] jktLFkku

fiu % 334001

4-

chdkusj iwxy jksM

irk % lCth eaMh ds lkeus] iwxy jksM]

ftyk& chdkusj] jktLFkku

fiu % 334001

5-

chBuksd

irk % chBuksd] rglhy& dksyk;r

ftyk& chdkusj ] jktLFkku

fiu % 334302

6-

chdkusj dj.kh uxj

irk % dj.kh uxj]

ftyk chdkusj&jktLFkku

fiu % 334002

7-

yk[kqlj

irk % lkeqnkf;d Hkou iapk;r lfefr

iksLV& yk[kqlj]

ftyk& chdkusj

jktLFkku

fiu % 334001

8-

eydhlj

irk % jsyos LVs'ku ds ikl]

eydhlj]

ftyk& chdkusj

jktLFkku

fiu % 334604

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

461

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

9-

miuh

irk % miuh xkao] iksLV& JhMwaxjx<+

ftyk& chdkusj

jktLFkku

fiu % 331803

10-

Nkij

irk % lksekuh xsLV gkml

cl LVSaM ds ikl

iksLV& Nkij

ftyk& pq#

jktLFkku

fiu % 331502

11-

vkjlhihlh] pq:

irk % dysDVªSV 'kk[kk ds Hkhrj

ftyk&pq:] jktLFkku

fiu % 331001

12-

<kcka

irk % iksLV& <kcka

rglhy& lkaxfj;k

ftyk& guqekux<+ ¼jktLFkku½

fiu % 335063

13-

xU/ksyh

irk % cl LVSaM ds ikl

iksLV % xU/ksyh]

rglhy % jkorlj

ftyk % guqekux<+ ¼jktLFkku½

fiu % 335523

14-

xksxklj

irk % iksLV % xksxklj

ftyk % pq:] jktLFkku

fiu % 331504

15-

guqekux<+ dysDVªSV

irk % dysDVªSV ifjlj

ftyk % guqekux<+

jktLFkku

fiu % 335512

16-

guqekux<+ ftyk vxz.kh cSad dk;kZy;

irk % 250] U;w xzsu /kku eaMh

ftyk % guqekux<+

jktLFkku

fiu % 335512

17-

vkjlhihlh] guqekux<+

irk % 65] /kku eaMh

guqekux<+ Vkmu

ftyk % guqekux<+

jktLFkku

fiu % 335513

18-

guqekux<+ {ks=h; dk;kZy;

irk % Jhxaxkuxj jksM

guqekux<+ taD'ku

ftyk % guqekux<+

jktLFkku

fiu % 335512

19-

jru uxj

irk % cl LVSaM ds lkeus

iksLV % jru uxj

ftyk % pq#

jktLFkku

fiu % 331021

20-

jksM+kaokyh

irk % cl LVSaM ds utnhd

iksLV % jks?kaokyh

ftyk % guqekux<+

jktLFkku

fiu % 335512

21-

ljnkj'kgj thch,e

irk % ljnkj'kgj

ftyk % pq#

jktLFkku

fiu % 331403

22-

vt; uxj] dksydÙkk

irk % 333] tknoiqj iwohZ

vt; uxj]

dksydÙkk&700075

23-

tks/kiqj ikdZ

irk % 71] tks/kiqj ikdZ

dksydkrk

if'pe caxky

24-

fodkl iqjh fnYyh

irk % lh&368] fodkliqjh

fnYyh&110018

25-

lsDVj 23& }kjdk

irk % lsDVj 23& }kjdk

ikspuiqj xk¡o ds fudV

fnYyh

462

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

26-

nsgjknwu

irk % 40] lgkjuiqj pkSd

nsgjknwu] mÙkjk[k.M

27-

xqM+xkao lsDVj&66

irk % ;wfuolZy fctusl ikdZ

xksYQ dkslZ ,DlVsa'ku jksM

lsDVj&66] xqM+xkao

gfj;k.kk&122101

28-

LokLF; fogkj

irk % ,&1] LokLF; fogkj

fodkl ekxZ

fnYyh&110092

29-

e;wj fogkj Qst&1

irk % Mh&39] e;wj fogkj

Qst&1] ubZ fnYyh&110091

30-

xkserh uxj

irk % 2@144] foiqy [kaM

xkserh uxj] y[kuÅ

mRrj çns'k

31-

dQsu pkS/kjh

irk % fnYyh ifCyd Ldwy dSail

dQsu jksM] iksLV& lukFkh

xjgk¡] ftyk& eqt¶Qjiqj

fcgkj&843103

32-

pkl

irk % /keZ'kkyk eksM+]

ekjokM+h /keZ'kkyk ds foijhr

pkl] ftyk&cksdkjks

>kj[kaM&827013

33-

flyhxqM+h

irk %

,e vkj jksM]

flyhxqM+h] nkftZfyax]

if'pe caxky&734005

34-

cDlj

irk % iapeq[kh guqeku eafnj ds foijhr

esu jksM] cDlj

fcgkj& 802101

35-

dlkLx<+] /kuckn

irk % ts oh Iyktk] diM+k iêh]

dlkLx<+] /kuckn]

>kj[kaM& 828113

36-

vklulksy

irk % 32 thVh jksM] cfLru cktkj

vklulksy] ftyk& c/kZeku

if'pe caxky& 713301

37-

dVd

irk %

ch ds jksM]

ekyh lkgh] dVd

vksfMlk &753001

38-

;equk uxj

irk % bZ&20] vkS|ksfxd {ks=

cl LVSaM ds utnhd

;equk uxj

gfj;k.kk& 135001

39-

vackyk flVh

irk % 102] çse uxj

vackyk flVh

gfj;k.kk& 134003

40-

iqBksyh

irk % fganqLrku ftad fyfeVsM

Hkhrj iqBksyh

ftyk % fpÙkkSMx<+&312021

41-

jk'keh

irk % jk'keh

ftyk % fpÙkkSMx<+&312203

42-

jkorHkkVk

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10265½

irk % jkorHkkVk Qst 2] rglhy csaxq

ftyk % fpÙkkSMx<+&323305

43-

lkyex<+

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10468½

irk % lkyex<+

ftyk % çrkix<+&312618

44-

ihiy[kwaV

¼'kk[kk dksM % 11027½

irk % ihiy[kwaV

ftyk % çrkix<+&327029

45-

ijrkiqj x<+h

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10234½

irk % ijrkiqj x<+h

ftyk % ckalokMk&327024

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

463

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

46-

fuEckgsMk

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10238½

irk % eky xksnke jksM] fuEckgsMk

ftyk % mn;iqj

fiu &312601

47-

fuEckgsMk —f"k mit eaMh

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10757½

irk % fuEckgsMk —f"k mit eaMh

ftyk % mn;iqj

fiu &312601

48-

lkaofj;k th

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10437½

irk % ehjk pkSjkgk

ftyk % fpÙkkSMx<+

fiu&312024

49-

U;w DyksFk ekdsZV ckalokMk

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10231½

irk % U;w DyksFk ekdsZV ckalokMk

ftyk % ckalokMk&327001

50-

ukgj exjk

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10321½

irk % ukgj exjk] Jhifr uxj

ftyk % mn;iqj&313201

51-

fpÙkkSMx<+

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10237½

irk % dysDVksjsV ldZy ds ikl

ftyk % fpÙkkSMx<+&312001

52-

cyhpk

¼'kk[kk dksM % 11100½

irk % cyhpk

ftyk % mn;iqj&313003

53-

Hkkuiqjk

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10695½

irk % Hkkuiqjk rglhy xksxqUnk

ftyk % mn;iqj&313003

54-

dyMokl

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10234½

irk % th 1@316] Hkkek'kkg vkS|ksfxd {ks=

dyMokl

ftyk % mn;iqj&313003

55-

ftad LesYVj

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10216½

irk % ftad LesYVj

ftyk % mn;iqj

fiu &313024

56-

Mwaxjiqj

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10228½

irk % eksph cktkj

ftyk % Mwaxjiqj

fiu &314001

57-

Mwaxjiqj U;w d‚yksuh

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10773½

irk % jktJh flusek ds lkeus

ftyk % Mwaxjiqj

fiu&314001

58-

lqjixyk

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10696½

irk % lqjixyk vkcw jksM

ftyk % fljksgh

fiu&307026

59-

lkxokMk

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10230½

irk % lkxokMk

ftyk % Mwaxjiqj&314025

60-

vkcw jksM

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10520½

irk % fjdks baMfLVª;y ,fj;k

ftyk % fljksgh&307026

61-

f'koxat , Mh ch

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10313½

irk % , Mh ch Nkouh f'koxat

ftyk % fljksgh&307027

62-

;qfuoflZVh jksM mn;iqj

¼'kk[kk dksM % 11084½

irk % ;qfuoflZVh jksM mn;iqj

ftyk % mn;iqj&313002

63-

mn;iqj lsDVj 6

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10520½

irk % lsDVj 6 mn;iqj

ftyk % mn;iqj&313001

64-

HkhyokMk vkS|ksfxd {ks=

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10093½

irk % mn;iqj jksM Mh vkbZ lh v‚fQl ds ihNs

ftyk % HkhyokMk&311001

464

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

65-

dkadjksyh

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10211½

irk % dkadjksyh

ftyk % mn;iqj

fiu &313324

66-

Hkhe

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10215½

irk % g‚fLiVy jksM Hkhe

ftyk % jktleUn

fiu &305921

67-

cjksnh;k

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10411½

irk % cjksnh;k] rglhy ckxhMksjk

ftyk % ckalokM+k

fiu &327601

68-

jktiqjk njhck

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10437½

irk % iksLV v‚fQl jktiqjk njhck

ftyk % jktleUn

fiu & 313211

69-

fl;kuk

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10686½

irk % fl;kuk rglhy vkesV

ftyk % jktleUn

fiu & 313327

70-

ephUn

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10687½

irk % xzke ephUn ok;k rglhy ukFk}kjk

ftyk % jktleUn

fiu & 313321

71-

csekyh

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10690½

irk % x.ks'k pkSd csekyh

ftyk % HkhyokM+k

fiu & 311809

72-

dqe] HkhyokMk

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10211½

irk % dqe] HkhyokM+k

ftyk % HkhyokM+k

fiu &311001

73-

,e vkbZ lh vkj] HkhyokM+k

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10881½

irk % ,e~ vkbZ lh vkj] HkhyokM+k

ftyk % HkhyokM+k

fiu &311001

74-

jkLesd] HkhyokM+k

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10892½

irk % 47] jktsaæ ekxZ] HkhyokM+k

ftyk % HkhyokM+k

fiu &311001

75-

lh lh ih lh] HkhyokM+k

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10903½

irk % Hkksiyxat] HkhyokM+k

ftyk % HkhyokM+k

fiu &311001

76-

vkj lh ih lh jktleUn

¼'kk[kk dksM & 10951½

irk % vkj lh ih lh jktleUn

ftyk % jktleUn

fiu &311326

77-

{ks= dk;kZy; 3] HkhyokM+k

irk % {ks= dk;kZy; 3] HkhyokM+k

ftyk % HkhyokM+k

fiu &311001

78-

pkjHkqtk xjHkksj

¼'kk[kk dksM % 11028½

irk % larks"k okfVdk]

lsoa=h jksM pkjHkqtk xjHkksj

ftyk % jktleUn

fiu &313333

79-

ckxhMksjk

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10232½

irk % ckxhMksjk

ftyk % ckalokM+k

fiu & 327601

80-

vktkn pkSd] ckalokM+k

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10805½

irk % vktkn pkSd] ckalokM+k

ftyk % ckalokM+k

fiu &327001

81-

,e ch ,l lh] ckalokM+k

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10605½

irk % ekfg ctkt lkxj dkEIysDl

ftyk % ckalokM+k

fiu &327001

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

465

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

82-

e.Mkojh 'kk[kk

¼'kk[kk dksM % 10822½

irk % e.Mkojh

cl LVs.M

ftyk& t;iqj ¼jktLFkku½

fiu&300305

83-

—-m-e-pkSew 'kk[kk

¼'kk[kk dksM % 11024½

irk % —f"k mit e.Mh] pkSew

fiu % 303702

ftyk& t;iqj ¼jktLFkku½

84-

ukaxy cSjlh 'kk[kk

¼'kk[kk dksM 10632½

irk % ukaxy cSjlh

ftyk& nkSlk ¼jktLFkku½

fiu % 303307

85-

dksViwryh 'kk[kk

¼'kk[kk dksM 10037½

irk % jk"Vªh; jktekxZ la- 8] dksViwryh

rglhy % dksViwryh

ftyk& t;iqj ¼jktLFkku½

fiu % 303108

86-

f'konkliqjk 'kk[kk

¼'kk[kk dksM 11073½

irk % f'konkliqjk

rglhy % pkdlw

ftyk& t;iqj ¼jktLFkku½

fiu % 303903

87-

dknsMk 'kk[kk

¼'kk[kk dksM 10685½

irk % dknsMk

rglhy % pkdlw

ftyk& t;iqj ¼jktLFkku½

fiu % 303901

88-

nkafry 'kk[kk

¼'kk[kk dksM 10670½

irk % nkafny

rglhy % dksViwryh

ftyk& t;iqj ¼jktLFkku½

fiu % 303107

89-

jk;lj 'kk[kk

¼'kk[kk dksM 10640½

irk % jk;lj

rglhy % teokjkex<+

ftyk& t;iqj ¼jktLFkku½

fiu % 303109

90-

Qwysjk 'kk[kk

¼'kk[kk dksM 10749½

irk % Qwysjk

vxzoky iapk;r Hkou

ftyk& t;iqj ¼jktLFkku½

fiu % 303338

91-

NkjsMk 'kk[kk

¼'kk[kk dksM 10639½

irk % NkjsMk

ftyk& nkSlk ¼jktLFkku½

fiu % 303505

92-

c‚l[kks 'kk[kk

¼'kk[kk dksM 11067½

irk % xzke iapk;r Hkou

c‚l[kks

rglhy % cLlh

ftyk& t;iqj ¼jktLFkku½

fiu % 300305

93-

yok.k 'kk[kk

¼'kk[kk dksM 11098½

irk % yok.k

iwfoZ;k Ldwy ds ikl

ftyk& nkSlk ¼jktLFkku½

fiu % 303004

94-

jsuoky Qkxh 'kk[kk

¼'kk[kk dksM 10977½

irk % jsuoky Qkxh

rglhy % Qkxh

ftyk& t;iqj ¼jktLFkku½

fiu % 303904

95-

cksjkt 'kk[kk

¼'kk[kk dksM 10976½

irk % cksjkt

iapk;r lfefr ds ikl

ftyk& t;iqj ¼jktL?Fkku½

fiu % 303338

96-

>ksVokMk vkS|kSfxd {ks= 'kk[kk

¼dksM &10028½

irk % LVsV cSad v‚Q chdkusj ,.M t;iqj

466

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

jksM ua- 8 >ksVokMk

vkS|kSfxd {ks=

t;iqj

fiu % 302012

97-

dj/kuh 'kk[kk

¼dksM &11086½

irk % LVsV cSad v‚Q chdkusj ,.M t;iqj

5 , lat; uxj] tks'kh ekxZ ds ikl

dkyokM jksM dj/kuh

t;iqj

fiu % 302012

98-

fp=dwV 'kk[kk

¼dksM &10828½

irk % LVsV cSad v‚Q chdkusj ,.M t;iqj

lh&8@2 fp=dwV

vtesj jksM

t;iqj

fiu % 302021

99-

fljlh jksM 'kk[kk

¼dksM &11155½

irk % LVsV cSad v‚Q chdkusj ,.M t;iqj

'kks#e ua- 1

jkstoqM vikVZeSUV

<kdk uxj ds lkeus

fljlh jksM

t;iqj

fiu % 302012

100-

ckiw cktkj 'kk[kk ¼10843½

irk % LVsV cSad v‚Q chdkusj ,.M t;iqj

lkaxusjh xsV ds ikl

ckiw cktkj

t;iqj&302003

101-

ljuk Mw¡xj vkS|kSfxd {ks= 'kk[kk

¼dksM &11050½

irk % th&93

LVsV cSad v‚Q chdkusj ,.M t;iqj

ljuk Mw¡xj

vkS|kSfxd {ks=

t;iqj

fiu % 302012

102-

x.kifr Iyktk 'kk[kk

¼dksM &10825½

irk % 103&105 x.kifr Iyktk

LVsV cSad v‚Q chdkusj ,.M t;iqj

,e-vkbZ- jksM

t;iqj

fiu % 302001

103-

Mh-lh-lh- 'kk[kk

¼dksM & 10865½

irk % LVsV cSad v‚Q chdkusj ,.M t;iqj

Mh-lh-lh- cuhikdZ

t;iqj

fiu % 302016

104-

eqjyhiqj 'kk[kk

¼dksM & 10721½

irk % LVsV cSad v‚Q chdkusj ,.M t;iqj

eqjyhiqj] t;iqj]

fiu % 302039

105-

pkaniksy cktkj 'kk[kk

¼dksM % 10025½

irk % LVsV cSad v‚Q chdkusj ,.M t;iqj

pkaniksy cktkj

t;iqj

fiu % 302001

106-

fuok# jksM 'kk[kk

¼dksM % 11176½

irk % LVsV cSad v‚Q chdkusj ,.M t;iqj

x.ks'k uxj&12

fuok# jksM

>ksVokMk

t;iqj

fiu % 302012

107-

ihry QSDVªh 'kk[kk

¼dksM % 10806½

irk % LVsV cSad v‚Q chdkusj ,.M t;iqj

fiad flVh Vkoj

>ksVokMk jksM

t;iqj

fiu % 302016

108-

fjtoZ iqfyl ykbZu

irk % fjtoZ iqfyl ykbZu

tukuk gLrirky ds çkax.k esa

t;iqj

ulZjh lfdZy jksM+

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

467

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

109-

ikoj gkml 'kk[kk

irk % iqjkuk ikoj gkml

jke eafnj ds ikl

cuh ikdZ] LVs'ku jksM+

fiu&302012

110-

oS'kkyh uxj

irk % LVsV cSad v‚Q chdkusj ,.M t;iqj

xkSre ekxZ] oS'kkyh uxj

t;iqj&302021

vapy dk;kZy; & paMhx<+

111-

bafM;u cSad

caxk jksM]

utnhd lqryst isVªksy iEi]

ftyk % uoka'kgj nksvkck

fiu % 144514

iatkc

112-

bafM;u cSad

/kkyhoky d‚EIysDl]

,QlhvkbZ xksMkmu ds lkeus

fQjkstiqj jksM

eqYyuiqj

ftyk % yqf/k;kuk&141101

iatkc

113-

bafM;u cSad

22 beçwoesaV VªLV fcfYMax]

th Vh jksM]

xqjnkliqj&143521

iatkc

114-

bafM;u cSad

,l-lh-,Q- 29&30

vcZu ,LVsV] lsDVj&1] cVkyk

ftyk % xqjnkliqj&143505

iatkc

115-

bafM;u cSad

ckck bZ'oj flag ,T;wds'ku lkslk;Vh

Hkkxiqjk

ftyk % eksxk&142043

iatkc

116-

bafM;u cSad

,l-lh-,Q- & 18

lsDVj % 20 Mh

paMhx<+

117-

bafM;u cSad

lsDVj&37 Mh

paMhx<+

118

bafM;u cSad

,l-lh-vks- 39

e/; ekxZ

lsDVj&7 lh

paMhx<+

119-

bafM;u cSad

edku uacj&48 lh

'kghn djusy flag uxj

Qst&3] ,l-;w-,- jksM

tkoMh] utnhd i[kksoky jksM

yqf/k;kuk&141013

iatkc

vapy dk;kZy; & ubZ fnYyh ,oa jktLFkku

120-

bafM;u cSad

yktiruxj 'kk[kk] ch13

yktiruxj &II

fnYyh&110024

121-

bafM;u cSad

dkilgsMk 'kk[kk]

oRl Hkou] Hkou la[;k&567]

iqjkuk ikye&xqMxk¡o ekxZ

leky[kk] dkilgsMk

fnYyh&110037

122-

bafM;u cSad

eaxksyiqjh 'kk[kk]

vkj tsM &349

[kljk la[;k& 149]

eaxksyiqj [kqnZ]

eaxksyiqjh]

fnYyh&110 085

123-

bafM;u cSad

}kjdk lSDVj&10 'kk[kk

dksBh la[;k&4

oanuk baVjus'kuy Ldwy ds lkeus]

lSDVj&10 }kjdk] fnYyh 110075

jktLFkku

124-

bafM;u cSad

ukjkSyh pkSM+ 'kk[kk] xzke iapk;r

xzke ,oa Mkd?kj ukjkSyh pkSM+]

468

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

rglhy ckeuokl]

ftyk lokbZ ek/kksiqj

fiu&322214

jktLFkku

125-

bafM;u cSad

nsbZ [ksM+k 'kk[kk]

lkeqnkf;d Hkou]

xzke ,oa Mkd?kj&nsbZ [ksM+k]

rglhy bUæ x<+]

ftyk&cwanh

fiu&323603

jktLFkku

126-

bafM;u cSad

vapy dk;kZy;]

iqYysIiMh ta-

fpRrqj jksM

,jukdqye

vapy dk;kZy; & y[kuÅ

127

bafM;u cSad

vdcjiqj 'kk[kk

vk'khokZn xsLV gkÅl

rglhy pkSjkgk

vdcjiqj

vEcsndjuxj

mRrj çns'k& 224122

128

bafM;u cSad

bykgkckn 'kk[kk

249] pd

thjks jksM

bykgkckn

mRrj çns'k& 211003

129

bafM;u cSad

cNjkoka 'kk[kk

, 21] iVsy uxj

cNjkoka jk; cjsyh

mRrj çns'k&229301

130

bafM;u cSad

cnk;wa 'kk[kk

437 flfoy ykbu

lqfurh uflaZx gkse ds lkeus

bafnjk pkSd]

cnk;wa]

mRrj çns'k&243601

131

bafM;u cSad

cgjkbp 'kk[kk]

Ýh xat] ¼Mk;e.M flusek ds ikl½

LVs'ku jksM

cgjkbp

mRrj çns'k& 271801

132

bafM;u cSad

cfy;k 'kk[kk

ekyxksnke jksM

'kh'k egy flusek ds ikl

cfy;k

mRrj çns'k& 277001

133

bafM;u cSad

cyjkeiqj 'kk[kk

efYVdqat

xksfoUn ck?k

LVs'ku jksM cyjkeiqj

mRrj çns'k& 271201

134

bafM;u cSad

cHkuh pkSjkgk 'kk[kk

cHkuh pkSjkgk

iksLV& laxr

lar dchj uxj

mRrj çns'k&272125

135

bafM;u cSad

cnuh pkQk 'kk[kk

xzke&ckjguh pkQk

iq- LVs'ku& Hkouh xat

rglhy&nqekfj;kxat

cjguh pkQk

fl)kFkZ uxj

mRrj çns'k& 272189

136

bafM;u cSad

ckjkcadh 'kk[kk

eksfguh Iyktk

jkt dey jksM

lR; çseh uxj

ckjkcadh

mRrj çns'k & 225001

137

bafM;u cSad

cjsyh 'kk[kk

la- 149 flfoy ykbUl

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

469

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

jktjkuh vLirky ds ikl

cjsyh

mRrjçns'k&243001

138

bafM;u cSad

cLrh 'kk[kk

dVh'oj ikdZ ds lkeus

xka/khuxj

cLrh

mRrj çns'k& 272001

139

bafM;u cSad

chdkiqj 'kk[kk

fcyxzke rglhy

gjnksbZ

mRrj çns'k&241302

140

bafM;u cSad

HkVkSyh cqtqxZ

xzke ,oa iksLV xkSjh cktkj

ftyk& nsofj;k

xkSjh cktkj& 274202

141

bafM;u cSad

pUnkSyh 'kk[kk

okMZ la- 11

gkml la[;k 48

lat; uxj

th Vh jksM pUnkSyh

mRrj çns'k& 232104

142

bafM;u cSad

NksVk Hkjokjk

gkml la[;k 749

xnkfj;uiqokZ

NksVk Hkjokjk

xkserh uxj

y[kuÅ

mRrj çns'k &226028

143

bafM;u cSad

nsofj;k 'kk[kk

gkml ua- 266

xksj[kiqj jksM

vcwcdj uxj

nsofj;k

mRrj çns'k &274001

144

bafM;u cSad

QStkckn 'kk[kk

igyk ry] vYdk VkolZ

fjdc xat

fu;kok jksM

QStkckn

mRrj çns'k& 224001

145

bafM;u cSad

fQjkstkckn 'kk[kk lsDVj 1@34

lqgkxuxj

fQjkstkckn

mRrj çns'k &283203

146

bafM;u cSad

xkthiqj 'kk[kk

jsyos Økflax ds ikl

xzke& QqYyuiqj

iksLV & chdkiqj

xkthiqj

mRrj çns'k &233001

147

bafM;u cSad

xkSjk c/kuok 'kk[kk

iksLV&t;rkiqj

cyjkeiqj

mRrj çns'k & 271604

148

bafM;u cSad

xksnksfy;k 'kk[kk

Mh&48@122 fefljkiks[kjk

xksnksfy;k

okjk.klh

mRrjçns'k & 221001

149

bafM;u cSad

xkserh uxj 'kk[kk

2@139 fot; [k.M

xkserh uxj

y[kuÅ

mRrj çns'k & 226010

150

bafM;u cSad

xksaMk 'kk[kk

lhih&108 lkSjHk dkEIysDl

lfdZyj jksM

vkokl fodkl d‚yksuh

xks.Mk

mRrj çns'k& 271002

470

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

151

bafM;u cSad

xksihxat 'kk[kk

Qwyck?k

Kkuiqj jksM

xksihxat

,l-vkj-,u- Hknksgh

mRrj çns'k& 221303

152

bafM;u cSad

xksj[kiqj 'kk[kk

16@lh cSad jksM

xksj[kiqj

mRrj çns'k &273001

153

bafM;u cSad

Kkuiqj 'kk[kk

iqjkuk ,-vkj-Vh-vks vkfQl

iVsy uxj

Kkuiqj

,lvkj,u Hknksgh

mRrj çns'k& 221304

154

bafM;u cSad

gjnksbZ 'kk[kk

?kaVk?kj jksM

gjnksbZ

mRrj çns'k & 241001

155

bafM;u cSad

bafnjk uxj 'kk[kk

ch&1316] lkbZ Iyktk

ch Cykd Økflax bafnjk uxj

y[kuÅ

bafnjk uxj

mRrj çns'k& 226016

156

bafM;u cSad

tkSuiqj 'kk[kk

dpgjh jksM flfoy ykbu

,lchvkbZ ds ikl

tkSuiqj

mRrj çns'k &222002

157

bafM;u cSad

deksfy;k 'kk[kk

csyxkou

lhrkiqj

mRrj çns'k& 261001

158

bafM;u cSad

dUukSt 'kk[kk

ekfyd dkEiysDl

,e th jksM

dkth VksYyk

dUukSt

mRrj çns'k& 209725

159

bafM;u cSad

dkuiqj 'kk[kk

la- 50@276

tqxy fcgkjth dkEIysDl

gYls jksM

dkuiqj flVh

dkuiqj

mRrj çns'k& 208001

160

bafM;u cSad

dkuiqj dUVksUesUV 'kk[kk

64 dSUV cksMZ vkfQl dSEil

VSxksj jksM] dUVksUesUV dkuiqj

mRrj çns'k &208004

161

bafM;u cSad

[kyhykckn 'kk[kk

lqxjfey jksM

[kyhykckn

lar dchj uxj

mRrj çns'k &272175

162

bafM;u cSad

fd'kunkliqj 'kk[kk

gkml vkQ ;ksxsUæk flag

iq~- LVs'ku& Åapgkj

fd'kunkliqj

jk;cjsyh ftyk

mRrj çns'k& 229401

163

bafM;u cSad

fdluh 'kk[kk

dqjs'kh ekdsZV

drjk pkSjkg

fdluh

vesBh ftyk

mRrj çns'k &227811

164

bafM;u cSad

fdBkok 'kk[kk

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

471

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

/kkjkbZ Cykd lSywu

jk;cjsyh ftyk

mRrj çns'k &229127

165

bafM;u cSad

ykyxat 'kk[kk

esu jksM] Hkxy fDyfud ds ikl

lkdsr uxj ykyxat

jk;cjsyh ftyk

mRrj çns'k &229206

166

bafM;u cSad

y[kuÅ 'kk[kk

la 1 vkSj 2

v'kksd ekxZ

gtjrxat

y[kuÅ

mRrj çns'k &226001

167

bafM;u cSad

egkjktxat 'kk[kk

Qjhnk jksM

gehn uxj

egkjktxat iksLV v‚Qhl

egkjktxat ftyk

mRrj çns'k &273303

168

bafM;u cSad

eYykoka 'kk[kk

1053 gjnksbZ

dkuiqj jksM

eYykou

gjnksbZ ftyk

eYykoka

mRrj çns'k &241303

169

bafM;u cSad

eÅ ukFk Hkatu 'kk[kk

257@1 T;ksrh Voj

'kgnkriqjk

HkquS fo|ky; ds ikl

eÅ ukFk Hkatu

eÅ ftyk

mRrj çns'k &275101

170

bafM;u cSad

ekbØkslsV jk;cjsyh 'kk[kk

,e&16 ykyxat jksM

vejs'kiqjh d‚yksuh

jk;cjsyh ftyk

mRrj çns'k &229001

171

bafM;u cSad

fetkZiqj 'kk[kk

Lokeh n;kuan ekxZ

osYyLyh xat

fetkZiqj ftyk

mRrj çns'k &231001

172

bafM;u cSad

eqjknkckn 'kk[kk

LVs'ku jksM

cq) cktkj

gksVy jktu ds lkeus

eqjknkckn ftyk

mRrj çns'k &244001

173

bafM;u cSad

uknsikj 'kk[kk

uknsikj pkSjkgk

xzke&uknsikj

iksLV&tksfx;k mn;iqj

fl)kFkZ uxj

mRrj çns'k& 272207

174

bafM;u cSad

iMjkSuk 'kk[kk

'kkL=h uxj

jkedksyk jksM iMjkSuk

dq'khuxj ftyk

mRrj çns'k& 274304

175

bafM;u cSad

ihyhHkhr 'kk[kk

la- 3 xka/kh LVsfM;e jksM

paæ g‚fLiVy ds lkeus

ihyhHkhr ftyk

mRrj çns'k& 262001

176

bafM;u cSad

ihyk egqvk 'kk[kk

ihyk egqvk

gjnksbZ ftyk

mRrj çns'k& 241405

177

bafM;u cSad

çrkix<+ 'kk[kk

472

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

47 , flfoy ykbUl

drjk jksM

lh,evks jsflMsUl ds ikl

çrkix<+

çrkix<+ ftyk

mRrj çns'k&230001

178

bafM;u cSad

jtuh [kaM 'kk[kk

,Q&3] okMZ uacj&1

jk;jcsyh jksM jtuh [kaM]

'kkjnk uxj fnydq'kk

y[kuÅ ftyk

mRrj çns'k&226002

179

bafM;u cSad

jk;cjsyh 'kk[kk

#æk Iyktk

fjQkeZ Dyc ds lkeus

vLirky jksM

jk;cjsyh

mRrj çns'k &229001

180

bafM;u cSad

jkeiqj 'kk[kk

'kkSdrvyh jksM

vQjks”k 'kkg dh dksBh ds lkeus

flfoy ykbUl

mRrj çns'k &244901

181

bafM;u cSad

j‚cVZ~lxat 'kk[kk

flfoy ykbu jksM

g"kZ uxj

j‚cVZ~lxat

lksuHkæk ftyk

mRrj çns'k &231216

182

bafM;u cSad

lSQqYykxat 'kk[kk

lSQqYykxat cktkj

xzke vkSj iksLV lSQqYykxat

rglhy lnj

lqYrkuiqj ftyk

mRrj çns'k &228119

183

bafM;u cSad

lkdsr uxj 'kk[kk

810] McY;w@1] Ldhe II

nhi V‚dht jksM

fdnobZ uxj

iksLV lkdsr uxj

dkuiqj

mRrj çns'k& 208014

184

bafM;u cSad

lrjkgh 'kk[kk

lrjkgh xzke

iksLV xjdq;k rgfly

gSnj?kj

ckjkcadh ftyk

mRrj çns'k &225124

185

bafM;u cSad

'kkgtgkaiqj 'kk[kk

tkyh dksBh cSdqaB ukFk eafnj ds lkeus

'kkgtgkaiqj

'kkgtgkaiqj ftyk

mRrj çns'k&242001

186

bafM;u cSad

lksU/kk 'kk[kk

lksU/kk xzke

dqUnjk

'kkgtgkaiqj ftyk

mRrj çns'k&242301

187

bafM;u cSad

lqYrkuiqj 'kk[kk

671@1 lksuh dkEIysDl

nfj;kiqj jksM

lqYrkuiqj ftyk

mRrj çns'k&228001

188

bafM;u cSad

Lo:iuxj 'kk[kk

113@148 cky fudqat Ldwy ds ikl

Lo:iuxj

dkuiqj ftyk

mRrj çns'k&208002

189

bafM;u cSad

rsUnqvk 'kk[kk

rsUnqvk

e/kqcu jksM

csyFkjk jksM iksLV

cfy;k ftyk

mRrj çns'k&221715

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

473

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

190

bafM;u cSad

okjk.klh 'kk[kk

la- lh&7@34&ch

ygqjkchj

okjk.klh

okjk.klh ftyk

mRrj çns'k&221001

191

bafM;u cSad

y[kuÅ lsok 'kk[kk

1] 2 v'kksd ekxZ

gtjrxat

y[kuÅ

y[kuÅ ftyk

mRrj çns'k&226001

192

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

vkesj jksM

czãiqjh Fkkus ds vkxs

t;iqj&302002

193

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

fp=dwV

tkudh ekxZ

LVsi ckbZ LVsi Ldwy ds ikl

t;iqj&302021

194

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

dySDVªsV lfdZy

dySDVªsV lfdZy ds ikl

cuhikdZ

t;iqj&302016

195

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

nqxkZiqjk

egkjkuh QkeZ] nqxkZiqjk

t;iqj&302018

196

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

tokgj lfdZy

xksYM lq[k xzkmaM

mÙkj if'pe jsyos gsM Do‚Vj ds vkxs

t;iqj& 302017

197

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

tokgj uxj

36&ch] lR;k lkbZ d‚yst ds lkeus

tokgj uxj

t;iqj&302004

198

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

>ksVokMk

Iy‚V ua- 8] vo/kiqjh dkyokM jksM

>ksVokMk

t;iqj&302012

199

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

dSyk'kiqjh

9] dSyk'kiqjh] Vksad jksM

t;iqj&302018

200

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

,e-,u-vkbZ-Vh-

,e-,u-vkbZ-Vh- dsEil

egkohj dsalj g‚fLiVy ds lkeus

ts-,y-,u- ekxZ

t;iqj&302017

201

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

fuekZ.k uxj

ds V‚oj] ,&47

o`ankou fogkj

fdaxl jksM] fuekZ.k uxj

t;iqj&302019

202

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

fo'ks"k x`g _.k 'kk[kk

c`t vuqdEik] v'kksd ekxZ

lh- Ldhe

t;iqj& 302001

203

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

çrki uxj

101@49] dqEHkk ekxZ

çrki uxj

t;iqj&302022

204

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

'kkL=h uxj

,& 30 ch

'kkL=h uxj

t;iqj&302016

205

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

fljlh jksM

¶ysV u-1 'ks[kkor Hkou]

fljlh jksM

t;iqj&302012

474

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

206

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lhrkiqjk vks|kSfxd {ks=

jhdks Hkou] lhrkiqjk vks|kSfxd {ks=

t;iqj&302022

207

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

,l-,e-bZ 'kk[kk ¼t;iqj nf{k.k½

22 & xksnke vks|kSfxd {ks=

t;iqj&302006

208

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

,l-,e-bZ 'kk[kk LVs'ku jksM

eaxy Hkou] LVs'ku jksM

t;iqj&302006

209

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

Lis'ky ,u-vkj-vkbZ 'kk[kk

Iy‚V ua- 8&9] d‚jiksjsV ikdZ

xksikyckMh]

t;iqj& 302006

210

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

f=os.kh uxj]

xksikyiqjk ckbZ ikl ds ikl]

t;iqj&302018

211

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

eqæk ç'kklfud dks"B

t;iqj fo'ks"k 'kk[kk ifjlj

lkaxkusjh xsV

t;iqj&302003

212

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

fHkokMh ,l-,e-bZ-

,Q&296] vkS|ksfxd {ks= fHkokMh

vyoj&301019

213

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

'kkgtgk¡iqj

vk'kh"k Iyktk] iqjkuk cl LVS.M

vyoj&301706

214

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ViqdMk

vyoj&301707

215

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

Fkkukxkth

Hkksjk Hkou] çrkix<+ jksM

Fkkukxkth]

vyoj&301022

216

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lw;Z uxj

guqeku pkSjkgk] fnYyh jksM

vyoj&301001

217

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

vthrx<+

lhdj&302701

218-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ouLFkyh

rglhy& fuokbZ

Vksad&304022

219-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

cLlh

ch-,l- iSjsMkbZ”k

ljkZQ d‚yksuh] cl LVsaM ds ikl

t;iqj jksM

cLlh&303301

220-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

[ksrMh

okMZ ua- 15] esu jksM]

[ksrMh

>qa>quq&333503

221-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ekyiqjk

rºlhy&ekyiqjk]

Vksad&304502

222-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ih# flag lfdZy

>qa>quq&333001

223-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

esMh] xkao&esMh]

rglhy & xaxkiqj flVh

lokbZ] ek/kksiqj&322219

224-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lksMk

xkao&lksMk]

rglhy& ekyiqjk

Vksad&304504

225-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

Jhek/kksiqj

lhdj&332715

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

475

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

226-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

Vksad

tokgj cktkj

Vksad & 304001

227-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

mn; [kqnZ

iksLV& egqdyku

Cy‚d & xaxkiqjflVh

lokbZ ek/kksiqj&322220

228-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

—f"k okf.kT; 'kk[kk

eaxy Hkou

çFke ry] LVs'ku jksM

t;iqj&302006

229-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lq[kkfM;k lfdZy

Jhxaxkuxj&335001

230-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

LVs'ku gsM DokVj

lk/kqokyh Nkouh

Jhxaxkuxj&335001

231-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

fefyVªh LVs'ku lwjrx<+

Jhxaxkuxj&335804

232-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

uksgj

rglhy& uksgj

guqekux<+&335523

233-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

tsy jksM

fot; HkSjo ekdsZV

eksgrk pkSd]

chdkusj&334005

234-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

uky

,;j QkslZ LVs'ku

uky] chdkusj&334001

235-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

Hkknjk

fu;j ,lh-ts-,e dksVZ

jsyos LVs'ku jksM

Hkknjk] guqekux<+&335501

236-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

vkS|ksfxd {ks= fd'kux<+

12 edjkuk jksM vkS|ksfxd {ks=

fd'kux<+&305801

237-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

buMkoj

eq[; gkbZ jksM] buMkoj

rglhy& esMrk flVh

ukxkSj&341510

238-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

tkMu [kkylk

,l-ch-vkbZ Jh fo'onhi xq#dqy

egs'kojkuUn vkJe

ikyh&306401

239-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

dknsMk

xk¡o&dknsMk] rglhy& [ksMyh

vtesj&305405

240-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

[kokl

rglhy& dsdMh

vtesj&305405

241-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ikyhekjokM

eq[; 'kk[kk LVs'ku jksM

ikyh&306401

242-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

{ksf=; 'kS{kf.kd laLFkku vtesj

iq"dj jksM

vtesj&305004

243-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lkstr flVh

,y-vkbZ-lh- dk;kZy; ds ikl] lkstr

ftyk&ikyh]

ekjokM&306104

244-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

{ksf=; dk;kZy; mn;iqj

fgrkokyk Hkou

Lo#i lkxj jksM

mn;iqj & 313001

245-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ç'kklfud dk;kZy; & 2

476

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

,&5] usg: Iysl

Vksad jksM

t;iqj & 302015

246-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

[ksjokMk

iapkSyh Hkou

iapkSyh vLirky ds ikl

[ksjokMk] mn;iqj&313803

247-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

xksxqank

'k‚i u: 95] 96] bUæçLFk ekdsZV

xksxqank] mn;iqj&313705

248-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lkxokMk

j‚;y lfoZl lsaVj

Vhoh,l lfoZl lsaVj ds ikl

Mwaxjiqj&314025

249-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

fi.MokMk fljksgh

jsyos LVs'ku jksM

VsfyQksu ,Dlpsat ds lkeus

fi.MokMk

fljksgh&307022

250-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

xksoZ/ku foykl

3@9 vkj-,p-oh d‚yksuh

xksoZ/ku foykl] esu jksM

mn;iqj&311002

251-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lywEcj

pqaxh ukdk ds ikl

lywEcj] mn;iqj& 313027

252-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

dq'kyckx ckalokMk

o/kZu 'k‚fiax d‚EiysDl

dq'kyckx ,fj;k] ckalokMk&327001

253-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

cl LVs.M mn;iqj

fofue; d‚EiysDl

mn;iqj&313001

254-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

dsljxat vkcwjksM

gksVy t;nhi dEikm.M

fljksgh&307026

255-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

vkj-ch-vks- tks/kiqj

bZ&4] lqfo/kk d‚EiysDl

'kkL=h uxj

tks/kiqj&342002

256-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

,evkbZlhvkj lsaVj tks/kiqj

mPp U;k;ky; Hkou]

tks/kiqj&342006

257-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

vksfl;ka

rglhy jksM

tks/kiqj&342303

258-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

eqæk ç'kklfud dks"B

,lchvkbZ gkbZ dksVZ 'kk[kk ifjlj

tks/kiqj&342006

259-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ckluh vks|kSfxd {ks=] tks/kiqj

,e-vkbZ-,- gkml

ckluh Qst &2

tks/kiqj&342005

260-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

iky fyad jksM tks/kiqj

461] iky fyad jksM

tks/kiqj&342003

261-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

pksikluh gkmflax cksMZ] tks/kiqj

14 Tokyk fogkj esu pksikluh jksM

tks/kiqj& 342009

262-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

egkeafnj tks/kiqj

ch&29] [ksrkukMh

eUMksj eaMh lfdZy

tks/kiqj& 342007

263-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

>kykeaM pkSjkgk

Iy‚V u- 121] fMfLVªDV 'kkfiax lsaVj

ljLorh uxj

tks/kiqj&342008

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

477

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

264-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

jkf"Vª; fof/k egkfo|ky;

,u-,p 65] ukxkSj jksM] eaMksj

tks/kiqj&342304

265-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

dqMh Hkxrkluh gkmflax cksMZ

lsDVj&2

tks/kiqj& 342005

266-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

xk¡o % jkex<+

ftyk % tSlyesj

tSlyesj& 345022

267-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

vkbZ-vkbZ-Vh- jktLFkku

Do‚Vj u- 307

thihvkj, dsUækapy d‚yksuh

foosd uxj

U;w ikyh jksM

tks/kiqj&342005

268-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

,u-vkj-vkbZ tks/kiqj

,p&1] 'kkL=h uxj

tks/kiqj&342003

269-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

vkehZ ,fj;k tSlyesj

tSlyesj&345001

270-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

egkohj uxj] ckMesj

gksVy U;w jkt

egkohj uxj

ckMesj&344001

271-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

iky ckykth jksM] tks/kiqj

Iy‚V ua- 4ch ,.M 7 ,] [kljk ua-198

iky esu jksM

tks/kiqj&342014

272-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

usojk jksM

oh-ih-vks usojk jksM

rglhy& vksfl;ka

tks/kiqj&342303

273-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ivksrk ch jksM] tks/kiqj

ih;w"k Hkou] y{eh uxj esu jksM

tks/kiqj&342010

274-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ckajk jksM dksVk

ckads lq[k/kke d‚yksuh

ckajk jksM] dksVk&324002

275-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

cwanh

xq#ukud d‚yksuh

cwanh&323001

276-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

xaxjkj

Iy‚V ua- 2538

ch-,l-,u-,y Vkoj ds ikl

xk¡o&xaxjkj

fpÙkkSMx<+&312901

277-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ty pDdh jktuxj

ty pDdh] dyDVªsV jksM

jktuxj

jktleUn&313326

278-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

diklu

LVsfM;e njxkg jksM ds ikl

diklu

jktleUn&312202

279-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

jsyexjk

cl LVS.M ds ikl]

jsyexjk

jktleUn&313029

280-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lsafFk ¼fpÙkkSM+x<+½

,&23 ckiw uxj lsafFk

fpÙkkSM+x<+&312001

281-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

,l-,e-bZ 'kk[kk] dksVk

>kykokM jksM

dksVk&324007

282-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lqHkk"k uxj fHkyokMk

ch&1 Cy‚d] lqjfHk d‚EiysDl

lqHkk"k uxj

HkhyokMk &311001

478

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

283-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

foKku uxj dksVk

1 Vh, 17 foKku uxj

dksVk& 324005

284-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

Qrguxj

'k‚i ua- 2] 3] 4 dkjxks Cy‚d

os;j gkml ds ikl

mn;iqj jksM

mn;iqj&313205

285-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

l:jiqj dy‚a 'kk[kk

ftyk& ckxir

mRrj çns'k &250619

286-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

jksgVk jksM 'kk[kk

ftyk&esjB

mRrj çns'k&250002

287-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

vehuxj ljk; 'kk[kk

ftyk&ckxir

mRrj çns'k&250606

288-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

J)kiqjh Qst&2 'kk[kk

fMQsUl baDyso

esu lj/kuk jksM

ftyk&esjB

mRrj çns'k&250001

289-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

vFkZyk 'kk[kk

dSyk'k ikdZ

ftyk& xkft;kckn

mRrj çns'k &201007

290-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

çrki fogkj 'kk[kk

lsDVj&12] çrki fogkj

ftyk& xkft;kckn

mRrj çns'k & 2010009

291-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

fHkDduiqj 'kk[kk

eqjknuxj

ftyk& xkft;kckn

mRrj çns'k & 201206

292-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

[kksM+k 'kk[kk

ftyk&xkft;kckn

mRrj çns'k & 201301

293-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

rglhy daikmaM 'kk[kk

ftyk&xkft;kckn

mRrj çns'k & 201001

294-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

jktuxj ,DlVsa'ku 'kk[kk

ftyk&xkft;kckn

mRrj çns'k&201003

295-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

'kkyhekj xkMZu 'kk[kk

Cy‚d ch] fxj/kj Iyktk

ftyk&xkft;kckn

mRrj çns'k&201005

296-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

vafdr fogkj 'kk[kk

ftyk& eqt¶Qjuxj

mRrj çns'k&251001

297-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

vyekliqj 'kk[kk

ftyk& eqt¶Qjuxj

mRrj çns'k&251001

298-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

iqjdkth 'kk[kk

ftyk& eqt¶Qjuxj

mRrj çns'k&251310

299-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

QStkckn 'kk[kk

ftyk&lgkjuiqj

mRrj çns'k&247121

300-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lsDVj&31 'kk[kk ukS,Mk

ftyk& xkSrecq)uxj

mRrj çns'k&201301

301-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lsDVj&51 'kk[kk

ukS,Mk

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

479

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

ftyk& xkSrecq)uxj

mRrj çns'k&201301

302-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

Hkaxsy 'kk[kk

ukS,Mk

ftyk&xkSrecq)uxj

mRrj çns'k&201301

303-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lsDVj&66 'kk[kk

ekewjk] ukS,Mk

ftyk& xkSrecq)uxj

mRrj çns'k&201307

304-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

vgenx<+ 'kk[kk

ftyk&cqyan'kgj

mRrj çns'k&203392

305-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

Nrkjh 'kk[kk

ftyk&cqyan'kgj

mRrj çns'k&203001

306-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

,l ,e bZ 'kk[kk

[kqtkZ

ftyk&cqyan'kgj

mRrj çns'k&203131

307-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ihchch 'kk[kk

lsDVj&ih2] xzsVj ukS,Mk

ftyk&xkSrecq)uxj

mRrj çns'k&201310

308-

Hkkjrh; L?VsV cSad

44 ih,lh 'kk[kk

2@3] 'kkL=huxj

ftyk& esjB

mRrj çns'k&250004

309-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

lwjtdqaM jksM 'kk[kk

ftyk& esjB

mRrj çns'k&250002

310-

Hkkjrh; L?VsV cSad

vkokl fodkl dkyksuh 'kk[kk

ftyk&gkiqM+

mRrj çns'k&245101

311-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

ckcwx<+ 'kk[kk

ckcwx<+ Nkouh

ftyk&gkiqM+

mRrj çns'k& 245201

312-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

/kkSykuk 'kk[kk

ftyk&gkiqM+

mRrj çns'k&245301

313-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

tkx`fr fogkj 'kk[kk

ftyk&esjB

mRrj çns'k&240004

314-

Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad

'krkCnh uxj 'kk[kk

ftyk&esjB

mRrj çns'k&250103

315-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

oh-ih-vks- fl/koka dyka

ftyk yqf/k;kuk

316-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

oh-ih-vks- jru gsjh

ih vks [kUuk

ftyk yqf/k;kuk

317-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

oh-ih-vks- fljhag

ftyk yqf/k;kuk

318-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

oh-ih-vks- yD[kk

rglhy txjkao

ftyk yqf/k;kuk

319-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

ljdkjh çkbejh Ldwy ds ikl

dhjh Hkqeky] rglhy txjkao

ftyk yqf/k;kuk

320-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

cl LVSaM ds ikl] esu jksM] cqtqxZ

ftyk yqf/k;kuk

321-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

ch&ekdsZV] lsDVj 6] fHkykbZ

NÙkhlx<+ & 490006

480

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

322-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

tSu /keZ'kkyk ds ikl] v'kksd uxj

e/;çns'k & 473331

323-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

ihruk pkSd] jk;iqj jksM] /kerjh

NÙkhlx<+ & 493773

324-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xzke & tkath] rglhy& eLrqjh

ftyk fcykliqj

NÙkhlx<+ & 495550

325-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

njkZHkkaBk] rglhy eLrqjh

ftyk fcykliqj

NÙkhlx<+ & 495550

326-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

fjlkek] rglhy&xquMjnsgh]

ftyk & nqxZ

NÙkhlx<+ & 491221

327-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

vkdk'kxaxk] O;olkf;d ifjlj] lqisyk

fHkykbZ]

NÙkhlx<+ & 490023

328-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

nqdku ua- 25] egky{eh diM+k ekdsZV] iaMjh

jk;iqj] NÙkhlx<+

329-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

ikoZrh fuokl] Hkksiky ukdk

flgksj

e/; çns'k & 466001

330-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xzke iguojhZ] iks- bVkjlh

ftyk gks'kaxkckn

e/; çns'k

331-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xzke iyk'k] ftyk & jryke

e/; çns'k & 457001

332-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

flfoy ykbZal] esu jksM] nfr;k

e/; çns'k & 475661

333-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

63] ekyok dkWEIysDl] lsDVj & 1

ihFkeiqj] ftyk % /kkj

e/; çns'k

334-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

dj.k vkdsZM] ijkfl;k jksM]

fNUnokM+k]

e/; çns'k & 480001

335-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o o Mkd[kkuk dksVyk lwjr yqgkj

rglhy vtukyk

ftyk ve`rlj

iatkc

336-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o o Mkd[kkuk rusy

rglhy ckck cdkyk

ftyk ve`rlj

iatkc

337-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o o Mkd[kkuk yLdjh uaxy

ftyk ve`rlj

iatkc

338-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o o Mkd[kkuk eh;afoaM

rglhy ckck cdkyk

ftyk ve`rlj

iatkc

339-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o o Mkd[kkuk ejgkuk

rglhy iêh

ftyk rju&rkju

iatkc

340-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o o Mkd[kkuk x?kkscwvk

ftyk rjurkju

iatkc

341-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o o Mkd[kkuk othj HkqYyj

rglhy ckck cdkyk

ftyk ve`rlj

iatkc

342-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

329] thokj jksM] bczkfgeiqj

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

481

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

tquSniqj

ftyk cqyan'kgj

mÙkj çns'k

343-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xkao o Mkd[kkuk lÝqnhu tkoyh

rglhy o ftyk xkft;kckn

mÙkj çns'k

344-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

Jh ?klhVk fcfYMax] xk¡o dkthokyk

ftyk fctukSj

mÙkj çns'k

345-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

nqdku ua- 2@12@13@14] y{eh Iyktk

,u ,p & 58] nkSjkyk

ftyk esjB

mÙkj çns'k

346-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xqIrk cznlZ pkaniqj jksM] uwjiqj

ftyk fctukSj

mÙkj çns'k

347-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

ts&9] th-,Q- fny'kkn dkyksuh

fnYyh

348-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

lh&3 58 ,] ;equkfogkj

fnYyh

349-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

nqdku ua- 14, o 12

f'kçk ,twj vkdsZM fu;j oso flusek

ftyk xkft;kckn

mÙkj çns'k

350-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

fu;j jsyos QkVd] dyksj jksM

cLlh iBkuk

ftyk QÙksgx<+ lkfgc

iatkc & 140412

351-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

ekQZr gksVy iqjh fu;j nso i‚y pkSd

gehjiqj

fgekpy çns'k & 177001

352-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

fu;j cl LVSaM] xqj}kjk jksM

rglhy o ftyk QÙksgx<+ lkfgc

iatkc & 140406

353-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

oh-ih-vks-] iatkSyh dyka

ftyk Qrsgx<+ lkfgc

iatkc & 145101

354-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o o Mkd[kkuk] cMoka

rglhy & vkauniqj lkfgc

ftyk :iuxj

iatkc & 140117

355-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o o Mkd[kkuk] Vaxksjh

ftyk eksgkyh

iatkc & 140306

356-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o o Mkd[kkuk] pkgj ektjk

rglhy & [kjM

ftyk eksgkyh

iatkc & 140501

357-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o o Mkd[kkuk] Qrsg ukaxy] dqaMk jksM

rglhy o ftyk xqjnkliqj

iatkc & 143519

358-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o o Mkd[kkuk & tksM+k fNrjku

rglhy o ftyk xqjnkliqj

iatkc & 143520

359-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o o Mkd[kkuk] ?kqeku

U;w e‚My dkyksuh

eq[; cktkj ?kqeku

rglhy cVkyk

ftyk xqjnkliqj

iatkc & 143514

360-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o o Mkd[kkuk HkksMhiqj

rglhy udksnj

ftyk tkya/kj

iatkc & 144040

361-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o o Mkd[kkuk Hkxksjka

482

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

rglhy uoka'kgj

ftyk 'kghn Hkxr flag uxj

iatkc & 143516

362-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

lfPpnkuUn uxj

:æç;kx

ftyk :æç;kx

mÙkjk[kaM & 246171

363-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

tykyiqj uhyk

Mkd?kj & jkejkt

rglhy tkulB

ftyk eqt¶ijuxj

mÙkj çns'k& 251320

364-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o /kcksVh

rglhy o ftyk flgksj

e/; çns'k& 466001

365-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o ykyxqokMh

rglhy o ftyk jryke

e/; çns'k& 457001

366-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o ljlok¡

rglhy iuk uxj

ftyk tcyiqj

e/; çns'k& 483220

367-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o /kjkSjk ekQh

ihyhHkhr ckbZikl jksM

iksLV v‚fQl bTtr uxj

ftyk cjsyh

mÙkj çns'k& 243122

368-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

ekSgYyk ubZ cLrh

xq:}kjs ds ikl] tliqj

rglhy dk'khiqj

ftyk m/ke flag uxj

mÙkjk[kaM & 2447121

369-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

'k‚i ua- 2686] U;w cl LVSaM jksM

rglhy o ftyk dkaxMk

fgekpy çns'k& 176001

370-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

ohihvks cgjkeiqj

rglhy o ftyk xqjnkliqj

iatkc & 143532

371-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

ohihvks nksjkaxy

rglhy o ftyk xqjnkliqj

iatkc & 143526

372-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

Mh & 127] 60 QqVk jksM

egkohj ,Udyso & 111

ubZ fnYyh & 110059

373-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

IykWV ua- 31] [kljk ua- 5624

ujs'k ikdZ ,DlVsa'ku

utQx<+ jksM] ukaxyksbZ

ubZ fnYyh & 110041

374-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

129] vkuUn uxj] bUæyksd

ubZ fnYyh & 110035

375-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

2155] vkSrjke yksu

xq# rsx cgknqj uxj

fnYyh & 110009

376-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

,&20&91] jkex<

th-Vh-djuky jksM] tgk¡xhj iqjh

ubZ fnYyh & 110033

377-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

[kljk ua- 311] xks;yk & }kjdk jksM

nhnkjiqj ¼utQx<½

ubZ fnYyh & 110043

378-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

/keZ'kkyk] dpgjh vìs ds ikl

ftyk m|ksx dsUæ ds lkeus

ftyk & dkaxMk

fgekpy çns'k & 176215

379-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

ohihvks & ljuk

ikbZi QSDVjh ds ikl] th-Vh-jksM

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

483

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

ftyk iBkudksV

iatkc & 145025

380-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

uxjksVk Hkxou] eq[; cktkj

iqjkuk cl LVSaM] ftyk & dkaxMk

fgekpy çns'k & 176047

381-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

flacy eksM] ihvks & feju lkfgc

rglhy & vkj-,l-iqjk

ftyk & tEew

tEew ,.M d'ehj & 181101

382-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

lqtkuiqj] ftyk & iBkudksV

iatkc & 145023

383-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o cgknqj gqlSu

ih vks & elkfu;k

rglhy & cVkyk

ftyk & xqjnkliqj

iatkc & 143505

384-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o ljpwj

rglhy & cVkyk

ftyk & xqjnkliqj

iatkc & 143602

385-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

xk¡o lhjg

rglhy & cVkyk

ftyk & xqjnkliqj

iatkc & 143513

386-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

lkack] ,u ,p &1 ,

ftyk & lkack

tEew ,.M d'ehj & 184121

387-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

ljfgan] th-Vh- jksM

ftyk Qrsgx< lkfgc

iatkc & 140406

388-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

ohihvks frÅM+

ftyk eksgkyh

iatkc & 140301

389-

iatkc ,.M fla/k cSad

ohihvks jaxhyiqj

ftyk jksiM+

iatkc & 140108

390-

Hkkjrh; fjtoZ cSad

4 Fkh eafty

jka-{ks-fo-çk- Hkou

çxfr lnu

dpgjh pkSd

jkaph &834001

>kj[kaM

391-

Hkkjrh; fjtoZ cSad

54@949] lR; çse fogkj

egknso ?kkV jksM] lqanj uxj

jk;iqj& 492013

Nrhlx<+

392-

Hkkjrh; fjtoZ cSad

rhljh eafty

th ,e oh ,u fcfYMax

74@1] jktiqj jksM

nsgjknwu& 248 001

mRrjkapy

393-

Hkkjrh; fjtoZ cSad

40] ,lMh, d‚EiysDl

,lchvkbZ Hkou

cslesaV & igyh eafty

dlqEiVh] f'keyk&171009

fgekpy çns'k

394-

Hkkjrh; fjtoZ cSad

iks-ck- ua- 20

xsjk bfEifj;e II

lkroha eafty

bZMhlh ladqy

Cy‚d la 3 , &3ch

iêks Iyktk

i.kth & 403001

xksok

395-

Hkkjrh; fjtoZ cSad

iks-c‚-la- 3065

,j.kkdqye ¼mÙkj½

dksPph & 628018

dsjy

484

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(Department of Financial Services)

New Delhi, the 2nd February, 2015

S.O.

204.—In pursuance of sub-rules (4) of rule

10 of the Official Languages (use for official purpose of

the union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government, hereby

notified the listed branches/offices of the following banks

in the attached annexure, more than 80% of the staff

whereof have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi.

Sl.

Name of the Banks

Number of

No.

Branches/Offices

1.

State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur

110

2.

Indian Bank

81

3.

State Bank of India

123

4.

Punjab & Sind Bank

75

5.

Reserve Bank of India

06

Total

395

[F. No. 11016/1/2015-OL( Noti.)]

Dr. VED PRAKASH DUBEY , Jt. Director (OL)

List of Branches/Offices to be notified under rule 10(4)

of Official Language Rules, 1976

Sl.

Name of the Branch and Address

No.

(1)

(2)

1.

Bikaner Bichwal I.A.

Address : Bichwal I.A.

Distt: Bikaner (RJ)

Pin: 334002

2.

Khara

Address : Industrial Area

Khara, Distt: Bikaner (RJ)

Pin: 342037

3.

Bikaner K.U.M.

Address : KUM Campus

Distt: Bikaner (RJ)

Pin: 334001

4.

Bikaner Pugal Road

Address : Opp. Sabji Mandi

Pugal Road, Distt: Bikaner (RJ)

Pin: 334001

5.

Beethnoke

Address : Beethnoke, Tahsil-Kolyat

Dist-Bikaner

Pin-334302

6

Bikaner Karni Nagar

Address: Karni Nagar,

Distt: Bikaner (RJ)

Pin: 334002

7.

Lakhusar

Address: Community Hall Panchayat Samiti,

Post: Lakhusar

Distt: Bikaner (RJ)

Pin: 334001

8.

Malkisar

Address: Near Railway Station,

Malkisar

Distt: Bikaner (RJ)

Pin: 334604

9.

Upani

Address: Upani Village,

Post: Shri Dungargarh

Distt: Bikaner (RJ)

Pin: 331803

10.

Chhapar

Address: Somani Guest House,

Near Bus Stand,

Post: Chhapar

Distt: Churu (RJ)

Pin: 331502

11.

RCPC, Churu

Address: Within the campus of

Collectorate Branch,

Distt: Churu (RJ)

Pin: 331001

12.

Dhaba

Address: Post: Dhaba,

Tehsil: Sangariya,

Distt: Hanumangarh (RJ)

Pin: 335063

13.

Gandheli

Address: Near Bus Stand,

Post: Gandheli,

Tehsil: Rawatsar,

Distt: Hanumangarh (RJ)

Pin: 335523

14.

Gogasar

Address: Post: Gogasar,

Distt: Churu (RJ)

Pin: 331504

15.

Hanumangarh Collectorate

Address: Collectorate Campus,

Distt: Hanumangarh (RJ)

Pin: 335512

(1)

(2)

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

485

16.

Hanumangarh District Lead Bank Office

Address: 250, New Grain Dhan Mandi,

Distt: Hanumangarh (RJ)

Pin: 335512

17.

RCPC, Hanumangarh

Address: 65, Dhan Mandi, Hanumangarh

TownDistt: Hanumangarh (RJ)Pin: 335513

18.

Hanumangarh Regional Office

Address: Shri Ganganagar Road,

Hanumangarh Junction

Distt: Hanumangarh (RJ)

Pin: 335512

19.

Ratan Nagar

Address: Opp. Bus Stand,

Post: Ratan Nagar

Distt: Churu (RJ)

Pin: 331021

20.

Rorawali

Address: Near Bus Stand,

Post: Rorawali

Distt: Hanumangarh (RJ)

Pin: 335512

21.

Sardarshahar GBM

Address: Sardarshahar,

Distt: Churu (RJ)

Pin: 331403

22.

Ajay Nagar, Kolkata

Address: 333, Jadavpur East

Ajay Nagar Kolkata

West Bengal-700075

23.

Jodhpur Park

Address: 71, Jodhpur Park

Kolkata West Bengal-700068

24.

Vikaspuri

Address: C-368, Vikashpuri

Delhi-110018

25.

Dwarka Sector-23

Address: Sector-23,

Dwarka near Pochanpur Village,

Delhi

26.

Deharadun

Address: 40, Saharanpur Chowk Deharadun

Uttarakhand-248001

27.

Gurgaon Sector-66

Address: Universal Business Park

Golf Course Extension Road

Sector-66, Gurgaon

Haryana-122101

28.

Swasthya Vihar

Address: A-1, Swasthya Vihar

Vikas Marg

Delhi -110092

29.

Mayur Vihar Phase-1

Address: D-39, Mayur Vihar Phase-1,

New Delhi-110091

30.

Gomati Nagar

Address: 2144, Vipul Khand

Gomati Nagar, Lucknow

Uttar Pradesh –

31.

Kafen Choudhary

Address: DPS Campus Kafen Road

Post Sanathi, Garhan

District-Muzzafarpur

Bihar – 843103

32.

Chas

Address: Dharamsala More

Opposite Marwari Dharamsala

Chas, District- Bokaro,

Jharkhand-827013

33.

Siliguri

Address: M.R. Road Siliguri,

Darjiling West Bengal-734005

34.

Buxar

Address: Opposite Panchmukhi

Hanuman Mandir

Main Road, Buxar

Bihar-802101

35.

Kastrshgarh, Dhanabad

Address: J V Plaja, Kapra Patti,

Kastrashgarh, Dhanabad,

Jharkhand-828113

36.

Asansol

Address: 32 G T Road, Bastin Bazar

Asansol, District- Bardhman

West Bengal-713301

37.

Cuttak

Address: B K Road, Mali Shahi,

Cuttak, Orisa-753001

38.

Yamuna Nagar

Address: E-20 Industrial Area

Near Bus Stand

Yamuna Nagar

Haryana-135001

39.

Ambala City

Address: 102, Prem Nagar

Ambala City

Haryana-134003

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

486

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

40.

Putholee

(Branch Code 10730)

Address : Inside Hindustan Zinc Limited

Putholee

Distt: Chittorgarh -312021

41.

Rashmee (Branch Code 10246)

Address : Rashmee

Distt: Chittorgarh -312203

42.

Rawatbhata (Branch Code 10265)

Address : Rawarbhata,

Phase –II ,Tahseel Begun

Distt: Chittaurgarh -323305

43.

Salamgarh (Branch Code 10468)

Address : Salamgarh,

Tehsil Amod

Distt: Pratapgarh -312618

44.

Peepalkhoont

(Branch Code 10520)

Address : Peepalkhoont

Distt: Pratapgarh -327029

45.

Partapur Garhee

(Branch Code 10234)

Address : Distt: Baanswada -327024

46.

Nimbaheda (Branch Code 10238)

Address : Maal Godam Road,

Nimbaheda

Distt: Udaipur -312601

47.

Nimbaheda Krushi Upaj Mandi

(Branch Code 10757)

Address : Nimbaheda Krushi Upaj Mandi

Distt: Udaipur -312601

48.

Saanwariyaa

(Branch Code 10432)

Address : Meera Chauraha

Distt: Chittaurgarh -312024

49.

New Cloth Market, Baanswada

(Branch Code 10231)

Address : New Cloth Market,

Baanswada

Distt: Baanswada-327001

50.

Nahar Magra

(Branch Code 10321 )

Address : Nahar Magra,

Shripati Nagar

Distt: Udaypur -313201

51.

Chittaurgarh

(Branch Code 10237)

Address : Near Collectorate Circle

Distt: Chittaurgarh -312001

52.

Balicha

(Branch Code 11000)

Address : Balicha

Distt: Udaipur-313003

53.

Bhanpura

(Branch Code 10695)

Address : Bhanpura ,

Tehsil Gogunda

Distt: Udaipur-313003

54.

Kaladwas

(Branch Code 11039)

Address : G-1316,

Bhamashah Industrial Area

Kaladwas

Distt: Udaipur-313003

55.

Zinc Smelter

(Branch Code 10216)

Address : Zinc Smelter

Distt: Udaipur -313024

56.

Dungarpur

(Branch Code 10228)

Address : Mochee Bajaar

Distt: Dungarpur -314001

57.

Dungarpur New Colony

(Branch Code 10773)

Address : Opposite Rajshree Cinema

Distt: Dungarpur -314001

58.

Surapgla

(Branch Code 10696)

Address : Surapgla, Aboo Road

Distt: Dungarpur -314001

59.

Sagwada

(Branch Code 10230)

Address : Sagwada

Distt: Dungarpur-314025

60.

Abu Road

(Branch Code 10520)

Address : Ricco Industrial Area

Distt: Sirohee -307026

61.

Sheogunj

(Branch Code 10313)

Address : Adb Chhawanee

Distt: Sirohee-307027

62.

University Road

(Branch Code 11084)

Address : University Road

Distt: Udaipur -313002

63.

Sector 6, Hiran Magri Udaipur

(Branch Code 10520)

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

487

Address : Sector 6,

Hiran Magri, Udaipur

Distt: Udaipur-313001

64.

Industrial Area Bheelwada

(Branch Code 10093)

Address : Udaipur Road,

Behind DIC Office

Distt: Bheelwada-311001

65.

Kankroli

(Branch Code 10211)

Address : Kankroli

Distt: Udaipur-313324

66.

Bhim

(Branch Code 10215)

Address : Hopital Road, Bhim

Distt: Rajsamand -305921

67.

Barodia

(Branch Code 10411)

Address : Barodia, Tahsil Bagidora

Distt: Baansawara-327601

68.

Rajpura Dariba

(Branch Code 10437)

Address : Post Office –Rajpura Dariba

Distt: Rajsamand-313211

69.

Siyana

(Branch Code 10686)

Address : Siyana , Tehsil Amet

Distt: Rajsamand-313327

70.

Machind

(Branch Code 10687)

Address : Gram Machind Via Tehsil Nathdwara

Distt: Rajsamand -3133321

71.

Bemali

(Branch Code 10690)

Address : Ganesh Chowk Bemali

Distt: Bheelwada-311809

72.

Kum, Bheelwada

(Branch Code 10211)

Address : Kum,Bheelwada

Distt: Bheelwada-311001

73.

MICR, Bheelwada

(Branch Code 10881)

Address : MICR, Bheelwada

Distt: Bheelwada-311001

74.

Rasmec, Bheelwada

(Branch Code 10892)

Address : 47, Rajendra Marg

Bheelwada

Distt: Bheelwada-311001

75.

CCPC, Bheelwada

(Branch Code 10903)

Address : Bhopalgunj, Bheelwada

Distt: Bheelwada-311001

76.

RCPC, Rajsamand

(Branch Code 10951)

Address : RCPC, Rajsamand

Distt: Rajsamand-311326

77.

Regional Office 3, Bheelwada

Address : Regional Office, Bheelwada

Distt: Bheelwada-311001

78.

Charbhuja Gadbhor

(Branch Code :-11028)

Address : Santosh Vatika,

Sevantri Road, Charbhuja Gadbhor

Distt: Rajsamand-313333

79.

Bagidora

(Branch Code :-10232)

Address : Bagidora

Distt: Baanswada-327601

80.

Ajad Chowk, Baanswada

(Branch Code :-10805)

Address : Ajad Chowk, Baanswada

Distt: Baanswada -327001

81.

MBSC, Baanswada

(Branch Code :-10605)

Address : Mahi Bajaj Sagar Complex

Distt: Baanswada -327001

82.

Mandawari Branch

(Branch Code : 10822)

Address: Mandawari

Bus Stand

District-Dausa (Rajasthan)

PIN-303504

83.

K.U.M. Chomu Branch

(Branch Code : 11024)

Address: Krishi Upaj Mandi, Chomu

District-Jaipur (Rajasthan)

PIN -303702

84.

Nangal Bersi Branch

(Branch Code : 10632)

Address: Nangal Bersi

District-Dausa (Rajasthan)

PIN -303307

85.

Kotputli Branch

(Branch Code : 10037)

Address: N H 8 Kotputli

Tehsil: Kotputli

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

488

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

District: Jaipur (Rajasthan)

PIN -303108

86.

Shivdaspura Branch

(Branch Code : 11073)

Address: Shivdaspura

Tehsil: Chaksu

District: Jaipur ( Rajasthan)

PIN -303903

87.

Kadera Branch

(Branch Code : 10685)

Address: Kadera

Tehsil: Chaksu

District: Jaipur (Rajasthan)

PIN -303901

88.

Dantil Branch

(Branch Code : 10670)

Address: Dantil

Tehsil: Kotputli

District: Jaipur (Rajasthan)

PIN -303107

89.

Raisar Branch

(Branch Code : 10640)

Address: Raisar

Tehsil: Jamwaramgarh

District: Jaipur (Rajasthan)

PIN -303109

90.

Phulera Branch

(Branch Code : 10749)

Address: Phulera Agarwal Panchayat Bhawan

District: Jaipur (Rajasthan)

PIN -303338

91.

Chhareda Branch

(Branch Code : 10639)

Address: Chhareda

District: Dausa (Rajasthan)

PIN -303505

92.

Banskho Branch

(Branch Code : 11067)

Address: Gram Panchayat Bhawan Banskho

Tehsil: Bassi

District: Jaipur (Rajasthan)

PIN -300305

93.

Lawan Branch

(Branch Code : 11098)

Address: Lawan Near Purviya School

District: Dausa (Rajasthan)

PIN -303004

94.

Renwal (Phagi) Branch

(Branch Code : 10977)

Address: Renwal (Phagi)

Tehsil: Phagi

District: Jaipur (Rajasthan)

PIN -303904

95.

Boraj Branch

(Branch Code : 10976)

Address: Boraj Near Panchayat Samiti

District: Jaipur (Rajasthan)

PIN -303338

96.

Jhotwara Industrial Area Branch

(Code – 10028)

Address: State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

Road No. 8

Jhotwara Industrial Area

Jaipur

PIN – 302012

97.

Karghani Branch

(Code – 11086)

Address: State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

5-A, Sanjay Nagar Near Joshi Marg

Kalwad Road

Karghani

Jaipur

PIN – 302012

98.

Chitrakoot Branch

(Code – 10828)

Address: State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

C-82, Chitrakoot

Ajmer Road

Jaipur

PIN – 302021

99.

Sirsi Road Branch

(Code – 11155)

Address: State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

Showroom No. 1

Rosewood Apartment

Opp. Dhaka Nagar Sirsi Road

Jaipur

PIN – 302012

100.

Bapu Bazar Branch

(Code – 10843)

Address: State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

Near Sanganeri Gate

Bapu Bazar

Jaipur

PIN – 302003

101.

Sarna Doongar I.A. Branch

(Code – 11050)

Address: G-93, State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

Sarna Dungar Ind. Area

Jaipur

PIN – 302012

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

489

102.

Ganpati Plaza Branch

(Code – 10825)

Address: 103-105 Ganpati Plaza

State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

M.I. Road

Jaipur

PIN – 302001

103.

D.C.C. Branch

(Code – 10865)

Address: State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

D.C.C. Bani Park

Jaipur

PIN – 302016

104.

Murlipura Branch

(Code – 10721)

Address: State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

Murlipura

Jaipur

PIN – 302039

105.

Chand Pole Bazar Branch

(Code – 10025)

Address: State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

Pole Bazar

Jaipur

PIN – 302001

106.

Niwaroo Road Branch

(Code – 11176)

Address: State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

Ganesh Nagar – 12

Niwaroo Road

Jhotwara

Jaipur

PIN – 302012

107.

Peetal Factory Branch

(Code – 10806)

Address: State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

Pink City Tower

Jhotwara Road

Jaipur

PIN – 302016

108.

Reserve Line Police Force

Address: State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

Reserve Line Police Force

Zanana Hosp. Campus

Distt: Jaipur, Rajasthan

109.

Power House

Address: State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

Old Power House

Near Ram Mandir Temple

Bani Park, Station Road

Jaipur, Rajasthan-302012

110.

Vaishali Nagar Branch

(Code-10438)

Address: State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

Gautam Marg

Vaishali Nagar

Jaipur, Rajasthan-302021

111.

Indian Bank

Banga Road

Near Sutlej Petrol Pump

District: Nawanshahr Doaba

PIN: 144514 Punjab

112.

Indian Bank

Dhaliwal Complex

Ferozepur Road

Mullanpur

District : Ludhiana – 141101

Punjab

113.

Indian Bank

22 Improvement Trust Building

G T Road,

Gurdaspur - 143521,

Punjab

114.

Indian Bank

SCF 29-30 Urban Estate

Sector - 1, Batala

District: Gurdaspur

Punjab

115.

Indian Bank

Baba Ishwar Singh Education Society

Bhagpura

District: Moga – 142043

Punjab

116.

Indian Bank

SCF -18, Sector 20 - D

Chandigarh

117.

Indian Bank

SCO -390

Sector 37 - D

Chandigarh

118.

Indian Bank

SCO -39, Madhya Marg

Sector 7 C

Chandigarh

119.

Indian Bank

House No. 48 C

Shaheed Karnail Singh Nagar

Phase – III, Sua Road

Jawadi, Near Pakhowal Road

Ludhiana - 141013

Punjab

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

490

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

120.

Indian Bank

Lajpat Nagar Branch, B-13

Lajpat Nagar-II

Delhi -110 024

121.

Indian Bank

Kapasheda Branch,

Wats Building, Building No.-567,

Old Palam - Gurgaon Marg

Samalka,

Kapasheda

Delhi110037

122.

Indian Bank

Mangolpuri Branch, Z -349

Khasra Number - 149

Mangolpur Khurd,

Mangolpuri, Delhi -110 085

123.

Indian Bank

Dwarka Sector-10 Branch

Kothi No. 4, Opp Vandana International School,

Sector-10, Dwarka, Delhi 110 075

Rajasthan

124.

Indian Bank

Naruli Chaud Branch, Gram Panchayat

Village and Post Office Naruli Chaud,

Bamnwas Tehsil, Sawai Madhopur District

Pin 322 214 (Rajasthan)

125.

Indian Bank

Dei Kheda Branch, Community Building,

Village and Post Office- Dei Khera,

Indra Garh Tehsil, Bundi District,

Pin 323 603 (Rajasthan)

126.

Indian Bank

Zonal Office

Pulleppady Jn.

Chittoor Road

Ernakulam

Zonal Office Lucknow

127.

Indian Bank

Akbarpur Branch

Ashirwad Guest House

Tehseel Chauraha Akbarpur

Ambedkarnagar

Uttar Pradesh-224122

128.

Indian Bank

Allahabad Branch

249, Chak

Zero Road

Allahabad

Uttar Pradesh-211003

129.

Indian Bank

Bachhrawan Branch

A21, Patel Nagar

Bachhrawan

Raebarelly

Uttar Pradesh-229301

130.

Indian Bank

Badaun Branch

437 Civil Line,

Opp Suniti Nursing Home

Indra Chowk

Badaun, Uttar Pradesh- 243601

131.

Indian Bank

Bahraich Branch

Free Ganj (Near Diamond Cinema)

Station Road

Bahraich

Uttar Pradesh- 271801

132.

Indian Bank

Ballia Branch

Mal Godam Road

Near Sheesh Mahal Cinema

Ballia

Uttar Pradesh- 277001

133.

Indian Bank

Balrampur Branch

Maltikunj

Govind Bagh

Station Road

Balrampur

Uttar Pradesh- 271201

134.

Indian Bank

Babhni Chauraha Branch

Babhni Chauraha

PO-Sangath

Sant Kabir Nagar

Uttar Pradesh-272125

135.

Indian Bank

Badani Chapha Branch

Vill-Barhni Chafa

P.S.-Bhawaniganj

Tehsil-Dumariyaganj

Barhni Chafa

Siddharth Nagar

Uttar Pradesh-272189

136.

Indian Bank

Barabanki Branch

Mohini Plaza

Raj Kamal Road

Satya Premi Nagar

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

491

Barabanki

Uttar Pradesh-225001

137.

Indian Bank

Bareilly Branch

No-149, Civil Lines

Near Rajrani Hospital

Bareilly

Uttar Pradesh- 243001

138.

Indian Bank

Basti Branch

Opp. Kateshwar Park

Gandhi Nagar

Basti

Uttar Pradesh- 272001

139.

Indian Bank

Bikapur Branch

Bilgram Tahsil

Hardoi

Uttar Pradesh- 241302

140.

Indian Bank

Bhatauli Bujurg

Village and Post Gauri Bazar

District Deoria

Gauri Bazar- 274202

141.

Indian Bank

Chandauli Branch

Ward No. 11, H.N. 48

Sanjay Nagar

G. T. Road

Chandauli

Uttar Pradesh- 232104

142.

Indian Bank

Chhota Bharwara Branch

H. No. 749

Gadariyanpurwa

Chhota Bharwara

Gomti Nagar

Lucknow

Uttar Pradesh-226028

143.

Indian Bank

Deoria Branch

House No 266

Gorakhpur Road

Abubkar Nagar

Deoria

Uttar Pradesh- 274001

144.

Indian Bank

Faizabad Branch

Ist Floor, Alka Tower, Rikab Ganj

Niyawa Road

Faizabad

Uttar Pradesh – 224001

145.

Indian Bank

Firozabad Branch

Sector-1/346

Suhag Nagar

Firozabad

Uttar Pradesh- 283203

146.

Indian Bank

Ghazipur Branch

Near Railway Crossing

Village-Fullanpur

Post-Bikapur

Ghazipur

Uttar Pradesh- 233001

147.

Indian Bank

Gaura Baganhawa Branch

Gaura Baganhawa

Post-Jaitapur

Balrampur

Uttar Pradesh- 271604

148.

Indian Bank

Godowlia Branch

D- 48/122 Missirpokhra Godowlia, Varanasi

Uttar Pradesh- 221001

149.

Indian Bank

Gomti Nagar Branch

2/139 Vijay Khand

Gomti Nagar

Lucknow

Uttar Pradesh- 226010

150.

Indian Bank

Gonda Branch

CP -108, Saurabh Complex

Circular Road

Awas Vikas Colony

Gonda

Uttar Pradesh- 271002

151.

Indian Bank

Gopiganj Branch

Phool Bagh

Gyanpur Road

Gopiganj

S. R. N. Bhadohi

Uttar Pradesh- 221303

152.

Indian Bank

Gorakhpur Branch

16/C, Bank Road

Gorakhpur

Uttar Pradesh- 273001

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

492

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

153.

Indian Bank

Gyanpur Branch

Old A RTO Office

Patel Nagar

Gyanpur

S R N Bhadohi

Uttar Pradesh- 221304

154.

Indian Bank

Hardoi Branch

Ghantaghar Road

Hardoi

Uttar Pradesh- 241001

155.

Indian Bank

Indira Nagar Branch

B-1316, Sai Plaza

B-block Crossing

Indira Nagar

Lucknow

Indira Nagar

Uttar Pradesh- 226016

156.

Indian Bank

Jaunpur Branch

Kutchery Road

Civil Line

Near SBI

Jaunpur

Uttar Pradesh- 222002

157.

Indian Bank

Kamolia Branch

Belgawan Sitapur

Uttar Pradesh- 261001

158.

Indian Bank

Kannauj Branch

Malik Complex, M G Road

Kazi Tola

Kannauj

Uttar Pradesh- 209725

159.

Indian Bank

Kanpur Branch

No. 50/276, Jugal Biharji Complex

Halsey Road

Kanpur City

Kanpur

Uttar Pradesh- 208001

160.

Indian Bank

Kanpur Cantonment Branch

64, Cantt Board Office Campus

Tagore Road,

Cantonment Kanpur

Uttar Pradesh- 208004

161.

Indian Bank

Khalilabad Branch

Sugar Mill Road

Khalilabad

Sant Kabir Nagar

Uttar Pradesh- 272175

162.

Indian Bank

Kishandaspur Branch

House of Yogendra Singh

P S - Unchahar

Kishandaspur Raebareli

Uttar Pradesh- 229401

163.

Indian Bank

Kisni Branch

Kureshi Market

Katra Chaurahkisni

Amethi District

Uttar Pradesh- 227811

164.

Indian Bank

Kithawa Branch

Dharai, Block Salon

Raebareli District

Uttar Pradesh- 229127

165.

Indian Bank

Lalganj Branch

Main Road, Near Baghel Clinic

Saket Nagar

Lal Ganj

Raebareli District

Uttar Pradesh- 229206

166.

Indian Bank

Lucknow Branch No.1 And 2

Ashok Marg

Hazratganj

Lucknow

Uttar Pradesh- 226001

167.

Indian Bank

Maharaj Ganj Branch

Farenda Road

Hameed Nagar

PO Maharajganj

Maharajganj District

Uttar Pradesh- 273303

168.

Indian Bank

Mallawan Branch

1053 Hardoi

Kanpur Road

Mallawan

Hardoi Dist.

Uttar Pradesh- 241303

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

493

169.

Indian Bank

Maunath Bhanjan Branch

257/1 Jyoti Tower

Sahadatpura

Near Bunai Vidyalay

Maunath Bhanjan

Mau District

Uttar Pradesh- 275101

170.

Indian Bank

Microset Branch

Raebarely

M-16 Lalganj Road

Amreshpuri Colony

Raebareli District

Uttar Pradesh- 229001

171.

Indian Bank

Mirzapur Bank

Swami Dayanand Marg

Welleseley Ganj

Mirzapur District

Uttar Pradesh- 231001

172.

Indian Bank

Moradabad Branch

Station Road

Budh Bazaar

Opposite- Hotel Rajan

Moradabad District

Uttar Pradesh- 244001

173.

Indian Bank

Nadepar Branch

Nadepar Chauraha

Vill-Nadepar

PO-Jogiya Udaypur

Siddharth Nagar

Uttar Pradesh- 272207

174.

Indian Bank

Padrauna Branch

Shastri Nagar

Ram Kola Road

Padarauna

Kushinagar District

Uttar Pradesh- 274304

175.

Indian Bank

Pilibhit Branch

3, Gandhi Stadium Road

Opp. Dr Chandra Hospital

Pilibhit District

Uttar Pradesh-262001

176.

Indian Bank

Peela Mahua Branch

Peela Mahua

Hardoi District

Uttar Pradesh-241405

177.

Indian Bank

Pratapgarh Branch

47 A, Civil Lines

Katra Road

Near C M O Residence

Pratapgarh

Pratapgarh District

Uttar Pradesh-230001

178.

Indian Bank

Rajni Khand Branch

F-3, Ward No-1

Raebareily Road

Rajni Khand, Sharda Nagar

Dilkusha

Lucknow District

Uttar Pradesh-226002

179.

Indian Bank

Raebareily Branch

Rudra Plaza

Opp - Reform Club Hospital Road

Raebarely

Uttar Pradesh- 229001

180.

Indian Bank

Rampur Branch

Shaukat Ali Road

Opp Of Afroz Shah Ki Kothi

Civil Lines

Rampur

Rampur District

Uttar Pradesh- 244901

181.

Indian Bank

Robertsganj Branch

Civil Line Road

Harsh Nagar

Robertsganj

Sonebhadra District

Uttar Pradesh- 231216

182.

Indian Bank

Saifullah Ganj Branch

Saifullah Ganj Bazar

Vill & Post Saifullah Ganj

Tahsil Sadar

Sultanpur District

Uttar Pradesh – 228119

183.

Indian Bank

Saket Nagar Branch

810, W/1, Scheme II

Deep Talkies Road

Kidwai Nagar Post

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

494

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Saket Nagar

Kanpur

Uttar Pradesh – 208014

184.

Indian Bank

Satrahi Branch

Vill Satrahi Pogharkuiya

Tahsil Haidergarh

Barabanki District

Uttar Pradesh – 225124

185.

Indian Bank

Shajahanpur Branch

Opp. Jali Kothi

Bankhandi Nath Mandir

Shahjahanpur

Shahjahanpur District

Uttar Pradesh-242001

186.

Indian Bank

Sondha Branch

Village Sondha Khundra

Shajhanpur District

Uttar Pradesh-242301

187.

Indian Bank

Sultanpur Branch

671/1 Soni Complex

Dariyapur Road

Sultanpur District

Uttar Pradesh-228001

188.

Indian Bank

Swaroopnagar Branch

113/148 Near Bal Nikunj School

Swaroop Nagar

Kanpur

Uttar Pradesh -208002

189.

Indian Bank

Tendua Branch

Tendua

Madhuban Road

PO - Belthra Road

Ballia District

Uttar Pradesh-221715

190.

Indian Bank

Varanasi Branch

No. C-7/34-B Lahurabir

Varanasi

Varanasi District

Uttar Pradesh-221001

191.

Indian Bank

Service Branch Lucknow

1,2 Ashok Marg

Hazratganj

Lucknow

Lucknow District

Uttar Pradesh -226001

192.

State Bank of India

Amber Road

Next to Brahmpuri Thana

Jaipur-302002

193.

State Bank of India

Chittrakoot

Near Step by Step School

Janaki Marg

Jaipur-302021

194.

State Bank of India

Collectorate Circle

Near Collectorate Circle ,

Banipark

Jaipur-302016

195.

State Bank of India

Durgapura

Maharani Farm

Durgapura

Jaipur-302018

196.

State Bank of India

Jawahar Circle

Gold Sukh Ground

Near North Western Railway Headquarters

Jaipur-302017

197.

State Bank of India

Jawahar Nagar

36-B, Opp. Satya Sai College

Jawahar Nagar

Jaipur – 302004

198.

State Bank of India

Jhotwara

Plot No.8, Avadhpuri

Kalwar Road, Jhotwara

Jaipur-302012

199.

State Bank of India

Kailash Puri

9, Kailash Puri

Tonk Road

Jaipur-302018

200.

State Bank of India

MNIT, MNIT Campus

Opp. Mahaveer Cancer Hospital

J.L.N. Marg

Jaipur-302017

201.

State Bank of India

Nirman Nagar

K Tower, A-47, Virndavan Vihar

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

495

Kings Road, Nirman Nagar

Jaipur-302019

202.

State Bank of India

Special Housing Finance Branch

Brij Anukampa, Ashok Marg

C-Scheme

Jaipur-302001

203.

State Bank of India

Pratap Nagar

101/49, Kumba Marg

Pratap Nagar

Jaipur-302022

204.

State Bank of India

Shastri Nagar A-30 B

Shastri Nagar

Jaipur-302016

205.

State Bank of India

Sirsi Road, Flat No.1

Shekhawat Building

Sirsi Road

Jaipur-302012

206.

State Bank of India

Sitapura Industrial Area

RICCO Building

Sitapura Industrial Area

Jaipur-302022

207.

State Bank of India

SME Branch (Jaipur South)

22-Godam Industrial Area

Jaipur-302006

208.

State Bank of India

SME Station Road

Mangal Bhawan

Station Road

Jaipur-302006

209.

State Bank of India

Speacial NRI Branch

Plot No. 8-9,

Corporate Park, Gopal Bari

Jaipur-302006

210.

State Bank of India

Triveni Nagar

Near Gopalpura Bye pass

Jaipur-302018

211.

State Bank of India

Currency Administration Cell

SBI Jaipur Special Branch

Sanganri Gate

Jaipur-302003

212.

State Bank of India

SME Bhiwadi

F-296, Industrial Area Bhiwadi

Alwar-301019

213.

State Bank of India

Sahjahanpur

Ashish Plaza

Old Bus Stand

Alwar-301706

214.

State Bank of India

Tapukra

Alwar-301707

215.

State Bank of India

Thana Gaji

Bhora Bhawan

Pratapgarh Road Thana Gaji

Alwar-301022

216.

State Bank of India

Surya Nagar

Hanuman Chouraha

Delhi Road

Alwar-301001

217.

State Bank of India

Ajeetgarh

Sikar-302701

218.

State Bank of India

Banasthali

Tehsil-Newai

Tonk-304022

219.

State Bank of India

BS Paradise

Saraf Colony

Near Bus Stand

Jaipur Road

Bassi-303301

220.

State Bank of India

Khetri, Ward No.-15

Main Road, Khetri

Jhunjhunu-333503

221.

State Bank of India

Malpura

Tehsil- Malpura

Tonk-304502

222.

State Bank of India

Peeru Singh Circle

Jhunjhunu-333001

223.

State Bank of India

Medi

Vill. Medi

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

496

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Teh. Gangapur City

Sawai Madhopur-322219

224.

State Bank of India

Soda

Village-Soda

Teh-Malpura

Tonk-304504

225.

State Bank of India

Shri Madopur

Sikar-332715

226.

State Bank of India

Tonk, Jawahar Bazar

Tonk-304001

227.

State Bank of India

Udai Khurd

Po-Mahukalan

Block- Gangapur City

Sawai Madhopur-322220

228.

State Bank of India

Agri Commercial Branch

Mangal Bhawan

1st Floor Station Road

Jaipur-302006

229.

State Bank of India

Sukhadia Circler

Shri Ganganagar-335001

230.

State Bank of India

Station Head Quarter

Sadhu Wali Cantt.

Shri Ganganagar-335001

231.

State Bank of India

Military Station Suratgarh

Shri Ganganagar-335804

232.

State Bank of India

Nohar

Tehsil- Nohar

Hanumangarh-335523

233.

State Bank of India

Jail Road

Vijay Bhairav Market

Mohta Chowk

Bikaner-334005

234.

State Bank of India

Nal

Air Force Station

Nal, Bikaner - 334001

235.

State Bank of India

Bhadra

Near ACJM Court

Railway Station Road

Bhadra, Hanumangarh - 335501

236.

State Bank of India

Industrial Area Kishangarh

12 Makrana Road Industrial Area

Kishangarh-305801

237.

State Bank of India

Indabar

Main High Raod Indabar

Tehsil- Merta City

Nagaur- 341510

238.

State Bank of India

Jadan Khalsa

SBI Shree Vishwadeep Gurukul

Maheshwaranand Ashram

Pali-306401

239.

State Bank of India

Kadera

Vill- Kadera, Teh- Kehrli

Ajmer-305405

240.

State Bank of India

Khawas

Tehsil- Kekri

Ajmer- 305405

241.

State Bank of India

Pali Marwar

Main Branch Station Road

Pali-306401

242.

State Bank of India

Regional Institution of Education of Ajmer

Pushkar Road

Ajmer-305004

243.

State Bank of India

Sojat City

Near LIC Office, Sojat

Distt. Pali Marwar-306104

244.

State Bank of India

Regional Office Udaipur

Hitawala Building

Swaroop Sagar Road

Udaipur- 313001

245.

State Bank of India

Administrative Office-2

A-5, Nehru Place

Tonk Road

Jaipur-302015

246.

State Bank of India

Kherwara

Near Pancholi Hospital

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

497

Pancholi Bhawan

Kherwara, Udaipur-313803

247.

State Bank of India

Gogunda

Shop No. 95/96, Indraprastha Market

Gogunda, Udaipur-313705

248.

State Bank of India

Sagwara

Royal Service Centre

Near TVS Service Centre

Sagwara

Dungarpur- 314025

249.

State Bank of India

Pindwara

Railway Station Road

Opp. Telephone Exchange

Pindwara

Sirohi-307022

250.

State Bank of India

Goverdhan Villas

3/9 RHB Colony

Goverdhan Villas, Main Road

Udaipur- 311002

251.

State Bank of India

Salumber

Near Chungi Naka

Salumber

Udaipur-313027

252.

State Bank of India

Kushal Bagh

Vardan Shoppping Complex

Banswara-327001

253.

State Bank of India

Bus Stand Udaipur

Vinimay Complex

Udaipur- 313001

254.

State Bank of India

Kesar Ganj- Abu Road

Hotel Jaideep Compound

Sirohi-307026

255.

State Bank of India

Regional Office Jodhour

E-4, Suvidha Complex

Shastri Nagar

Jodhpur-342002

256.

State Bank of India

MICR Centre Jodhpur

High Court Building

Jodhpur- 342006

257.

State Bank of India

Osian

Tehsil Road

Jodhpur-342303

258.

State Bank of India

Currency Administration Cell

C/o SBI High Court Branch

Jodhpur- 342006

259.

State Bank of India

Basni Industrial AreaMIA House

Basni Phase-2

Jodhpur-342005

260.

State Bank of India

Pali Link Road

461, Pali Link Road

Jodhpur- 342003

261.

State Bank of India

Chaupasni Housing Board

14, Jwala Vihar

Main Chaupasni Road

Jodhpur-342009

262.

State Bank of India

Mahamandir, Jodhpur

B-29, Khetanadi

Mandore Mandi Circle

Jodhpur- 342007

263.

State Bank of India

Jhalamand Chauraha

Plot No.121, District Shopping Centre

Saraswati Nagar

Jodhpur-342008

264.

State Bank of India

National Law Univercity

N.H.65, Nagaur Road Madore

Jodhpur-342304

265.

State Bank of India

Kudi Bhagtasani Housing Board

Sector-2

Jodhpur-342005

266.

State Bank of India

Ramgarh

Village- Ramgarh

Dist. Jaisalmer-345022

267.

State Bank of India

IIT Rajasthan

Quarter No.307

GPRA Kendranchal Colony

Vivek Nagar

New Pali Road

Jodhpur-342005

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

498

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

268.

State Bank of India

NRI Jodhpur

H-1, Shastri Nagar

Jodhpur-342003

269.

State Bank of India

Army Area Jaisalmer

Jaisalmer-345001

270.

State Bank of India

Mahaveer Nagar

Hotel New Raj

Mahaveer Nagar

Barmer-344001

271.

State Bank of India

Pal Balaji Road

Plot No. 4B & 7A Khasra No.198

Pal Main Road

Jodhpur-342014

272.

State Bank of India

Newra Road

VPO Newra Road

Tehsil- Osian

Jodhpur-342303

273.

State Bank of India

Paota B Road

Peeyush Bhawan

Laxmi Nagar Main Road

Jodhpur-342010

274.

State Bank of India

Baran Road Kota

Bankey Saukhdham Colony

Baran Road

Kota-324002

275.

State Bank of India

Bundi

Guru Nanak Colony

Bundi-323001

276.

State Bank of India

Gangrar

Plot No. 2538, Near BSNL Tower

Village - Gangrar

Chittorgarh-312901

277.

State Bank of India

Jal Chakki

Collectorate Road,

Rajnagar

Rajsamand-313326

278.

State Bank of India

Kapasan

Near Stadium

Dargah Road

Kapasan

Rajsamand-312202

279.

State Bank of India

Rail Magra

Near Bus Stand

Rail Magra

Rajsamand-313029

280.

State Bank of India

Senthi (Chittorgarh)

A-23, Babu Nagar, Senthi

Chittorgarh-312001

281.

State Bank of India

SME Branch

Jhalawar Road

Kota-324007

282.

State Bank of India

Subhash Nagar, Bhilwara

B-1 Block, Surbhi Complex

Subhash Nagar

Bhilwara-311001

283.

State Bank of India

Vigyan Nagar, Kota

1 TA, 17 Vigyan Nagar

Kota-324005

284.

State Bank of India

Fatehnagar

Shop No. 2, 3, 4 Karga Block

Near WareHouse

Udaipur Road

Udaipur-313205

285.

State Bank of India

Sarurpur Kalan Branch

Distt.- Baghpat

Uttar Pradesh-250619

286.

State Bank of India

Rohta Road Branch

Distt.- Meerut

Uttar Pradesh-250002

287.

State Bank of India

Aminagar Sarai Branch

Distt.- Baghpat

Uttar Pradesh-250606

288.

State Bank of India

Shradhapuri Phase-2 Branch

Defence Enclave

Distt.- Meerut

Uttar Pradesh-250001

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

499

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

289.

State Bank of India

Arthala Branch

Kailash Park

GT Road

Distt.-Ghaziabad

Uttar Pradesh-201007

290.

State Bank of India

Pratap Vihar Branch

Sector-12, Pratap Vihar

Distt. - Ghaziabad

Uttar Pradesh-201009

291.

State Bank of India

Bhikkanpur Branch

Muradnagar

Distt.- Ghaziabad

Uttar Pradesh-201206

292.

State Bank of India

Khoda Branch

Distt. Ghaziabad

Uttar Pradesh-201301

293.

State Bank of India

Tehsil Compound Branch

Distt.- Ghaziabad

Uttar Pradesh-201001

294.

State Bank of India

Raj Nagar Extension Branch

Distt. – Ghaziabad

Uttar Pradesh-201003

295.

State Bank of India

Shalimar Garden Branch

Block -B, Girdhar Plaza

Distt.-Ghaziabad

Uttar Pradesh-201005

296.

State Bank of India

Ankit Vihar Branch

Distt.- Muzaffarnagar

Uttar Pradesh-251001

297.

State Bank of India

Almaspur Branch

Distt.- Muzaffarnagar

Uttar Pradesh-251001

298.

State Bank of India

Purkaji Branch

Distt.- Muzaffarnagar

Uttar Pradesh-251310

299.

State Bank of India

Faizabad Branch

Distt.- Saharanpur

Uttar Pradesh-247121

300.

State Bank of India

Sector-31 Branch

Noida

Distt.- Gautambudh Nagar

Uttar Pradesh-201301

301.

State Bank of India

Sector-51 Branch

Noida

Distt.- Gautambudh Nagar

Uttar Pradesh-201301

302.

State Bank of India

Bhangel Branch

Noida

Distt.- Gautambudh Nagar

Uttar Pradesh-201301

303.

State Bank of India

Sector-66 Branch

Mamura

Noida

Distt. Gautambudh Nagar

Uttar Pradesh-201307

304.

State Bank of India

Ahmad Garh Branch

Distt.- Bulandshahar

Uttar Pradesh-203392

305.

State Bank of India

Chhatari Branch

Distt.- Bulandshahar

Uttar Pradesh-203001

306.

State Bank of India

SME Branch

Khurza

Distt.- Bulandshahar

Uttar Pradesh-203131

307.

State Bank of India

PBB Branch

Sector P2, Greater Noida

Distt. Gautambudh Nagar

Uttar Pradesh-201310

308.

State Bank of India

44 PAC Branch

2/3 Shastri Nagar

Distt.- Meerut

Uttar Pradesh-250004

309.

State Bank of India

Surajkund Road Branch

Distt.- Meerut

Uttar Pradesh-250002

500

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

310.

State Bank of India

Avas Vikas Colony Branch

Distt. Hapur

Uttar Pradesh-245101

311.

State Bank of India

Babugarh Branch

Babhgarh Chawani

Distt.- Hapur

Uttar Pradesh- 245201

312.

State Bank of India

Dhaulana Branch

Distt.- Hapur

Uttar Pradesh-245301

313.

State Bank of India

Jagruti Vihar Branch

Distt.- Meerut

Uttar Pradesh-240004

314.

State Bank of India

Shatabdi Nagar Branch

Distt.- Meerut

Uttar Pradesh-250103

315.

Punjab & Sind Bank

VPO Sidhva kalan

District Ludhiana

316.

Punjab & Sind Bank

VPO Ratan heri

P.O. Khanna

District Ludhiana

317.

Punjab & Sind Bank

VPO Sirinh

District Ludhiana

318.

Punjab & Sind Bank

VPO Lakha

Tehsil Jagranv

319.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Near Govt. Primary School

Kiri Bhumal

Tehsil Jagranv

District Ludhiana

320.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Near Bus Stand

Main Road, Bujurg

District Ludhiana

321.

Punjab & Sind Bank

B- Market, Sector 6

Bhilai, Chattisgarh – 490006

322.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Near Jain Dharmshala

Ashok Nagar

Madhya Pradesh – 473331

323.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Pitana Chowk, Raipur Road

Dhamatari

Chattisgarh – 493773

324.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Vill.-Janjee, Tehsil-Masturi

Distt. Bilaspur

Chattisgarh – 495550

325.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Vill.-Darrabhantha

Dist. Bilaspur

Chattisgarh - 495550

326.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Risama, Tehsil – Gunderdehi

Distt. Durg

Chattisgarh - 49491221

327.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Akash Ganga, Vyavsaik Parisar

Supela, Bhilai

Chattisgarh - 490006

328.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Shop No. 25, Mahalaxmi Cloth Market

Pandri, Raipur

Chattisgarh

329.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Parvati Nivas, Bhopal Nakka

Sehore, Madhya Pradesh – 466001

330.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Vill. Pahanvarri

Distt. Hoshangabad

Madhya Pradesh

331.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Vill. Palash, Distt. Ratlam

Madhya Pradesh – 457001

332.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Civil Lines, Main Road

Datiya, Madhya Pradesh – 473331

333.

Punjab & Sind Bank

63, Malva Complex, Sector -1,

Pithampur, Distt. Dhar

Madhya Pradesh .

334.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Karan Arcade, Parasia Road

Chindwara, Madhya Pradesh – 480001.

335.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Vill. & Post Office Kotla Surat Luhar

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

501

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

Tehsil Ajnala, Distt. Amritsar

Punjab.

336.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Vill. & Post Office Tanel

Tehsil Baba Bakala, Distt. Amritsar

Punjab.

337.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Vill. & Post Office Laskari Nangal

Tehsil Ajnala, Distt. Amritsar

Punjab.

338.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Vill. & Post Office Mianwind

Tehsil Baba Bakala, Distt. Amritsar

Punjab.

339.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Vill. & Post Office Marhana

Tehsil Patti, Distt. Taran Taran

Punjab.

340.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Vill. & Post Office Gaggobua

Distt. Taran Taran

Punjab.

341.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Vill. & Post Office Wazir Bhullar

Tehsil Baba Bakala, Distt. Amritsar

Punjab.

342.

Punjab & Sind Bank

329, Jewar Road, Ibrahimpur

Junaid Pur, Distt. Bulandshahar

Uttar-Pardesh

343.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Vill. & Post Office Shafruddin Javli

Tehsil & Distt. Ghaziabad

Uttar-Pardesh.

344.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Shri Ghaseeta BuildingV

illage Kaziwala, Distt. Bijnore

Uttar Pardesh

345.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Shop No. 2/12/13/14, Laxmi Plaza

NH – 58, Daurala, Distt. Meerut

Uttar-Pardesh

346.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Gupta Bros. Chandpur Road

Noorpur, Distt. Bijnore

Uttar-Pardesh.

347.

Punjab & Sind Bank

J-9. G.F. Dilshad Colony

Delhi

348.

Punjab & Sind Bank

C-3, 58 A, Yamuna Vihar

Delhi.

349.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Shop No. 14 A & 12, Shipra Azure

Arcade Near Wave Cinemas

Distt. Ghaziabad

Uttar Pardesh.

350.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Near Railway Phatak

Kalour Road, Bassi Pathana

Distt. Fatehgarh Sahib

Punjab – 140412.

351.

Punjab & Sind Bank

C/o Hotel Puri, Near Dev Pal Chownk

Hamirpur, Himachal Pardesh – 177001.

352.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Near Bus Stand, Gurudwara Road

Tehsil & Distt. Fatehgarh Sahib

Punjab – 140406.

353.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village & Post Office Panjoli Kalan

Distt. Fatehgarh Sahib

Punjab – 145101.

354.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village & Post Office Barnwa

Tehsil Anandpur Sahib

Distt. Rupnagar

Punjab – 140117.

355.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village & Post Office Tangori

Distt. Mohali

Punjab – 140306.

356.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village & Post Office Chahar Majra

Tehsil Kharar, Distt. Mohali

Punjab – 140501.

357.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village & Post Office Fateh Nangal

Kunda Road

Tehsil & Distt. Gurdaspur

Punjab – 143519.

358.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village & Post Office Jaura Chhatran

Tehsil & Distt. Gurdaspur

Punjab – 143520.

359.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village & Post Office Ghoman

New Model Colony

Main Bazar Ghoman

502

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

Tehsil Batala, Distt. Gurdaspur

Punjab – 143514.

360.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village & Post Office Bhodipur

Tehsil Nakodar, Dist.. Jalandhar

Punjab – 144040.

361.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village & Post Office Bhagoran

Tehsil Nawanshahar

Distt. Shahid Bhagat Singh Nagar

Punjab – 144516.

362.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Satchitanand Nagar

Rudraprayag, Distt. Rudraprayag

Uttarakhand -246171.

363.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Jalalpur Nella, Post Office – Ramraj

Tehsil Jansath, Distt. Muzaffar Nagar

Uttar Pardesh - 251320.

364.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village Dhaboti, Tehsil Distt. - Sehore

Madhya Pradesh – 466001.

365.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village Lalguwadi, Block + Distt. Ratlam

Madhya Pradesh – 457001.

366.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village Sarsawa

Tehsil Panagpur

Distt. Jabalpur

Madhya Pradesh - 483220.

367.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village Dhaurera Mafi

Pilibhit by pass Road

Post Office – Izzat Nagar

Distt. Bareilly

Uttar Pardesh - 243122.

368.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Mohalla Nai Basti, Near Gurdwara

Jaspur, Tehsil Kashipur

Distt. Udham Singh Nagar

Uttarakhand- 244712.

369.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Kangra, Shop No. 2686

New Bus Stand Road

Tehsil & Distrct Kangra

Himachal Pardesh – 176001.

370.

Punjab & Sind Bank

VPO Behrampur

Tehsil & Distrcit Gurdaspur

Punjab – 143532.

371.

Punjab & Sind Bank

VPO Dorangal

Tehsil & District Gurdaspur

Punjab – 143526.

372.

Punjab & Sind Bank

D-127, 60 Feet Road

Mahavir Enclave-III

New Delhi – 110059.

373.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Plot No. 31, Khasra No. 5624

Naresh Park Extension

Najafgarh Road, Nangloi

Delhi – 110041.

374.

Punjab & Sind Bank

129, Anand Nagar

Inderlok, Delhi – 110035.

375.

Punjab & Sind Bank

2155, Outram Lane

Guru Teg Bahadur Nagar

New Delhi – 110009.

376.

Punjab & Sind Bank

A-20-91, Ram Garh

G.T. Karnal Road

Jahangirpuri

New Delhi – 110033.

377.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Khasra No. 311, Ground Floor

Goyla-Dwarka Road, Didarpur

Najafgarh, New Delhi – 110043.

378.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Dharamshalla, Near Kachaheri Adda

Opp. Dist. Industry Centre

District – Kangra

Himachal Pardesh – 176215.

379.

Punjab & Sind Bank

VPO – Sarna, Near Pipe Factory

G.T. Road, Dist. Pathankot

Punjab – 145025.

380.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Nagrota Bhagwan, Main Bazar

Near Old Bus Stand

District – Kangra

Himachal Pardesh – 176047.

381.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Simbal More, PO Miran sahib

Tehsil R.S. Pura, Distt. Jammu

Jammu & Kashmir – 181101

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

503

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

382.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Sujanpur, Distt. Pathankot

Punjab – 145023.

383.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village Bahadur Hussain

P.O. Massanian, Tehsil Batala

Distt. Gurdaspur

Punjab – 143602.

384.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village Sarchur, Tehsil Batala

Distt. Gurdaspur

Punjab – 143602.

385.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Village Sirah, Tehsil Batala

Distt. Gurdaspur

Punjab – 143513.

386.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Samba, NH-1A, Distt. Samba

Jammu & Kashmir – 184121.

387.

Punjab & Sind Bank

Sirhind, G.T. Road

Distt. Fatehgarh Sahib

Punjab – 140406.

388.

Punjab & Sind Bank

VPO Teur, Distt. Mohali

Punjab – 140301.

389.

Punjab & Sind Bank

VPO Rangilpur, Distt. Ropar

Punjab – 140108.

390.

Reserve Bank of India

4th Floor, R.R.D.A. Building

Pragati Sadan, Kachahari Chowk

Ranchi - 834001, Jharkhand

391.

Reserve Bank of India

54/949, Satya Prem Vihar

Mahadev Ghat Road

Sunder Nagar, Raipur – 492013

Chhattisgarh

392.

Reserve Bank of India

3rd Floor, G.M.V.N. Building

74/1, Rajpur Road,

Dehradun -248001, Uttaranchal

393.

Reserve Bank of India

40, SDA Complex, SBI Building

Basement –I, Kasumpati

Shimla – 171009 HP

394.

Reserve Bank of India

Post Box No. 20, Gera Imperium –II

7th Floor, EDC Complex

Patto Plaza, Panaji -403001

Goa.

395.

Reserve Bank of India

Post Box No. 3065

Ernakulam (North)

Kochi- 628018, Kerala

LokLF; ,oa ifjokj dY;k.k ea=kky;

(LokLF; ,oa ifjokj dY;k.k foHkkx)

ubZ fnYyh] 15 vDrwcj] 2013

dk-vk- 205-—Hkkjrh; fpfdRlk ifj"kn vfèkfu;e] 1956

(1956 dk 102) dh /kjk 11 dh mi&/kjk (2) }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa

dk iz;ksx djrs gq, dsUnz ljdkj] Hkkjrh; fpfdRlk ifj"kn ls

ijke'kZ djus ds i'pkr~] ,rn~}kjk mDr vf/fu;e dh izFke

vuqlwph esa vgZrk ds uke esa ifjorZu ds dkj.k vkSj la'kks/u

djrh gS] vFkkZr~ %—

mDr vuqlwph esa %—

(d) ¶MkW- ,u-Vh-vkj- LokLF; foKku fo'ofo|ky;]

fot;okM+k¸ ds lkeus ^ekU;rkizkIr fpfdRlk vgZrk* ¹blds ckn

dkWye (2) ds :i esa lanfHkZr] 'kh"kZ ds varxZr vafre izfof"V rFkk

mlls lacaf/r izfof"V ds ckn ^iathdj.k ds fy;s laf{kIr :i*

¹blds ckn dkWye (3) ds :i esa lanfHkZr] 'kh"kZd ds rgr

fuEufyf[kr dks var£o"V fd;k tk,xk] vFkkZr~ %—

(2)

(3)

¶ekLVj vkWiQ ltZjh

,e-,l- (us=k jksx foKku)

(us=k jksx foKku)¸

(;g ebZ] 2013 esa ;k mlds ckn

esfMflVh fpfdRlk foKku laLFkku]

?kuiqj] vka/z izns'k esa izf'kf{kr fd, tk

jgs Nk=kksa ds laca/ esa MkW- ,u-Vh-vkj-

LokLF; foKku fo'ofo|ky;] fot;okM+k

}kjk LohÑr fd, tkus ij ekU;rkizkIr

fpfdRlk vgZrk gksxh)A

¶ekLVj vkWiQ ltZjh

,e-,l- (vfLFk jksx foKku)

(vfLFk jksx foKku)¸

(;g ebZ] 2013 esa ;k mlds ckn

esfMflVh fpfdRlk foKku laLFkku]

?kuiqj] vka/z izns'k esa izf'kf{kr fd, tk

jgs Nk=kksa ds laca/ esa MkW- ,u-Vh-vkj-

LokLF; foKku fo'ofo|ky;] fot;okM+k

}kjk LohÑr fd, tkus ij ekU;rkizkIr

fpfdRlk vgZrk gksxh)A

504

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

¶MkDVj vkWiQ esMsflu

,e-Mh- (iQkekZdkWykWth)

(iQkekZdkWykWth)¸

(;g ebZ] 2013 esa ;k mlds ckn ih-bZ-

,l- fpfdRlk foKku ,oa vuqla/ku

laLFkku] dqIie] vka/z izns'k esa izf'kf{kr

fd, tk jgs Nk=kksa ds laca/ esa MkW- ,u-

Vh-vkj- LokLF; foKku fo'ofo|ky;]

fot;okM+k }kjk LohÑr fd, tkus ij

ekU;rkizkIr fpfdRlk vgZrk gksxh)A

([k) mDr izFke vuqlwph esa ¶xq: xks¯on ¯lg baæizLFk

fo'ofo|ky;] ubZ fnYyh¸ ds lkeus ^ekU;rkizkIr fpfdRlk vgZrk*

¹blds ckn dkWye (2) ds :i esa lanfHkZr] 'kh"kZ ds varxZr vafre

izfof"V rFkk mlls lacaf/r izfof"V ds ckn ^iathdj.k ds fy;s

laf{kIr :i* ¹blds ckn dkWye (3) ds :i esa lanfHkZr] 'kh"kZd ds

rgr fuEufyf[kr var£o"V fd;k tk,xk] vFkkZr~ %—

(2)

(3)

¶MkDVj vkWiQ esfMflu

,e-Mh- (euf'pfdRlk)

(euf'pfdRlk)¸

(;g vizSy] 2013 esa ;k mlds ckn MkW-

vkj-,e-,y- LukrdksÙkj fpfdRlk f'k{kk

,oa vuqla/ku laLFkku ,oa vLirky]

ubZ fnYyh esa izf'kf{kr fd, tk jgs

Nk=kksa ds laca/ esa xq: xks¯on ¯lg baæizLFk

fo'ofo|ky;] ubZ fnYyh }kjk LohÑr

fd, tkus ij ekU;rkizkIr fpfdRlk

vgZrk gksxh)A

(x) mDr izFke vuqlwph esa ¶xqtjkr fo'ofo|ky;]

vgenkckn] xqtjkr¸ ds lkeus ^ekU;rkizkIr fpfdRlk vgZrk*

¹blds ckn dkWye (2) ds :i esa lanfHkZr] 'kh"kZ ds varxZr vafre

izfof"V rFkk mlls lacaf/r izfof"V ds ckn ^iathdj.k ds fy;s

laf{kIr :i* ¹blds ckn dkWye (3) ds :i esa lanfHkZr] 'kh"kZd ds

rgr fuEufyf[kr var£o"V fd;k tk,xk] vFkkZr~ %—

(2)

(3)

¶MkDVj vkWiQ esfMflu

,e-Mh- (vkikrdkyhu esfMflu)

(vkikrdkyhu esfMflu)¸ (;g vizSy] 2013 esa ;k mlds ckn

Jherh ,u,p,y uxj ikfydk

esfMdy dkWyst ,oa vLirky]

vgenkckn] xqtjkr esa izf'kf{kr fd,

tk jgs Nk=kksa ds laca/ esa xqtjkr

fo'ofo|ky;] vgenkckn] xqtjkr }kjk

LohÑr fd, tkus ij ekU;rkizkIr

fpfdRlk vgZrk gksxh)A

(?k) mDr izFke vuqlwph esa ¶lkSjk"Vª fo'ofo|ky;]

jktdksV] xqtjkr¸ ds lkeus ^ekU;rkizkIr fpfdRlk vgZrk* ¹blds

ckn dkWye (2) ds :i esa lanfHkZr] 'kh"kZ ds varxZr vafre izfof"V

rFkk mlls lacaf/r izfof"V ds ckn ^iathdj.k ds fy;s laf{kIr :i*

¹blds ckn dkWye (3) ds :i esa lanfHkZr] 'kh"kZd ds rgr

fuEufyf[kr var£o"V fd;k tk,xk] vFkkZr~ %—

(2)

(3)

¶vfLFk jksx foKku

Mh-vksjFkks-

esa fMIyksek¸

(;g vizSy] 2013 esa ;k mlds ckn lh-

;w- 'kkg esfMdy dkWyst ,oa vLirky]

lqjsUæuxj] xqtjkr esa izf'kf{kr fd, tk

jgs Nk=kksa ds laca/ esa lkSjk"Vª

fo'ofo|ky;] jktdksV] xqtjkr }kjk

LohÑr fd, tkus ij ekU;rkizkIr

fpfdRlk vgZrk gksxh)A

(Ä) mDr izFke vuqlwph esa ¶fgekpy izns'k fo'ofo|ky;]

fgekpy izns'k¸ ds lkeus ^ekU;rkizkIr fpfdRlk vgZrk* ¹blds

ckn dkWye (2) ds :i esa lanfHkZr] 'kh"kZ ds varxZr vafre izfof"V

rFkk mlls lacaf/r izfof"V ds ckn ^iathdj.k ds fy;s laf{kIr :i*

¹blds ckn dkWye (3) ds :i esa lanfHkZr] 'kh"kZd ds rgr

fuEufyf[kr var£o"V fd;k tk,xk] vFkkZr~ %—

(2)

(3)

¶MkDVj vkWiQ esfMflu

,e-Mh- (laKkgj.k foKku)

(laKkgj.k foKku)¸

(;g twu] 2013 esa ;k mlds ckn MkW-

jktsaæ izlkn 'kkldh; esfMdy dkWyst]

VkaMk] fgekpy izns'k esa izf'kf{kr fd,

tk jgs Nk=kksa ds laca/ esa fgekpy izns'k

fo'ofo|ky;] fgekpy izns'k }kjk

LohÑr fd, tkus ij ekU;rkizkIr

fpfdRlk vgZrk gksxh)A

(p) mDr izFke vuqlwph esa ¶jktho xka/h LokLF; foKku

fo'ofo|ky;] caxyq:] dukZVd¸ ds lkeus ^ekU;rkizkIr fpfdRlk

vgZrk* ¹blds ckn dkWye (2) ds :i esa lanfHkZr] 'kh"kZ ds varxZr

vafre izfof"V rFkk mlls lacaf/r izfof"V ds ckn ^iathdj.k ds fy;s

laf{kIr :i* ¹blds ckn dkWye (3) ds :i esa lanfHkZr] 'kh"kZd ds

rgr fuEufyf[kr var£o"V fd;k tk,xk] vFkkZr~ %—

(2)

(3)

¶MkDVj vkWiQ esfMflu

,e-Mh- (ekbØksck;ksykWth)

(ekbØksck;ksykWth)¸

(;g ebZ] 2013 esa ;k mlds ckn

bZ,lvkbZ&ihthvkbZ,e,lvkj] bZ,lvkbZ

vLirky] jktkth uxj] cSaxyq:]

dukZVd esa izf'kf{kr fd, tk jgs Nk=kksa

ds laca/ esa jktho xka/h LokLF; foKku

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

505

fo'ofo|ky;] caxyq:] dukZVd }kjk

LohÑr fd, tkus ij ekU;rkizkIr

fpfdRlk vgZrk gksxh)A

¶MkDVj vkWiQ esfMflu

,e-Mh- (iSFkksykWth)

(iSFkksykWth)¸

(;g ebZ] 2013 esa ;k mlds ckn

bZ,lvkbZ&ihthvkbZ,e,lvkj] bZ,lvkbZ

vLirky] jktkth uxj] caxyq:]

dukZVd esa izf'kf{kr fd, tk jgs Nk=kksa

ds laca/ esa jktho xka/h LokLF; foKku

fo'ofo|ky;] caxyq:] dukZVd }kjk

LohÑr fd, tkus ij ekU;rkizkIr

fpfdRlk vgZrk gksxh)A

¶MkDVj vkWiQ esfMflu

,e-Mh- (iSFkksykWth)

(iSFkksykWth)¸

(;g twu] 2013 esa ;k mlds ckn

vkfnpqapuxhjh fpfdRlk foKku laLFkku]

ekaM;k] dukZVd esa izf'kf{kr fd, tk

jgs Nk=kksa ds laca/ esa jktho xka/h LokLF;

foKku fo'ofo|ky;] caxyq:] dukZVd

}kjk LohÑr fd, tkus ij ekU;rkizkIr

fpfdRlk vgZrk gksxh)A

¶vkVksykjkbuxksykWth

Mh-,y-vks-

esa fMIyksek¸

(;g ebZ] 2013 esa ;k mlds ckn uoksn;

esfMdy dkWyst] jk;pwj] dukZVd esa

izf'kf{kr fd, tk jgs Nk=kksa ds laca/ esa

jktho xka/h LokLF; foKku

fo'ofo|ky;] caxyq:] dukZVd }kjk

LohÑr fd, tkus ij ekU;rkizkIr

fpfdRlk vgZrk gksxh)A

¶MkDVj vkWiQ esfMflu

,e-Mh- (iQhft;ksykWth)

(iQhft;ksykWth)¸

(;g ebZ] 2013 esa ;k mlds ckn ,l-

Mh-,e- fpfdRlk foKku dkWyst] /kjokM+

dukZVd esa izf'kf{kr fd, tk jgs Nk=kksa

ds laca/ esa jktho xka/h LokLF; foKku

fo'ofo|ky;] caxyq:] dukZVd }kjk

LohÑr fd, tkus ij ekU;rkizkIr

fpfdRlk vgZrk gksxh)A

¶MkDVj vkWiQ esfMflu

,e-Mh- (iSFkksykWth)

(iSFkksykWth)¸

(;g ebZ] 2013 esa ;k mlds ckn ,l-

Mh-,e- fpfdRlk foKku dkWyst] /kjokM+

dukZVd esa izf'kf{kr fd, tk jgs Nk=kksa

ds laca/ esa jktho xka/h LokLF; foKku

fo'ofo|ky;] caxyq:] dukZVd }kjk

LohÑr fd, tkus ij ekU;rkizkIr

fpfdRlk vgZrk gksxh)A

¶laKkgj.k foKku

Mh-,-

esa fMIyksek¸

(;g ebZ] 2013 esa ;k mlds ckn ,l-

Mh-,e- fpfdRlk foKku dkWyst] /kjokM+

dukZVd esa izf'kf{kr fd, tk jgs Nk=kksa

ds laca/ esa jktho xka/h LokLF; foKku

fo'ofo|ky;] caxyq:] dukZVd }kjk

LohÑr fd, tkus ij ekU;rkizkIr

fpfdRlk vgZrk gksxh)A

(N) mDr izFke vuqlwph esa ¶ve`rk fo'o fon~;kihBe

fo'ofo|ky;] dks;EcVwj] rfeyukMq¸ ds lkeus ^ekU;rkizkIr fpfdRlk

vgZrk* ¹blds ckn dkWye (2) ds :i esa lanfHkZr] 'kh"kZ ds varxZr

vafre izfof"V rFkk mlls lacaf/r izfof"V ds ckn ^iathdj.k ds fy;s

laf{kIr :i* ¹blds ckn dkWye (3) ds :i esa lanfHkZr] 'kh"kZd ds

rgr fuEufyf[kr var£o"V fd;k tk,xk] vFkkZr~ %—

(2)

(3)

¶MkDVj vkWiQ esfMflu

,e-Mh- (ih,evkj)

(fiQftdy eSfMflu

(;g ebZ] 2013 esa ;k mlds ckn

,oa jhgSfcfVys'ku

ve`rk Ldwy vkWiQ eSfMflu]

lkb±l)¸

,vkbZ,e,l] dksfPp esa izf'kf{kr fd,

tk jgs Nk=kksa ds laca/ esa ve`rk fo'o

fon~;kihBe fo'ofo|ky;] dks;EcVwj]

rfeyukMq }kjk LohÑr fd, tkus ij

ekU;rkizkIr fpfdRlk vgZrk gksxh)A

lHkh ds fy, uksV % 1- fdlh LukrdksÙkj ikB~;Øe dks bl

izdkj ekU;rk vf/dre 05 o"kZ dh

vof/ ds fy, gksxh vkSj mlds ckn

mldk uohdj.k djuk gksxk A

2- mi&[k.M 4 esa ;Fkkisf{kr le; ij

ekU;rk dk uohdj.k u gksus ij lacafèkr

LukrdksÙkj ikB~;Øe esa nkf[kyk

fujiokn :i ls #d tk,xk A

¹la- ;w- 12012@70@2013&,ebZ (ih&II)º

vfurk f=kikBh] voj lfpo

MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE

(Department of Health and Family Welfare)

New Delhi, the 15th October, 2013

S.O. 205.—In exercise of the powers conferred by

sub-section (2) of the Section 11 of the Indian Medical

Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956), the Central Government,

506

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes

the following further amendments in the First Schedule

to the said Act, due to change of nomenclature of the

qualification, namely :—

In the said Schedule—

(a)

against “Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences,

Vijayawada” under the heading ‘Recognized Medical

Qualification’ [hereinafter referred to as column (2)] after

the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading

‘Abbreviation for Registration’ [hereinafter referred to as

column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely :—

(2)

(3)

“Master of Surgery

MS (Ophthalmology)

(Ophthalmology)”

(This shall be a recognized

medical qualification when

granted by Dr. NTR University

of Health Sciences, Vijayawada

in respect of students being

trained at Medicity Institute of

Medical Sciences, Ghanpur,

Andhra Pradesh on or after

May, 2013).

“Master of Surgery

MS (Orthopaedics)

(Orthopaedics)”

(This shall be a recognized

medical qualification when

granted by Dr. NTR University

of Health Sciences, Vijayawada

in respect of students being

trained at Medicity Institute of

Medical Sciences, Ghanpur,

Andhra Pradesh on or after

May, 2013).

“Doctor of Medicine

MD (Pharmacology)

(Pharmacology)”

(This shall be a recognized

medical qualification when

granted by Dr. NTR University

of Health Sciences, Vijayawada

in respect of students being

trained at P.E.S. Institute of

Medical

Sciences

and

Research, Kuppam, Andhra

Pradesh on or after May, 2013).

(b)

against “Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University,

New Delhi” under the heading ‘Recognized Medical

Qualification’ [hereinafter referred to as column (2)] after

the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading

‘Abbreviation for Registration’ [hereinafter referred to as

column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely :—

(2)

(3)

“Doctor of Medicine

MD (Psychiatry)

(Psychiatry)”

(This shall be a recognized

medical qualification when

granted by Guru Gobind Singh

Indraprastha University, New

Delhi in respect of students

being trained at Postgraduate

Institute of Medical Education

and Research, Dr. RML

Hospital, New Delhi on or after

April, 2013).

(c)

against “Gujarat University, Ahmedabad, Gujarat”

under the heading ‘Recognized Medical Qualification’

[hereinafter referred to as column (2)] after the last entry

and entry relating thereto under the heading ‘Abbreviation

for Registration’ [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the

following shall be inserted, namely :—

(2)

(3)

“Doctor of Medicine

MD (Emergency Medicine)

(Emergency Medicine)”

(This shall be a recognized

medical qualification when

granted by Gujarat University,

Ahmedabad, Gujarat in respect

of students being trained at

Smt. NHL Municipal Medical

College

and

Hospital,

Ahmedabad, Gujarat on or after

April, 2013).

(d)

against “Saurashtra University, Rajkot, Gujarat”

under the heading ‘Recognized Medical Qualification’

[hereinafter referred to as column (2)] after the last entry

and entry relating thereto under the heading ‘Abbreviation

for Registration’ [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the

following shall be inserted, namely :—

(2)

(3)

“Diploma in Orthopaedics”

D. Ortho.

(This shall be a recognized

medical qualification when

granted by Saurashtra

University, Rajkot, Gujarat in

respect of students being

trained at C.U. Shah

Medical College and

Hospital, Surendranagr,

Gujarat on or after April,

2013).

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

507

(e)

against “Himachal Pradesh University, Himachal

Pradesh” under the heading ‘Recognized Medical

Qualification’ [hereinafter referred to as column (2)] after

the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading

‘Abbreviation for Registration’ [hereinafter referred to as

column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely :—

(2)

(3)

“Doctor of Medicine

MD (Anaesthesia)

(Anaesthesia)”

(This shall be a recognized

medical qualification when

granted by Himachal Pradesh

University, Himachal Pradesh

in respect of students being

trained at Dr. Rajendra Prasad

Govt. Medical College, Tanda,

Himachal Pradesh on or after

June, 2013).

(f)

against “Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences,

Bangalore, Karnataka” under the heading ‘Recognized

Medical Qualification’ [hereinafter referred to as column

(2)] after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the

heading ‘Abbreviation for Registration’ [hereinafter referred

to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted,

namely :—

(2)

(3)

“Doctor of Medicine

MD (Microbiology)

(Microbiology)”

(This shall be a recognized

medical qualification when

granted by Rajiv Gandhi

University of Health Sciences,

Bangalore, Karnataka in

respect of students being

trained at ESI-PGIMSR, ESI

Hospital,

Rajajinagar,

Bangalore, Karnataka on or

after May, 2013).

“Doctor of Medicine

MD (Pathology)

(Pathology)”

(This shall be a recognized

medical qualification when

granted by Rajiv Gandhi

University of Health Sciences,

Bangalore, Karnataka in

respect of students being

trained at ESI-PGIMSR, ESI

Hospital,

Rajajinagar,

Bangalore, Karnataka on or

after May, 2013).

“Doctor of Medicine

MD (Pathology)

(Pathology)”

(This shall be a recognized

medical qualification when

granted by Rajiv Gandhi

University of Health Sciences,

Bangalore, Karnataka in respect

of students being trained at

Adichunchanagiri, Institute of

Medical Sciences, Mandya,

Karnataka on or after June,

2013).

“Diploma in

DLO

Otolaryngology”

(This shall be a recognized

medical qualification when

granted by Rajiv Gandhi

University of Health Sciences,

Bangalore, Karnataka in

respect of students being

trained at Navodaya Medical

College, Raichur, Karnataka on

or after May, 2013).

“Doctor of Medicine

MD (Physiology)

(Physiology)”

(This shall be a recognized

medical qualification when

granted by Rajiv Gandhi

University of Health Sciences,

Bangalore, Karnataka in respect

of students being trained at

S.D.M. College of Medical

Sciences, Dharwad, Karnataka

on or after May, 2013).

“Doctor of Medicine

MD (Pathology)

(Pathology)”

(This shall be a recognized

medical qualification when

granted by Rajiv Gandhi

University of Health Sciences,

Bangalore, Karnataka in respect

of students being trained at

S.D.M. College of Medical

Sciences, Dharwad, Karnataka

on or after May, 2013).

“Diploma in Anaesthesia”

DA

(This shall be a recognized

medical qualification when

granted by Rajiv Gandhi

University of Health Sciences,

Bangalore, Karnataka in respect

of students being trained at

508

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

S.D.M. College of Medical

Sciences, Dharwad, Karnataka

on or after May, 2013).

(g)

against “Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University,

Coimbatore, Tamilnadu” under the heading ‘Recognized

Medical Qualification’ [hereinafter referred to as column

(2)] after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the

heading ‘Abbreviation for Registration’ [hereinafter referred

to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely :—

(2)

(3)

“Doctor of Medicine

MD (PMR)

(Physical Medicine and

(This shall be a recognized

Rehabilitation)”

medical qualification when

granted by Amrita Vishwa

Vidyapeetham University,

Coimbatore, Tamilnadu in

respect of students being

trained at Amrita School of

Medicine AIMS, Kochi on or

after 2013).

Note to all :

1. The recognition so granted to a

Postgraduate Course shall be for a

maximum period of 5 years, upon which

it shall have to be renewed.

2. Failure to seek timely renewel of

recognition as required in sub-clause 4

shall invariably result in stoppage of

admission

to

the

concerned

Postgraduate Course.

[No. U. 12012/70/2013-ME (P-II)]

ANITA TRIPATHI, Under Secy.

vk;q"k ea=kky;

ubZ fnYYkh] 15 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 206.—dsUnzh; ljdkj] jktHkk"kk (la?k ds 'kkldh;

iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx) fu;e] 1976 (;Fkk la'kksf/r 1987) ds

fu;e 10 ds mi&fu;e (4) ds vuqlj.k esa vk;q"k ea=kky; ds

iz'kklfud fu;a=k.kk/hu fuEufyf[kr dk;kZy;] ftlds 80 izfr'kr

deZpkfj;ksa us ¯gnh dk dk;Z lk/d Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS] dks

,rn~}kjk vf/lwfpr djrh gS %

2-

¶jk"Vªh; vk;qosZn vkS"kf/ fodkl vuqla/ku laLFkku]

Hkqous'oj¸ A

[la- bZ&11018@1@2013&vk;q"k (jk-Hkk-)]

jkekuUn ehuk] mi lfpo

MINISTRY OF AYUSH

New Delhi, the 15th January, 2015

S.O. 206.—In pursuance of sub-rule (4) of Rule

10 of the Official Languages (Use for Official Purpose

of the Union) Rules,1976 (as amended in 1987), the

Central Government, hereby, notifies the following office

under the administrative control of Ministry of AYUSH,

where 80% staff have acquired the working knowledge

of Hindi :

1.

“National Research Institute of Ayurvedic Drug

Development, Bhubaneswar”.

[No. E-11018/1/2013-AYUSH (O.L.)]

RAMANAND MEENA, Dy. Secy.

'kgjh fodkl ea=kky;

ubZ fnYYkh] 23 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 207.—dsUnzh; ljdkj ,rn~}kjk 'kgjh fodkl ea=kky;

ds iz'kklfud fu;a=k.kk/hu dsUæh; yksd fuekZ.k foHkkx dk

fuEufyf[kr dk;kZy;] ftlds 80 izfr'kr ls vf/d vf/dkfj;ksa

vkSj deZpkfj;ksa us ¯gnh dk dk;Z lk/d Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS] dks

jktHkk"kk (la?k ds 'kkldh; iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx) fu;e] 1976

(;Fkk la'kksf/r 1987) ds fu;e 10 ds mi&fu;e (4) ds varxZr

vf/lwfpr djrh gS %

dk;kZy; mi egfuns'kd (mn~;ku)]

dsUæh; yksd fuekZ.k foHkkx]

dejk ua- 236 ^,* [k.M]

fuekZ.k Hkou]

ubZ fnYyh&110011

[iQk- la- bZ&11017@5@2013&fgUnh]

/esZUæ] la;qDr lfpo

MINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT

New Delhi, the 23rd January, 2015

S.O. 207.—In pursuance of sub-rule (4) of Rule

10 of the Official Language (Use for Official Purpose

of the Union) Rules,1976 (as amended in 1987), the

Central Government, hereby, notified the following office

of the Central Public Works Department, Ministry of Urban

Development, where more than 80% of officers/employees

have attained working knowledge of Hindi :

Office of the Deputy Director General

(Horicultrue),

CPWD,

Room No. 236, ‘A’ Wing,

Nirman Bhavan,

New Delhi-110011

[F. No. E-11017/5/2013-Hindi]

DHARMENDRA, Jt. Secy.

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

509

Je ,oa jkstxkj ea=kky;

ubZ fnYyh] 22 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 208-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj osLVuZ dksyfiQYMl~

fyfeVsM 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;] ukxiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 18@2011)

dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 22@01@2015 dks izkIr

gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&22012@86@2011&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º

eks- tkfgn 'kjhiQ] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

New Delhi, the 22nd January, 2015

S.O.

208.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 18/2011)

of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour

Court, Nagpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of the Junad Sub Area,

Western Coalfields Ltd., and their workmen, received by

the Central Government on 22/01/2015.

[No. L-22012/86/2011-IR(CM-II)]

Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI J. P. CHAND,

PRESIDING OFFICER,

CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

NAGPUR

Case No.CGIT/NGP/18/2011

Date: 05.01.2015.

Party No. 1

:

The Sub Area Manager,

Junad Sub Area,

Western Coalfields limited,

Post-Ukani, Tah- Wani,

Distt.-Yavatmal. (M.S.)

Versus

Party No. 2

:

The President,

Bhartiya Koyla Khadan Mazdoor

Sangh (BMS),

Wani North Area,

Pragati Nagar, Ward No.4, Tah.-Wani,

Distt.-Yavatmal (M.S.)

AWARD

(Dated: 5thJanuary, 2015)

In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of

sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) (“the Act” in

short), the Central Government has referred the industrial

dispute between the employers, in relation to the

management of Junad Sub-Area, Western coalfields

Limited and their workman, Shri S. R. Bobade, for

adjudication, as per letter No.L-22012/86/2011-IR (CM-II)

dated 14.07.2011, with the following Schedule:-

“Whether the action of the management of Junad

Sub Area of Wani Area of WCL in denying

promotion to Shri S. R. Bobade, Dumper Operator is

legal and justified?To what relief the applicant

workman is entitled?”

2.

On receipt of the reference, the parties were noticed

to file their respective statement of claim and written

statement and accordingly, the workman, Shri S. R. Bobade,

(‘the workman” in short), filed the statement of claim and

the management of Western Coalfields Limited (“Party

No. 1” in short) filed their written statement.

The case of the workman as projected in the

statement of claim is that he is working as a dumper

operator with party No.1 till date and in 2007, the party

No.1 constituted a departmental Promotion Committee,

chaired by Shri Datar, the Mine Manager, Junad Open

Cast Mine for promotion to seven posts of dumper

operator including one post reserved for ST candidate

and he (Workman) was from the general cadre and he

topped the seniority list and the post of dumper operator

falls in category “B” and is a seniority-cum-merit post and

as he fulfilled all the criteria, he was promoted as a dumper

operator vide order dated 14.09.2007and on the very date,

he submitted his joining report in the promotional post of

dumper operator and on his joining report, the competent

Officer made remark for fixation of his pay to the Billing

Clerk and signed the same and his probation was for a

period of one year and after a period of one year and

almost eleven months of the completion of the probation

period, to his surprise, party No.1 issued a letter dated

08.08.2009, cancelling his promotion and the order of

cancellation of his promotion was illegal, improper and

impermissible.

It is further pleaded by the workman that at the

relevant time, the workman was driving dumper for the

purpose of water tanker and blasting and account was

being maintained of the trips made by the dumper on

machine and even to-day, he is operating dumper for

blasting and such fact has been admitted by the party

No.1 vide their note sheet dated 09.03.2008 and the mining

department comes under the mining Manager and the

Mining Manager writes the performance of the employees

of the said department and the Mining Manager was the

Chairman Of the Departmental Promotion Committee and

as such the say of the party No.1 that he did not operate

dumper is not correct.

The further case of the workman is that he had

submitted an application on 29.05.2005 for alternative job

510

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

and on the said application, the Deputy Chief Medical

Officer had made the remark of “no driving” and opined to

send him to the Medical Board, but he was neither sent to

the Medical Board nor any alternative job was provided

to him and no action was taken by the party No1 on his

application dated 29.05.2005 and he continued with his

treatment and submitted his fitness certificates dated

09.07.2005 and 12.07.2005 on his joining his duties and the

Personnel Manager signed on the said certificates only

on 10.05.2008 and party No.1 took a period of three years

to look at the report and to take action on the same and

from such facts, it is clear that some conspiracy was

hatched by the party No.1 for cancelling his promotion

and to accommodate one ShriArun Salve, who was at serial

No. 8 in the list prepared by the D.P.C. and the Union

raised the industrial dispute as per the minutes dated

09.06.2009 and 21/25.06.2009.

The workman has prayed to quash and set aside the

order dated 08.08.2009, whereby, his promotion was

cancelled and to grant him all the consequential benefits

thereof.

3.

The party No.1 in the written statement has pleaded

inter-alia that though the dispute was raised by the

president of the union, the statement of claim has been

signed, verified and filed by the workman himself, who in

fact and in law is not a party to the dispute and so also, in

the reference made by the Government and the statement

of claim lacks basic requirement of constituting an

industrial disputeas per the Act and therefore, the same is

liable to be rejected on this ground and the union as

mentioned in the reference order of the Central Government

has not filed any document on record to indicate the

workman to be its member and that any resolution was

passed by it for espousing the dispute of the workman

and in absence of the same, no industrial dispute as defined

under section 2-k of the Act is constituted and as such,

the reference is not tenable in law.

It is further pleaded by the party No.1 that the

workman was in Excavation Cadre as dumper operator and

in excavation of mines, heavy earth moving machineries,

such as Shovel, Dozers and Dumpers etc are deployed

and the operators of these machines are highly skilled and

they require special experience for their growth and the

workman while in dumper category “C” had become

medically unfit to operate dumper due to suffering from

Epilepsy and he was recommended for alternative job and

the workman by his letter dated 29.07.2005 applied for

providing him light job, which was given to him by

protecting his pay and he was deployed as explosive van

driver in ancillary jobs and ever since he was deployed in

alternative job in 2005, he was not operating dumper till

the date of holding of the DPC on 25.08.2007 and he did

not acquire the requisite experience and skill for promotion

to the higher post, i.e., dumper operator category “B” and

when the D.P.C. for promotion to category “B” posts was

held on 25.08.2007, the fact that the workman was not

operating dumper at the relevant time was lost sight of

and in a routine manner his name was recommended for

promotion to category “B” under misconceived and

misleading circumstances and consequently, the promotion

order was issued, promoting him to the post of dumper

operator, category “B” and later on, when it was pointed

out that the workman had not been operating dumper and

was not having experience and skill for category “B” post,

the position was reviewed and his promotion order was

withdrawn vide office order dated 08.08.2009 and in view

of the withdrawal of the promotion order of the workman,

one post of category “B” became available and against

the said vacant post, ShriArun Salve was promoted and

such actions were taken with the approval of the competent

authority and the withdrawal of the promotion of the

workman as dumper operator category “B” was on valid

and reasonable grounds duly approved by the competent

authority.

The further case of the party No.1 is that D.P.C.

proceedings and recommendations are not final and they

are subject to acceptance, review and correction by the

competent authority and therefore, when the

recommendation of the D.P.C. was reviewed and modified

by the competent authority, the same cannot be termed as

invalid and improper and the management has an inherent

right to correct errors and mistakes and if the same has

been resorted to in the case of the workman, it cannot be

termed as irregular or illegal and the workman has already

been promoted to category “B” post w.e.f. 31.03.2011 and

the workman is not entitled to any relief.

4.

No rejoinder has been filed by the workman.

5.

In support of their respective claims, both the parties

have led oral evidence, besides placing reliance on

documentary evidence.

The workman has examined himself as a witness in

support of his case, whereas, party No.1 has examined

one Shri Devanand Wahane as a witness in support of the

stands taken by it.

6.

The workman in his examination-in-chief which is

on affidavit has reiterated the facts mentioned in the

statement of claim. In his cross-examination, the workman

has stated that the statement of claim has been filed by

him and not by the unionand the dispute was raised by

the union before the ALC and the union has not raised the

dispute before the Tribunal and he has not filed any

document to show that he is a member of the union and no

resolution was passed by the union to raise the dispute

on his behalf. The workman has admitted that at present,

he is working as Group “B” dumper operator and he was

promoted to the present grade on 31.03.2011 and by his

application dated 29.07.2005,Ext. M-I, he had requested

the management to give him alternative light job, due to

suffering from Epilepsy. However, the workman has denied

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

511

the suggestions that he was provided with alternative light

job of explosive driver and he did not work as dumper

operator.

7.

The evidence of the witness examined by the party

No.1 on affidavit Is more or less in the same line as taken

by the party No.1 in the written statement. In his cross-

examination, this witness has admitted that no written order

was given to the workman of giving him alternative light

job and no certificate was issued by the Medical Board

stating that the workman was not fit to work as a dumper

operator and he was not examined by any Medical Board

to find out about his fitness or otherwise to work as a

dumper operator and no document has been filed by the

management to show that the workman did not work as a

dumper operator and worked in alternative light job and

no office order was passed by the management basing on

the recommendation of the Area Medical Officer to provide

alternate light job to the workman and the management of

WCL has no evidence to show that the workman did not

work as a dumper operator and he worked in the alternate

light job.

8.

At the time of argument, it was submitted by the

learned advocate for the workman that the workman was

promoted as a dumper operator grade “B” as per the office

order dated 14.09.2007, as he topped the seniority list in

the D.P.C. held for the promotion to the posts of dumper

operator grade “B” and after one year and eleven months

of such promotion, on 08.08.2009, the promotion order

was cancelled by the party No.1 illegally and though, the

workman had applied for providing him alternate light job,

no alternate light job as given to him and it is clear from

the evidence of the witness examined by the party No.1

that the workman was never provided with any alternate

light job and he worked as dumper operator and the

cancellation of the order of promotion of the workman

was illegal, arbitrary and without any basis and the same

is not sustainable in law.

9.

Per contra, it was submitted by the learned advocate

for the party No.1 that though, the union had raised the

dispute, the workman who was not a party to the dispute

has filed the statement of claimand the statement of claim

lacks the basic requirement of an industrial dispute as per

the Act and is therefore, is liable to be rejected and no

document has been filed to show that the workman is a

member of the union and that resolution was passed by

the union to espouse the dispute of the workman and in

absence of the same, industrial dispute under Section 2(k)

of the Act is not constituted and therefore, the reference

is not tenable in law.

It was further submitted by the learned advocate for

the party No.1 that according to the JBCCI, a dumper

operator is a skilled workman and for promotion to dumper

operator grade “B” post, 5 years experience in the operation

of heavy duty highway dumper of coal haulers like

Euvclide, Macks Le turvene etc.is one of the criteria and

when the D.P.C. for promotion to category “B” posts was

held on 25.08.2007, the workman was not operating dumper

and such fact was lost sight of and in a routine manner,

the name of the workman was recommended for promotion

and consequently, the promotion order was issued,

promoting the workman to the post of dumper operator

grade “B” and later on, when it came to the knowledge of

the part No.1 that the workman was not having the

experience and skill for category “B” post, the matter was

reviewed and his promotion order was withdrawn and such

action was taken with the approval of the competent

authority and the withdrawal of the promotion order of

the workman is valid and the same cannot be termed as

illegal and therefore, the workman is not entitled to any

relief.

10.

So far the first contention raised by the learned

advocate for the party No.1 that the dispute raised is not

an industrial dispute and the statement of claim has not

been filed by the union, but the same has been filed by the

workman and therefore, the same is liable to be rejected is

concerned, on perusal of the record, it is found that the

union had raised the dispute on behalf of the workman

before the party No.1 and as party No.1 did not take any

action , the union raised the dispute before the Assistant

Labour commissioner. It is also found that the Central

Government while sending the dispute for adjudication to

this Tribunal has made the union as a party. It is well

settled that when an individual dispute is sponsored by

the union of workmen, the same becomes industrial

dispute. Section 2(k) of the Act defines an industrial

dispute. When literally construed, the definition may

include within its scope a dispute between a single

workman and his employer, because the plural, in the

context, will include the singular. In this case, as the

dispute had been raised by the union on behalf of the

workman, the dispute has become an industrial dispute.

Admittedly, the statement of claim in this case has

not been filed by the union, but the same has been filed by

the workman. However, having regard to the broad policy

which underlines the Act and in order to safeguard the

interests of the working class, the statement of claim filed

by the workman cannot be said to be illegal and therefore

to be rejected. The statement of claim has been filed by

the workman himself. If for any reason, the union, which

had raised the dispute on behalf of the workman does not

come forward to file the statement of claim and to contest

the case before the Tribunal, then the workman would

have left with no other option for asking his dispute to be

adjudicated, unless he himself comes forward and files

the statement of claim. So, the statement of claim filed by

the workman cannot be rejected.

11.

In this case, it is the admitted case by the parties

that the workman was working as a dumper operator grade

512

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

“C” and there was a D.P.C. on 25.08.2007 for promotion to

category “B” posts and the workman was promoted to

category “B”, as per the recommendation of the D.P.C., as

per office order dated 14.09.2007 and after the probation

period of one year, he worked in grade “B” dumper

operator till 08.08.2009 and by order dated 08.08.2009, his

promotion order was cancelled by the party No.1. It is also

not disputed that by office order dated 30/31.03.2011, Ext.

M-IV, the workman was again promoted to category “B”.

According to party No. 1, the workman was not

driving the dumper at the relevant time and such fact was

overlooked by the D.P.C. and later on when such fact came

to the notice of the management, the order of promotion

of the workman was cancelled.

On perusal of the materials on record including the

evidence of the witness examined by the party No.1, it is

found that party No.1 has failed to prove that the workman

was not driving the dumper prior to the holding of the

D.P.C. and he had no experience and skill to drive the

dumper. Rather, it is found from the document of the D.P.C.

that the workman was given 20 marks out of 30 marks in

performance, 28 marks out of 40 marks in trade test and 28

marks out of 30 marks in length of service. So, it cannot be

said that the fact of the workman not driving the dumper

was overlooked and his name was recommended for

promotion to grade “B” by the D.P.C. in a routine manner.

It is also clear from the record that the workman joined in

the promotional post of grade “B” on 14.09.2007 and

completed the probation period of one year and there after

worked in the said post till 08.08.2009.

From the materials on record, it is found that the

order of cancellation of the promotion of the workman

dated 08.08.2009 is illegal and in breach of the principles

of natural justice. The workman having been promoted,

the party No.1 could not have cancelled his promotion

order without giving the workman a show cause notice to

have his say in the matter. The order of cancellation of the

promotion of the workman dated 08.08.2009 is also found

to be based on unsustainable ground and therefore cannot

be sustained. Hence, it is ordered:

ORDER

The action of the management of Junad Sub Area of

Wani Area of WCL in denying promotion to Shri S. R.

Bobade, Dumper Operator is illegal and unjustified. The

order dated 08.08.2009 passed by the party No.1 cancelling

the promotion of the workman to the post of dumper

operator Grade “B” is quashed and set aside. The order of

promotion of the workman dated 14.09.2007 is restored

and he be treated as promoted to dumper operator grade

“B” w.e.f. 14.09.2007 with continuity and also with seniority

and all other consequential benefits including the financial

benefits.

J. P. CHAND, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 22 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 209-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj osLVuZ dksyfiQYMl~

fyfeVsM 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;] ukxiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 38@2011)

dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 22@01@2015 dks izkIr

gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&22012@02@2010&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º

eks- tkfgn 'kjhiQ] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 22nd January, 2015

S.O. 209.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 38/2011)

of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour

Court, Nagpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of the Pench Sub Area,

Praceya Western Coalfields Ltd., and their workmen,

received by the Central Government on 22/01/2015.

[No. L-22012/02/2010-IR(CM-II)]

Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI J. P. CHAND,

PRESIDING OFFICER,

CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

NAGPUR

Case No.CGIT/NGP/38/2011

Date: 05.01.2015.

Party No. 1

:

Chief Manager,

WCL Pench Area, Praceya,

Distt.-Chhindwara.

Versus

Party No. 2

:

Shri Bharat Singh,

General Secretary,

Sanuket Koyla Mazdoor Sangh

(ATAC)

Ekkalhar, Chhindwara.

AWARD

(Dated: 5thJanuary, 2015)

In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of

sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) (“the Act” in

short), the Central Government has referred the industrial

dispute between the employers, in relation to the

management of WCLPench Area Praceya, District-

Chhindwara and the petitioner, ShriArjun, for adjudication,

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

513

as per letter No.L-22012/02/2010-IR (CM-II) dated

23.12.2010, with the following schedule :-

“Whether the action of the management of Pench

Area of M/s. WCL in not providing compassionate

employment to ShriArjun S/o Late Mahesh, DPR,

Token No. 3874 is legal and justified? To what relief

the claimant is entitled?”

2.

On receipt of the reference, the parties were noticed

to file their respective statement of claim and written

statement and accordingly, the union, “Sanuket Koyla

Mazdoor Sangh(ATAC)” (“the union” in short) filed the

statement of claim on behalf of the petitioner, Shri Arjun,

(“the petitioner” in short) and the management of WCL

(“Party No. 1” in short) filed their written statement.

The case of the petitioner as presented by the union

in the statement of claim is that deceased Mahesh, the

father of the petitioner was working in Ganpati Mine and

he died on 27.10.2006 and Lakhania Bai, the first wife of

Mahesh had predeceased him and she had died on

17.10.1981 and the petitioner is the first child of deceased

Mahesh through his first wife, Laklina Bai and the petitioner

was born on 25.06.1973 and the name of the petitioner has

been mentioned as the son of Mahesh in Form-F and

service book of deceased Mahesh, maintained by the party

No.1 and so also, in the family card, residential certificate

and other documents and the petitioner submitted an

application on 18.12.2006 to the party No.1, for employment

as the dependent son of deceased Mahesh and on

05.04.2008, the petitioner submitted another application

to the Chief Manager, Pench Area for such appointment

and on 11.02.2009, the petitioner submitted another

application to the Chief Manager, Pench Area with copy

of the same to the Sub Area Manager requesting to provide

him employment as the dependent son of late Mahesh, as

per the provisions made in the NCWA for providing

employment to one dependent of the workman, who dies

while in service, but party No.1 did not provide any

employment to him, for which, the industrial dispute was

raised on behalf of the petitioner.

The union has prayed to direct the party No.1 to

give employment to the petitioner as the dependent son

of late Mahesh.

3.

The party No.1 in the written statement has pleaded

inter-alia that Late Mahesh was employed as a

departmental piece rated worker and posted at Chanda

Colliery w.e.f. 16.01.1979 and on 08.12.2000, he was

transferred to Ganpati Mine and continued to work as

such till his death on 27.10.2006 due to illness and as

per the declaration given by the deceased Mahesh in

different records and forms, his family consisted of

Smt. Tijiyabai(wife), Arjun, Bhim, Baldeo(the three sons)

and Sita(daughter) and deceased Mahesh had also shown

Tijiyabai as his second wife in the service excerpts

supplied to him by the management in 1987 and the

petitioner had submitted an affidavit duly notarized dated

15.11.2006 stating of his having no objection in providing

employment to his younger brother, Shri Baldeo and that

he would not raise any dispute in future regarding the

employment and in the mean time, Tijiyabai, the widow of

deceased Mahesh submitted an application for giving her

employment as the dependent of her late husband and as

per the provisions of NCWA for providing employment to

dependent, the first right goes to the widow and for

considering of giving employment to any other dependent

than the widow, consent of all the other dependents is

required and the SKMS union of Pench Area raised

industrial dispute before the ALC©, Chhindwara for

providing employment to the petitioner and it had

submitted its written comments in the matter before the

said ALC, stating therein that the petitioner did not produce

the no objection/consent of the other members of his family

and on receipt of the application dated 11.02.2009 filed by

the petitioner claiming employment, he was informed in

writing to submit the required documents, consent/no

objection of other legal heirs of late Mahesh, vide letters

dated 04.03.2009. 01.04.2009, 15.04.2009, 16.05.2009,

23.06.2009, 02.09.2009, 14.09.2009, 11.02.2011, 26.04.2011,

14.05.2011 and 09.09.2011 and letter Nos. 546 dated

14.05.2011 and 1022 dated 14.09.2011 were sent to Tijiyabai,

but the petitioner did not comply with the same and without

fulfilling the legal requirements, he rushed to the

Conciliation Officer to raise the dispute and in view of the

facts and circumstances as mention above, the petitioner

is not entitled for employment as the dependent of late

Mahesh and on the date of application , the petitioner was

already over age and on that count also, the petitioner is

not entitled for employment and therefore, the reference is

liable to be answered in favour of the management and

against the petitioner.

4.

In the rejoinder, the union on behalf of the petitioner

has pleaded that the management is not empowered to

give employment to the son of the second wife of the

deceased Mahesh, even if, filing of the affidavit by the

petitioner, till the petitioner is not declared unfit for such

employment for any reason and as Tijiyabai is the second

wife of Late Mahesh, as per the records, submission of

application by her for employment does not have any

bearing, because as per the the provisions, she is not

entitled for employment and the petitioner had filed his

first application on 18.12.2006, when his age was 33 years

and when he was not over age and the said application

was received by the management on 22.12.2006 and party

No.1 sent the letters without having any reason, as all the

required documents for employment had already been

submitted by the petitioner.

5.

In support of their respective claims, both the parties

have led oral evidence, besides placing reliance on

documentary evidence.

514

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

The union has examined the petitioner as a witness

in support of the claim, whereas, one M.B.Kumbhare has

been examined as a witness by the party No.1.

6.

In his examination-in-chief on affidavit, the petitioner

has reiterated the facts mentioned in the statement of claim

and rejoinder. However, in the cross-examination,the

petitioner has admitted that in P.S.-3 and P.S.-4 forms

submitted by the his father, the name of Tijiyabai was

mentioned as his wife and his mother and brother raised

objection to provide him(petitioner) employment as a

dependent of his father and management had written

number of letters to him for submission of consent of other

family members and as he failed to submit the consent of

other family members, he was not provided with any

employment by the management.

7.

The evidence of the witness examined by the party

No.1is also on affidavit and his evidence is more or less in

the same line of the stands taken by the party No.1 in the

written statement. In his cross-examination, this witness

has stated that at the time of the death of Mahesh, NCWA-

VII was in force and as per clause 9.5.0 of NCWA-VII,

employment is to be given to one dependent of the

workman, who dies while in service and the service excerpts

submitted by Late Mahesh, Ext. W-II, the petitioner was

shown as his eldest son and his age was 13 years in 1987.

8.

At the time of argument, it was submitted by the

union representative that Mahesh, the father of the

petitioner, who was working at Ganpati Mine as DPR died

on 27.10.2006 and the petitioner submitted his application

dated 18.12.2006 for providing employment to him as the

dependent of his deceased father under the provisions of

the NCWA and subsequently, he also submitted

applications on 05.04.2008 and 05.05.2008 for the same

and management vide letter dated 04.03.2009 asked the

petitioner to submit documents and vide letter dated

01.04.2009, the party No.1 made correspondence with the

petitioner for employment and the petitioner had submitted

all the required documents in the office of party No.1 and

on 27.07.2007, Tajiya Bai submitted an application for

providing employment to her and such application was

filed by Tajiya Bai only to deprive the petitioner from getting

employment, at the instance of others and on the date of

filing of the application on 18.12.2006, the petitioner was

33 years of age and he was not overage and the petitioner

is entitled for employment.

9.

On the other hand, it was submitted by the

representative for the party No.1 that Tijiya is admittedly

the wife of Late Mahesh, the deceased workman and she

has applied for providing her employment as per the

NCWA and the wife of a deceased workman has the

preferential right for employment and the petitioner was

asked to submit the consent of the other legal heirs of

Late Mahesh for providing employment to him, but he

failed to do the same and as such, he was not provided

with employment and as such, action of party No.1 is

justified and the workman is not entitled to any relief.

10.

For better appreciation of the matter, I think it proper

to mention the provisions as provided in Chapter-IX of

NCWA-VII for providing employment to dependent of a

workman, who dies while in service.

9.3.0-

Provision of employment to dependent.

(i)

The clauses 9.3.0, 9.4.0 & 9.5.0 of NCWA-VI

will be operative in NCWA-VII till a revised

scheme is jointly prepared keeping in view

the various verdicts of Hon’ble Supreme Court

at the earliest.

The provisions in chapter-IX of NCWA-VI are as

follows:

9.3.0.

Provision of employment to dependents.

9.3.1.

Employment would be provided to one

dependent of worker who are disable

permanently and also those who die while in

service. The provision will be implemented as

follows.

9.3.2.

Employment to one dependent of the worker

who dies while in service. In so far as female

dependents are concerned their employment/

payment of monetary compensation would be

governed by para 9.5.0.

9.3.3.

The dependent for this purpose means the

wife/husband as the case may be, unmarried

daughter, son and legally adopted

son,……………

9.5.0.

Employment/Monetary compensation to

female provision of employment/monetary

compensation to female dependents of

workman who die while in service and who

are declared medically unfit as per clause 9.4.0.

would be regulated as under;

(i)

………

(ii)

In case of death/total permanent disablement

due to causes other than mine accident and

medical unfitness under clause 9.4.0., if the

female dependent is below the age of 45 years,

she will have the option either to accept the

monetary compensation of Rs. 3000/- per

month or employment.

In case the female dependent is above 45 years of

age she will be entitled only to monetary compensation

and not to employment.

11.

After perusal of the record and taking into

consideration the submissions made by the representatives

for the parties the following undisputed facts are found:-

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

515

(i)

Mahesh, the father of the petitioner was

working as a DPR in Ganpati mine and while in

service, he died on 27.10.2006 and Laxmibai,

the first wife of Mahesh died on 17.10.1981.

(ii)

The petitioner, Arjun is the eldest son of

Mahesh through his first wife.

(iii)

Tajiyabai is the second wife of deceased

workman, Mahesh and she was shown as his

second wife in the records of the party No.1

by the deceased workman.

(iv)

After the death of Mahesh, the petitioner

submitted an affidavit dated 15.11.2006,

stating of his having no objection for giving

employment to his younger brother, Shri

Baldeo and not to raise any dispute in future

regarding employment.

(v)

The petitioner also submitted application

dated 22.12.2006 and thereafter to give him

employment as the dependent of deceased

workman, Mahesh.

(vi)

Tijiyabai submitted application dated

27.09.2007 to give her employment as

dependent of deceased workman, Mahesh.

(vii)

The petitioner was asked by party No. to

submit the relevant documents and so also

the consent of the other dependents of the

deceased workman, but the petitioner failed

to submit the consent of the other dependents

of deceased workman to provide him

employment and due to such failure, party No.1

did not proceed further to provide

employment to the petitioner.

12.

It is clear from the provisions as provided in the

NCWA-VI that employment to only one dependent of the

workman who dies while in service. It is also clear that the

wife of the deceased workman has the preference right for

such employment. In this case, Tijiyabai, the wife of the

deceased workman has also applied to provide her

employment. The petitioner though applied for

employment, he failed to submit the consent of other

dependents including Tijiyabai to give him employment

as the dependent of the deceased workman. So, the action

of the party No. in not providing employment to the

petitioner, Arjun is justified. Hence, it is ordered:

ORDER

The action of the management of Pench Area of

M/s. WCL in not providing compassionate employment to

ShriArjun S/o Late Mahesh, DPR, Token No. 3874 is legal

and justified. The petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

J. P. CHAND, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 22 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 210-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ,l- lh- lh-

,y- 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;] xksnkojh[kUuh ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

46@2013) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 22@01@2015

dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&22013@01@2015&vkbZvkj (lh&II)º

eks- tkfgn 'kjhiQ] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 22nd January, 2015

S.O. 210.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 46/2013)

of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour

Court, Godavarikhani as shown in the Annexure in the

Industrial Dispute between the management of the SCCL,

and their workmen, received by the Central Government

on 22/01/2015.

[No. L-22013/1/2015-IR(C-II)]

Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN,

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR

COURT-CUM-VI ADDL. DISTRICT &

SESSIONS COURT, GODAVARIKHANI

Present :

Sri G. V. Krishnaiah, Chairman-cum-

Presiding Officer

Wednesday, the 3rd day of December, 2014

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 46 OF 2013

Between :

Thokala Srikanth,

S/o. Thirupathi, Age: 25 Years,

Occ: Ex-Badli Coal Filler,

E.C.No. 2372461, RK-1A Incline,

R/o H.No. 7-2-533/209, Ganga Nagar,

Godavarikhani

Post, Karimnagar District.

...Petitioner

And

1. The Colliery Manager,

RK.IA Incline, SCCo.Ltd.,

Mandamarri Area,

Dist.Adilabad.

2. The General Manager,

S.C. Co. Ltd., Mandamarri Area,

Mandamarri Post, Dist.Adilabad.

516

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

3. The Chairman & Managing Director,

S.C. Co. Ltd.,

Post : Kothagudem, Dist. Khammam.

...Respondents

This Industrial Dispute petition coming on before

me for final hearing in the presence of Sri N.Kishan Rao,

Advocate for the Petitioner and of Sri D.Krishna Murthy,

Advocate for the respondents and the matter having stood

over before me for consideration till this date, the Court

passed the following:-

AWARD

1.

The allegations in this petition are:-

Petitioner was appointed as Badli Coal Filler in the

place of his father under dependent employment scheme

vide order dt. 16-08-2006 and underwent training upto

February, 2007. He was posted to work under control of

respondent No. 1 vide Office order dt. 15-02-2007.

Respondent engaged the petitioner for coal filling against

the absentee vacancies of regular coal fillers. Petitioner

discharged his duties to the satisfaction of his superiors

but the atmosphere and water did not suit the petitioner,

due to coal filling of underground work petitioner suffered

severe ill-health and not attended his work. But R-1 without

considering the facts and ill-health of the petitioner issued

charge sheet dt. 07-01-2008 under office standing orders

25.25 alleging habitual absence from duty without

sufficient cause for putting in only 40 musters during the

year 2007. Petitioner submitted his explanation about his

ill-health but the enquiry was conducted. Petitioner

participated in the enquiry and pleaded his ill-health and

assured that he will be regular in future. Enquiry was not

conducted fairly and properly and therefore enquiry may

be held invalid. From November, 2006 till February, 2007

petitioner underwent MVTC training. He was shown

coal filling duty on May, 2007 and issued identity card

on 21-05-2007. He suffered fever and body pains from

July, 2007 and underwent treatment in SCCL dispensaries

frequently. Without considering the facts, second

respondent dismissed him from service vide office order

dt. 17-11-2009 with effect from 27-11-2009. The said

dismissal is highly disproportionate and unfair labour

practice and amounts to victimization. Hence the petitioner

may be reinstated into service with continuity of service

and all attendant benefits and full back wages.

2.

Respondent No. 2 filed counter and respondent

No. 1 and 3 filed adoption memo adopting the counter of

R-2 and contended that the petitioner’s attendance to

duties as follows:

Sl.No.

Year

No. of musters.

1.

2006

70

2.

2007

106

3.

2008

41

4.

2009

48

Since attendance of the petitioner was poor he was

given charge sheet dt. 20-01-2009 and enquiry was

conducted on 05-02-2009. Petitioner was given ample

opportunity and he participated in the enquiry. Petitioner

was counseled for the first time for improving attendance

on 06-02-2009, and was put on observation for a period of

three months. On 31-03-2009 petitioner was given show cause

notice enclosing the enquiry report. Petitioner received show

cause notice on 09-04-2009 and submitted explanation and

assured to attend duties regularly. Therefore petitioner was

once again counseled on 15-07-2009 and was put on one

month observation time from 01-08-2009 to improve his

attendance. But petitioner failed to attend duties during

August, 2009. He was put on observation for two months

from 01-09-2009. Petitioner attended for three days in

September and did not attend in October. Therefore

petitioner was dismissed from service on 17-11-2009 with

effect from 27-11-2009. Petitioner never worked for 190

musters which is the minimum. Respondents followed the

procedure with regard to conducting enquiry and gave

ample opportunity to men himself. Petitioner kept quiet

for four years and now raised dispute which is barred by

limitation under section 2A(3) of Industrial Disputes

Amendment Act, 2010. Therefore petition may be

dismissed.

3.

During the course of enquiry petitioner filed memo

u/s. 11-A of Industrial Dispute Act that he is not disputing

the validity of departmental enquiry.

4.

During the course of hearing, Ex.M-1 to M-16 are

marked on behalf of respondent/management. No oral or

documentary evidence adduced on behalf of the petitioner.

5.

Now the point for consideration is whether the

petitioner can be reinstated into service?

6.

This is a case where petitioner was irregular to his

duties right from tbe beginning and in the year 2008 he

attended for only 40 days. A Departmental enquiry was

held on 05-02-2009. Petitioner pleaded in the enquiry that

because of illness he could not attend and herein after he

will be regular. Therefore he was put under observation

for three months from 05-03-2009 to 05-05-2009 but his

attendance was irregular, then he was put on observation

for another two periods but his attendance was quite

irregular. Already Management has given sufficient

opportunity to the petitioner to improve his attendance.

The petitioner was dismissed from service with effect from

27-11-2009 vide order dt. 17-11-2009. He filed this Industrial

Dispute with a delay of four years. Respondents have

taken the plea that under the amendment of 2010 to the

I.D., Act an industrial dispute has to be raised within three

years of dismissal or discharge. However present I.D can

not be dismissed on that ground because the petitioner

was dismissed from service even prior to the coming into

force of the Management. Under these circumstances

though, the petition can not be dismissed on the ground

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

517

of limitation, there appear to be no grounds to interfere

with the order passed by the Management dismissing the

petitioner from service because of the long rope given to

the petitioner before such dismissal.

7.

Accordingly petition is dismissed.

G. V. KRISHNAIAH, Chairman-cum-Presiding Officer

Appendix of Evidence

Witnesses Examined

For workman :

For Management :

-Nil-

-Nil-

EXHIBITS

For workman :

-Nil-

For Management :

Ex.M-1

Dt.

20-01-2009

Charge sheet o/copy

Ex.M-2

Dt.

04-02-2009

Ack., to charge sheet

Ex.M-3

Dt.

04-02-2009

Enquiry notice

Ex.M-4

Dt.

05-02-2009

Explanation to the charge sheet

Ex.M-5

Dt.

05-02-2009

Enquiry proceedings (along

with enquiry material)

Ex.M-6

Dt.

12-02-2009

Enquiry report

Ex.M-7

Dt.

06-02-2009

Undertaking letter/observation

period letter signed by the

petitioner before counseling

member

Ex.M-8

Dt.

31-03-2009

Show-cause notice

Ex.M-9

Dt.

09-04-2009

Ack., to show-cause notice

Ex.M-10 Dt.

21-05-2009

Reply of petitioner to the

show-cause notice

Ex.M-11 Dt.

03-07-2009

Counseling letter issued to the

petitioner

Ex.M-12 Dt.

15-07-2009

Undertaking 2nd observation

period letter signed by the

petitioner and others during

2nd counseling.

Ex.M-13 Dt.

02-08-2009

Letter issued to the petitioner

advising him to improve

attendance performance

Ex.M-14 Dt.

09-09-2009

Ack., to letter of improvement

of attendance

Ex.M-15 Dt.

11-10-2009

Letter issued to the petitioner

to improve attendance/

performance and its ack.,

Ex.M-16 Dt.

17-11-2009

Dismissal order o/copy.

ubZ fnYyh] 22 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 211-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj lh- ih- MCY;w-

Mh- 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; ua- 2] ubZ fnYyh ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

15@2007) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 22@01@2015

dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&42012@198@2005&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º

eks- tkfgn 'kjhiQ] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 22nd January, 2015

S.O. 211.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 15/2007)

of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court No. 2, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure,

in the Industrial Dispute between the management of the

CPWD, and their workmen, received by the Central

Government on 22/01/2015.

[No. L-42012/198/2005-IR(CM-II)]

Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT - II,

DELHI

Present : Shri Harbansh Kumar Saxena

ID No. 15/2007

Smt. Sunita Devi,

W/o Sh. Uttam Chand , Work Assistant,

C/o All India CPWD (MRM),

Karamchari Sangathan (Reg.)

4823, Balbir Nagar Extension,

Gali No. 13, Shahdra,

Delhi-110032.

...Workman

Versus

The Superintending Engineer

(Elect) Coord. Circle,

CPWD, East Block ,

R. K. Puram, New Delhi.

...Management

AWARD

The Central Government in the Ministry of Labour

vide notification No. L-42012/198/2005(IR(CM-II)) dated

12.06.2007 referred the following industrial Dispute to this

tribunal for adjudication :-

“Whether the demand of the Union in the matter of

payment of arrears w.e.f. 3.06.1982 to 23.12.1992 for

518

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

the post of enquiry clerk i.e. 260-400/950-1500 in

respect of the workman Sh. Uttam Chand from the

management of CPWD i.e. Superintending Engineer

Electrical Coordination Circle CPWD East Block ,

R.K. Puram , New Delhi is legal and justified? If not,

to what relief the workman is entitled and from which

date?”

On 22.06.07 reference was received in this tribunal.

Which was register as I.D No. 15/2007 and claimant was

called upon to file claim statement with in fifteen days

from date of service of notice. Which was required to be

accompanied with relevant documents and list of

witnesses.

When notice to workman sent to his residential

address than his wife Sh. Sunita Devi came in the court on

30.09.2008 . She informed that his husband already died

on 30.08.2005 .

After service of notice Smt. Sunita Devi W/o

workman/claimant filed claim statement on 27.09.2007 on

behalf of workman. Wherein she stated as follows:-

1.

That the workman who had filed this case before the

Hon’ble Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) had been

died on 30.12.2005 and hence his wife is the applicant in

this case.

2.

That all the terminal benefits of the deceased

workman have been paid to Smt. Sunita who is wife of the

workman and hence also the legal heir of the workman.

3.

That my husband late Sh. Uttam Chand was working

as Work Assistant under the Executive Engineer, Dr. RML

Hospital Division, CPWD , New Delhi before his death.

4.

That my husband late Sh. Uttam Chand had been

employed on muster-roll as Beldar w.e.f. 30.06.1982 under

‘B’ division of CPWD at New Delhi. Photocopy of proof is

enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure-1.

5.

That he was transferred to E Division of CPWD w.e.f .

1.09.85 when he was on muster-roll Beldar but he was

performing the duties of Enquiry Clerk under the said

Division at 1/E , Teen Murti House, New Delhi. Photocopy

of proof is enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure-II.

6.

That as per judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court,

he had been paid arrears of equal pay of equal work for the

post of Beldar instead he was performing the duties of

Enquiry clerk.

7.

That the services of my late husband were

regularized w.e.f. 24.12.92 as Beldar but upon

implementation of Arbitration Award, he had been paid

the arrears of wages of the post Enquiry Clerk as he was

performing the duties of Enquiry Clerk in the pay scale of

Rs. 950-1500/3050-4590 w.e.f. 24.12.92.

8.

That beside above, he was entitled for the pay scale

of Rs. 260-400- 950-1500 w.e.f. 30.06.82 as had been

performing the duty of Enquiry clerk from his initial

appointment.

9.

That as per the recommendations of Arbitration

Award, 1988, pay scale of Rs. 260-400/950-1500 was

awarded in favour the muster-roll/work charged Beldar

from their initial date of appointment who had performed

the duties of Enquiry Clerk.

10.

That the management of CPWD had challenged the

recommendations of Arbitration Award , 1988 in the

Hon’ble High court of Delhi and Hon’ble High Court had

modified the said award on 28.1.92 and Hon’ble Court had

declared the Muster-roll category as null and void as there

was no reference before the Arbitration Board for muster-

roll categories of the CPWD.

11.

That in view of the para 10 above, it was become

necessary for the workman to make reference for his cause

hence he filed the application before the appropriate forum

and on the recommendations of the forum the , M/o Labour

has issued the following reference.

“Whether the demand of the Union in the matter of

payment of arrears w.e.f. 3.6.1982 to 23.12.92 in

respect of the workman Sh. Uttam Chand from the

management of CPWD i.e. Superintending Engineer

Electrical Coordination Circle, CPWD , East Block,

R. K. Puram , New Delhi is legal and justified? If not,

to what relief the workman is entitled and from which

date”.

12.

That in view of the above facts, the applicant is

entitled to claim the earned wages of her late husband.

13.

That my late husband had been active member and

office Bearer of the All India CPWD (MRM) Karamchari

Sangthan till his death.

14.

That hence I am authorizing the General Secretary,

All India CPWD (MRM) Karamchari Sangthan in writing

to take up my case after death of my husband till its

finalization.

15.

That I am also submitting application for Legal

Representative of the workman sedately with this claim

application.

Prayer

In view of the above facts and circumstances of the

case, the applicant most humbly and respectfully prays

for the following among other relief:-

(i)

That I am entitled to receive the arrears of

earned wages of my late husband late Sh.

Uttam Chand w.e.f . 3.6.82 to 23.12.92 in the

pay scale of Rs. 260-400/950-1500 and all other

consequential benefits including terminal

benefits .

(ii)

Any other relief which may kindly be deemed

fit and proper to meet the end of justice.

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

519

Subsequently application for substitution L.Rs .of

deceased workman has been moved which was allowed

on 03.09.2009 and Smt. Sunita Devi was substituted as L.R

of his deceased husband.

Against Statement of Claim Management filed

Written Statement on 30.11.2007. Wherein it stated as

follows:-

Most Respectfully Showeth:-

PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS :

1.

That the statement of the worker is not maintainable

and liable to be dismissed with a ground of Suppressio-

vari and Suggesssio-falsi. The worker has not approached

his Hon’ble Court with clean hands.

2.

That the statement of the worker is also not

maintainable and liable to be dismissed as the same is

devoid of any cause of action.

PRELIMINARY SUBMISSIONS :

(i)

The deceased Uttam Chand was initially

appointed as Beldar on Muster Roll on

30.06.1982 and was transferred to Executive

Engineer “E” Division, CPWD , N. Delhi as a

Muster Roll Beldar. The claim of the applicant

on behalf of the deceased that he had

performed duty as Enquiry Clerk under “E”

division is not admissible as per Executive

Engineer “E” Division officer letter No. 54(4) /

ED /2007/2920 dt. 02.11.2007, which is self –

explanatory. Vide that letter it has been cleared

that there is no such record in the said Division

showing that Uttam Chand , work assistant

had performed duty of Enquiry Clerk. Hence

the claim of the applicant is liable to be

rejected. Copy of the letter dt. 02.11.2007 is

enclosed herewith as Annexure –R 1.

Parawise Reply :

1-4.

That the contents of para -1 to 4 of the statement of

claim need no reply being matter of record.

5.

That with regard to the contents of para -5 of the

Statement of Claim it is respectfully submitted that the

deceased Uttam Chand was initially appointed Beldar on

Muster Roll on 30.06.1982 and was transferred to Executive

Engineer “E” Division , CPWD , N. Delhi as Muster Roll

Beldar. The claim of the applicant on behalf of the deceased

that he had performed duty as Enquiry clerk under “E”

division is not admissible as per Executive Engineer “E”

Division officer 54(4) /ED /2007/2920 dt.02.11.2007, which

is self –explanatory. Vide that letter it has been cleared

that there is no such record in the said Division showing

that Uttam Chand , work assistant had performed duty of

Enquiry Clerk. Hence the claim of the applicant is liable to

be rejected. Copy of the letter dt. 02.11.2007 is enclosed

herewith as Annexure –R 1.

6.

That the contents of para -6 of the statement of

claim are wrong hence vehemently denied. In this regard

whatever is stated in the preceding para is reiterated and

applicant is not entitled to pay any arrear of equal pay for

equal work, as he was initially appointed on Muster Roll

as Beldar.

7.

That in reply to the averment of para -7 of the

statement of claim nothing is admitted except what has

been substantiated by records and whatever is stated in

preceding para No. 5 is reiterated.

8.

That the contents of para -8 of the statement of

claim are wrong hence vehemently denied and whatever

is stated in the para -5 is reiterated.

9.

That the contents of para-9 of the statement of claim

are wrong hence vehemently denied since the deceased

was appointed initially as Beldar.

10.

That the contents of para -10 of the statement of

claim need no reply being matter of record.

11-12 That the contents of para-11 and 12 of the statement

of claim are wrong hence vehemently denied. The demand

of Union for payment of arrears w.e.f. 03.06.82 to 23.12.92

is not justified and no payment of arrears is due.

13.

That the contents of para 13 of the statement of

claim need no comments being irrelevant.

14.

That the contents of para 14 of the of the statement

of claim need no comment being irrelevant .

15.

That the contents of para 15 of the statement of

claim need no comment.

16.

That the para under reply are the prayers made before

this Hon’ble court and is liable to be dismissed with costs.

In Reply to the written statement on the behalf of

the workman Smt. Sunita Devi w/o Workman filed rejoinder

on 20.03.2008. Wherein she stated as follows:-

1-4

Need no reply being matters of record.

5.

That the contention of management is wrong,

incorrect, misleading , misrepresentation of facts so denied

and disputed. It is submitted that late Uttam Chand was

regularized on the same post and place and continued to

be designated as Beldar but discharging the duties of

Enquiry Clerk, therefore, my husband had been working

on the same post and place before and after regularization

of services. It is further submitted that my husband had

got wages for working as Enquiry Clerk for the period

from date of regularization and date of promotion as Work

Assistant in accordance with the order of Director General

of Work, CPWD dated 09.09.99. Copy of proof of payment

received as Enquiry Clerk is enclosed and marked as

Annexure –A.

6.

That the contention of management is wrong so

denied and disputed. The submission of workman is

restated and reaffirmed.

520

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

7.

That the contention of management is wrong so

denied and disputed. It is submitted that “E” Division has

made the payment and deputed on duty. The officers who

have extracted work from my husband has also certified

that late Uttam Chand had performed duties of Enquiry

Clerk. Copy of said proof is already enclosed with the

main application as Annexure-II . Late Uttam Chand was

paid wages of enquiry clerk for the period of workcharged

establishment and not for the period of muster roll which

is illegal and unjustified.

8.

That the contention of management is wrong,

incorrect, misrepresentation of facts so denied and

disputed. It is submitted that no duty can be called as

additional work. In fact, my husband had performed the

said duties as mentioned in the letter of Executive Engineer,

E Division as his routine duties.

9.

That the contention of management is wrong so

denied and disputed. The submission of workman is

restated and reaffirmed.

10.

Needs no reply being matter of record.

11-12.That the contention of management is wrong so

denied and disputed. The submission of workman is

restated and reaffirmed.

13-14.Need no reply being matters of records.

15.

That the contention of management is wrong so

denied and disputed. The submission of workman is

restated and reaffirmed.

In view of above submissions, most humbly and

respectfully it is prayed that this Hon’ble Tribunal may

kindly be pleased to set aside the written statement of

management in the interest and fair play.

On 19.8.2010 my Ld. Predecessor passed order on

order sheet that question of determination are sufficient

for adjudication and no need to frame any issue more and

fixed 2.11.2010 for workman evidence.

Smt. Sunita Devi W/oWorkman in support claim filed

her affidavit on 9.11.2011. Where-in she stated as follows:-

1.

That I am legal heir of late Uttam Chand and I had

received all the terminal benefits in respect of late Uttam

Chand and I am receiving family pension also.

2.

That The case was filed by my late husband before

the conciliation officer and same has continued further by

me consequent upon his death.

3.

That as per Arbitration Award 1988, Beldars who

had worked as Lab. Assistant/Enquiry Clerk were given

the wages of said posts in CPWD/PWD.

4.

ThatUttam Chand and similarly situated Beldar had

been working on same basis on muster roll as well as

workcharged establishment.

5.

That the reference for adjudication has to be properly

referred because as per Arbitration Award , there was no

reference of Muster roll and hence the present application.

6.

That I was also a union member and office bearer

and new late Uttam Chand very closely and am well

conversant with the case.

7.

That I had personally found late Uttam Chand

discharging his duties as Enquiry Clerk.

8.

That Uttam Chand was legally and rightfully entitled

to receive the wages of Enquiry Clerk and his wife legal

heir is entitled to receive the same.

Smt. Sunita Devi W/o Workman tendered her

affidavit on 8.11.2012 . Her statement of tendering of

affidavit is as follows:-

I tender in evidence my affidavit by way of

examination in chief. It is signed by me at points A and B

and is correct. The same is Ex. WW1/A . It be read as part

of my statement.

She was cross-examined on same day. Her cross-

examination is as follows:-

XXXXX:- By Sh. K.C Dubey , Ld. A/R for the management.

Since Uttam Chand was my husband I am personally

aware of what he was doing and had seen him doing work

as enquiry clerk. I personally was not working there. I

personally was not the member of the Union but my

husband was the member. It is wrong to suggest that my

husband Uttam Chand was never working as enquiry clerk

nor I had ever seen him working as such nor the

management officer ever asked him by way of any letter or

correspondence to work as such. It is incorrect to suggest

that my husband was not working in the office of the

management at the relevant period. I cannot produce any

letter or correspondence whereby the management had

asked my husband to work as enquiry clerk in his office at

the relevant period.

Smt. Sunita Devi, W/o Workman in support of her

case filed affidavit of WW2. Sh. Satish Kumar. Wherein

he stated as follows:-

1.

That I am working as Work Assistant in R Division,

CPWD, New Delhi and am well conversant with the case

of late Uttam Chand.

2.

That I was also appointed as Beldar initially and got

appointment as Work Assistant under Direct Recruitment

quota.

3.

That as per Arbitration Award 1988, Beldars who

had worked as Lad. Assistant/Enquiry Clerk were given

the wages of said posts in CPWD/PWD.

4.

That Uttam Chand and similarly situated Beldar had

been working on same basis on muster roll as well as

workcharged establishment.

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

521

5.

That the reference for adjudication has to be properly

referred because as per Arbitration Award, there was no

reference of Muster roll and hence the present application.

6.

That I was also a union member and office bearer

and new late Uttam Chand very closely and am well

conversant with the case.

7.

That I had personally found late Uttam Chand

discharging his duties as Enquiry Clerk.

8.

ThatUttam Chand was legally and rightfully entitle

to receive the wage of Enquiry Clerk and his wife legal

heir is entitled to receive the same.

Smt. Sunita Devi, W/o Workman tendered his

affidavit on 8.11.2012. His statement of tendering of

affidavit is as follows:-

I tender in evidence my affidavit by way of

examination –in –chief . It is signed by me at point A and B

and is correct. The same is Ex. WW2/A. It be read as part

of my statement.

He was cross-examined on same day. His cross-

examination is as follows:-

XXXXXX:- By Sh. K.C Dubey , Ld. A/R for the

management.

I was initially appointed as Baildar in the office of

the management and after promotion I am working as Work

Asstt. In the same office. I am a regular employee. It is

incorrect to suggest that Uttam Chand was never

regularized and my statement made in para 3of my affidavit

is wrong. It is wrong to suggest that my information

regarding Uttam Chand that he got wages of enquiry clerk

for the period work charged establishment is incorrect.

Management in support of its case filed affidavit of

MW1 Sh. Munna Lal on 18.04.2013. Wherein he stated as

follows:-

1.

That I am well conversant with the facts and

circumstances of the case matter and competent to swear

this affidavit.

2.

That the deceased husband of claimant, Sh. Uttam

Chand was a Beldar on mustrol roll and working as Work

Assistant. Vide this office letter No. 3/LHD/Court /07/1459,

dated 26.10.2007 the status of Late Sh. Uttam Chand was

enquired from the concerned office. In reply to the same,

the Executive Engineer vide their letter No. 54 (G)/EM/

2007/2920, date 02.11.2007, has clarified that no record

with regard to working of Late Sh. Uttam Chand as typing,

dispatch of salary bill, correspondence etc. is available in

the office.

3.

That the genuineness of the certificate issued by

Sh. M. C, Gupta, Asst. Eng. and Sh. R. P. Sharma, Asst.

Eng. could not be ascertained as they are not working

therein. A copy of letter dated 02.11.2007 are exhibited

and marked as PW1/1.

4.

That the working of Late Sh. Uttam Chand can only

be ascertained from the enteries of his service book. A

copy of letter dated 02.11.2007 are exhibited and marked

as PW1/1.

Management in support of its case filed

Supplementary affidavit of MW1 Sh. Munna Lal on

13.11.2013. Wherein it stated as follows:-

1.

That I am well conversant with the facts and

circumstances of the case matter and competent to swear

the affidavit.

2.

That I state that the claimant was Beldar and after

passing the trade test he became skilled workman. As per

rule a skilled workman is required to pass another trade

test for being appointed as ‘Work Assistant’. The claimant

had passed the said two trade tests and was working as

“Work Assistant” at RML Hospital at the time of his death.

The claimant was regularized as work charge employee

from the Muster Roll Beldar w.e.f . 24.12.1992. His service

book was maintained and the same is exhibited as Ex. MW-

1/1 (colly).

3.

That I state that there are four cadres of employees

in CPWD. These are 1. Engineering Staff, 2. Ministerial

Staff (LDC, UDC, and Office Superintendant ), 3.Work

Charge Establishment (Beldar, Carpenter, Mason etc.) and

4. Regular classified (Work Asst. ,Sewer-man, Sweeper

etc. ) . It may be noted that the enquiry clerk falls under the

category of Ministerial Staff. At the moment there is no

such post . Earlier the most senior LDC was appointed as

Enquiry Clerk, after imparting specific training for the same.

The claimant being in the category of work charge

Establishment and later on in the Regular Classified, cannot

claim to have worked at the post of Enquiry Clerk. A copy

of recruitment rules, rules for trade tests and the categories

in the work charge establishment are annexed herein and

exhibited as Ex. MW-1/2, MW-1/3 and MW-1/4

respectively.

4.

That I state that A.E . (Assistant Engineer) is not

appointing authority for the post of “Enquiry Clerk”. It is

the Superintending Engineer Coordination who is the

appointing authority for the post of Enquiry Clerk.

Obviously it is this authority which is empowered even to

assign the duties of Enquiry Clerk to an eligible person.

The record shows that no appointment letter was issued

to the claimant for the post of Enquiry Clerk by any

competent authority and so he cannot claim the benefits

of that post in any manner whatsoever. The letter dated

26.10.2007 and testimonials (Colly) and 02.11.2007 are

exhibited as:-

5.

Ex. MW-1/5 (colly and MW-1/6 respectively.

However from 24.12.92 applicant has been paid due

payment from the date when he was appointed by the

competent authority to discharge the Service of enquiry

clerk (photo copy of Service Book attached).

522

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

MWI tendered his affidavit on 3.06.2013. His

statement of tendering of affidavit is as follows:-

I tender my affidavit as evidence, which is Ex. MW1/

A .Alongwith this affidavit, I rely on letters dated

02.11.2007 and 56.10.2007, which documents are Ex. MW1/

1 to Ex. MW1/2 . These documents may be read in support

of my affidavit. I would like to produce copies of service

record of the claimant on the next date. My further

examination may be deferred. At the request of the witness,

his further examination is deferred.

Thereafter, MW1 filed supplementary affidavit on

13.11.2013. Which was tendered on 13.11.13. His statement

of tendering of affidavit is as follows:-

I have filed my supplementary affidavit as Exhibit

MW1/B. I am also filing on record Exhibit MW1/1colly the

service record of late Uttam Chand. I am also submitting

the recruitment rules as Ex. MW1/B. Thereafter I am

submitting on record the rules for trade test as MW1/3. I

have also placed on record. The categories in the work

charge as Ex. MW1/4. I am placing on record letter dated

16.10.2007 and two testimonials as Ex. MW1/5 (Colly). I

am also placing on record letter 2.11.2007 as Ex. MW1/6.

He was cross-examined on the same day and his

Cross-examination is as follows:-

XXXX:- by Satish Kumar, Ld. A/R for the workman.

I am fully satisfied and aware of the contents of the

documents with my affidavit placed on record. As per

record he passed trade test for the post of ‘Assistant

Painter”. While he was working as ‘Beldar’ on 28.2.1995.

As per record thought he passed the trade test he was not

posted at the post of “Assistant Painter”.

Q.

Whether contents of para 3of your affidavit are

correct or not?

A. Yes, Correct.

Worker was paid as per office order dtd 6.4.2001.

Pay scale of Enquiry clerk for a period w.e.f. 24.12.92.

Aforesaid was made after his regularization. It is correct

that workman was a Beldar when aforesaid payment was

made to him. Workman was Beldar as well as Mustroll

period and work charge period. Duty of Beldar is to help

skill workman/semi skill . It is incorrect to suggest that

workman only performed duty of Enquiry Clerk only.

Q.

Whether certificate issued by AE relating to work

performance of Enquiry clerk by workman was not believed

and relied upon by you. Can you mention any reason.

A.

As Ex. Engineer informed vide letter dtd. 2.11.2007

inform that workman never perform. There is no record to

show that workman the duty of inquiry clerk. He also

mention the testimonial issue by A.E could not be

ascertained as Mr. M. C Gupta and Mr. R. P. Sharma A.

Engineer were not working in this Division. I cannot say

aforesaid Engineer are still working or not. It is correct

that no verification were sought from A.E relating to

certificate issued by them reason is Ex. Engineer is Senior

to them.

Q.

How many Beldars were working ?

A.

I cannot say only working division may is state about

it. It may be confirmed from correspondence from working

Division.

Q.

Whether any other Beldar has been paid pay scale

of Enquiry clerk except the workman.

A.

In my knowledge only present workman was paid

payment of Enquiry.

On aforesaid question correspondence shall be made

by me in reply of correspondence shall be intimated to the

tribunal.

It is incorrect to suggest that my affidavit is false

and I am deposing falsely.

I have heard the arguments of Ld. A/Rs for the

parties at length on 8.12.2014. To appreciate the

contentions and counter contentions of Ld.A/Rs for the

parties. I perused the pleadings of claim statement , written

statement and rejoinder as well as questions of

determination mentioned in the schedule of reference

including evidence of parties.

It is relevant to mention here the schedule of

reference containing questions of determination . Which

are as follows:-

“Whether the demand of the Union in the matter of

payment of arrears w.e.f. 3.06.1982 to 23.12.1992 for

the post of enquiry clerk i.e. 260-400/950-1500 in

respect of the workman Sh. Uttam Chand from the

management of CPWD i.e. Superintending Engineer

Electrical Coordination Circle CPWD East Block ,

R.K. Puram , New Delhi is legal and justified? If not,

to what relief the workman is entitled and from which

date?”

Perusal of claim statement makes it crystal clear that

it contains contents of para 5 and prayer as follows:-

Para 5 of claim statement

“That he was transferred to E Division of CPWD

w.e.f. 1.09.85 . When he was on muster –roll Beldar

but he was performing the duties of enquiry clerk

under the said devision at 1/E, Teen MurtiHouse ,

New Delhi , Photo copy of proof is enclosed herewith

and marked as Annexure –II.”

Prayer

In view of the above facts and circumstances of the

case, the applicant most humbly and respectfully prays

for the following among other relief:-

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

523

(i)

That I am entitled to receive the arrears of

earned wages of my late husband late Sh.

Uttam Chand w.e.f . 3.6.82 to 23.12.92 in the

pay scale of Rs. 260-400/950-1500 and all other

consequential benefits including terminal

benefits .

(ii)

Any other relief which may kindly be deemed

fit and proper to meet the end of justice.

Annexure-II issued by Sh. R.P. Sharma I/E , Sub-

division CPWD , Teen Murti House , N.D. Contains as

follows:-

This is to certify that Sh. Uttam Chand, S/o Sh.

ShandkarDass, Beldar has been working as Enquiry Clerk

in this Sub-Division since 1.9.1985 to 31.01.1990. He has

been attending to the duties of Enquiry clerk in addition

to his own duties . He performed his duties to the

satisfaction of all concerned.

He bears good moral character to best of my

knowledge and belief.

(R. P. SHARMA )

Assistant Engineer

I/E Sub-Division CPWD,

Teen Murti House, New Delhi.

Annexure –II issued by Sh. M.C Gupta Assistant

Engineer , NDZIV, CPWD, East Block I , Level III, R.K.

contains as follows:-

It is to certify that Sh. Uttam Chand S/o Sh. Shankar

Dass, Beldar attached with Sub-Division No.1 during my

tenure there as Asstt. Engineer, Sub Division I, ‘E’ Division,

C.P.W.D , New Delhi from Feb, 1990 to June, 1992 has been

attending to all works of typing ,preparation of pay bills,

correspondence Diary, Despatch and other duties of

Enquiry Clerk including issue of stores etc., besides his

routine duties of Beldar. It is to the best of my knowledge

and belief.

(M. C. GUPTA)

Assistant Engineer,

NDZIV, C.P.W.D.,

East Block 1, Level III,

R. K. Puram, New Delhi-110066,

Tel No. 6175819(0) 6523990(R)

It is further relevant to mention here that my Ld.

Predecessor on 19.08.2010 treated questions of

determination of schedule of reference as issues.

Perusal of question of determination No.1makes it

crystal clear that burden to prove it lies on wife of workman.

To discharge her burden proof w/o workman filed

her affidavit dated 29.8.2011 on 9.11.2011 and tendered it

on 8.11.12 as WW1. She was cross –examined on same

day . In her corroborative evidence she filed affidavit of

Sh. Satish Kumar. Who tendered his affidavit on 8.11.2012.

He was also cross-examined on the same day.

Prayer made by Smt. Sunita Devi w/o Workman in

clause (i) of prayer mentioned in claim statement is beyond

pleadings of para5 of claim statement. Which cannot be

granted as per legal provisions of relevant principles of

law. In this background prayer which is confined upto

pleadings can be granted in case it is not rebutted by

management evidence.

In the instant case management evidence is not

sufficient to rebutt the workman evidence on the point of

prayer confined upto pleading of claim statement.

On the basis of aforesaid discussion I am of

considered view that question of determination No.1 is

liable to be partly decided in favour of deceased workman.

Which is accordingly decided.

Reference is liable to be decided in favour of

deceased workman and against management.Which is

accordingly decided. Management is directed to pay the

arrears of pay to Smt. Sunita Devi w/o Workman within a

period of two months after expiry of period of available

remedy against award.

Award is accordingly passed.

Dated:-07/01/2015

HARBANSH KUMAR SAXENA, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 22 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 212-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj ch- ch- ,e-

ch- 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; ua- 2] p.Mhx<+ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

1348@2008) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks

22@01@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&23012@4@2007&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º

eks- tkfgn 'kjhiQ] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 22nd January, 2015

S.O. 212.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 1348/

2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court No. 2, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure

in the Industrial Dispute between the management of the

Bhakra Beas Management Board, and their workmen,

received by the Central Government on 22/01/2015.

[No. L-23012/4/2007-IR(CM-II)]

Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer

524

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,

CHANDIGARH

Present: Sri KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer.

Case No. I.D. No.1348/2008

Registered on 31.1.2008

Sh. Durga Singh,

S/o Sh. Takur Singh,

R/o Village Bhanwar,

PO Tandu, Tehsil and Distt. Mandi,

Himachal Pradesh.

...Petitioner

Versus

The Chief Engineer BSL (P),

Bhakra Beas Management Board,

Sunder Nagar, Himachal Pradesh.

...Respondents

APPEARANCES :

For the workman

:

Sh. R. K. Parmar, A. R.

For the Management

:

Sh. RavinderRana, Law Officer.

AWARD

Passed on 24.11.2014

Central Government vide Notification No. L-23012/

4/2007 (IR(CM-II)) Dated 28.1.2008, by exercising its

powers under Section 10 Sub Section (1) Clause (d) and

Sub Section (2-A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

(hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’) has referred the following

Industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:-

“Whether the action of the management of BBMB,

Sunder Nagar (HP) in terminating the services of Sh.

Durga Singh w.e.f. 9.12.2005 is legal and justified? If

not, to what relief is the workman entitled?”

In response to the notice, the workman submitted

statement of claim to which reply was filed by the

management. The facts emerging from the pleadings are

that the workman was appointed as Peon on 89 days basis

vide order dated 4.4.2003 and thereafter, he was given 11

more spells of 89 days from time to time. His services were

terminated on 9.12.2005.

Now according to the workman he rendered two

years three months and five days service and he was

entitled to compensation of one-and-a-half months of

average wages but was given compensation only of one

month wages. That the compensation is not as per Section

25F(b). Hence his termination is not legal. It is further

pleaded that the persons junior to him were retained in

service, the same amounts to violation of the provisions

of law. That he be reinstated in service.

According to the management, the father of the

workman was working as a Peon and on his death the

workman was go be given regular employment by Irrigation

Department of Haryana government but to remove

hardship, the petitioner was appointed for 89 days. The

Board adopted a new policy regarding employment issued

vide letter dated 3.11.2005 and accordingly the services of

the workman were terminated after paying him

retrenchment compensation as per provisions of Section

25F of the Act which was received by the workman without

any objection. That the retrenchment is legal and valid.

Parties were given opportunities to lead evidence.

In support of its case, the workman appeared in the

witness box and filed his affidavit reiterating the stand

taken by him in the claim statement.

On the other hand the management has examined

Sh. Jaswinder Singh who filed his affidavit reiterating the

case of the management as pleaded in the written

statement.

I have heard Sh. R.K. Singh Parmar, AR of the

workman and Sh. RavinderRana, Law Officer for

management.

There is no dispute that the workman was appointed

on 89 days basis as Peon w.e.f. 4.4.1993. Thereafter, he

was again appointed for 10 times and his services were

terminated in view of some policy framed by the Board

vide order dated 9.12.2005. For the sake of convenience

the termination order dated 9.12.2005 is reproduced as

follow:-

“You were appointed as peon vide this office letter

No.495-99/3-E dated 4.4.2003 purely on contract basis for

89 days on compassionate grounds under Ex- gratia

scheme of BBMB. You were further appointed on the

above said terms and conditions vide following letters.

1.

2nd Spell: Letter No. 945-49/3-E dated 3.7.2003

2.

3rd Spell: Letter No. 1391-95/3-E dated 1.10.2003

3.

4th Spell: Letter No. 1855-58/3-E dated 26.12.2003

4.

5thSpell: Letter No. 531-35/3-E dated 29.3.2004

5.

6th Spell: Letter No. 948-51/3-E dated 28.6.2004

6.

7th Spell: Letter No. 1884-86/3-E dated 27.9.2004

7.

8th Spell: Letter No. 2872-76/3-E dated 30.12.2004

8.

9th Spell: Letter No. 1168-72/3-E dated 29.3.2005

9.

10th Spell: Letter No. 3043-45/3-E dated 4.7.2005

10.

11th Spell: Letter No. 4061-64/3-E dated 1.10.2005

2.

The Board in its 190th Meeting held on 21.10.2005

has considered the matter regarding employment on

compassionate grounds to the members of the families of

the deceased BBMB (own recruited) and State

Government/State Electricity Boards/Power Utilities

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

525

allocated and has decided to adopt new alternate policy in

lieu of compassionate employment.

3.

In view of the above your service is dispensed with

effect from 9.12.2005 afternoon in accordance with the terms

and conditions of your offer of appointment.

4.

In this connection, the following payments are

admissible under the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947.

1.

One month wages in lieu of one month

termination notice for Rs. 5209/-.

2.

Compensation equivalent to fifteen days

average pay for Rs.5911/-. DA/Cheque

No.G016239 dated 9.12.2005 for Rs. 11710/-.

It is clear from the termination order itself that the

workman continuously worked from 4.4.2003 to 9.12.2005

with the notional break of one day every time. The

retrenchment compensation paid as find mentioned in Para

4 of the said letter is one month wages in lieu of notice

amounting to Rs.5799/-, and compensation equivalent to

15 days average pay was Rs.5911/-.

Section 25F deals with the retrenchment

compensation and it read as follow:-

“25-F - No workman employed in any industry who

has been in continuous service for not less than one year

under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer

until –

(a)

The workman has been given one month’s

notice in writing indicating the reasons for

retrenchment and the period of notice has

expired, or the workman has been paid in lieu

of such notice, wages for the period of the

notice.

(b)

The workman has been paid, at the time of

retrenchment, compensation which shall be

equivalent to fifteen days’ average pay [for

every completed year of continuous service]

or any part thereof in excess of six months;

and

(c)

Notice in the prescribed manner is served on

the appropriate Government [or such authority

as may be specified by the appropriate

Government by notification in the Official

Gazette.]

Thus the workman is to be paid wages for the period

of notice i.e. for one month; and he is also to be paid

compensation equivalent to 15 days average pay for every

completed year of continuous service or in part thereof in

excess of six months. Since it is not denied that the

workman worked for more than two years and eight months

and therefore he was entitled to get retrenchment

compensation for 15 days average pay of two complete

years and also 15 days average pay for the service he

rendered for more than eight months. Sh. Jaswinder Singh,

examined by the management has deposed in his affidavit

in para 5 as follow:-

“Compensation equivalent to fifteen days average

pay for every completed year Rs.5911/-.”

Thus, according to him, the workman was paid 15

days average pay per every completed year. Workman

has specifically pleaded in para 4 of the written statement

that he was entitled to one-and-a-half average pay by way

of compensation. But the management intentionally

omitted to give a specific reply to this averment and simply

pleaded that workman was paid compensation for every

completed year. Thus the workman was paid

compensation only for 15 days average pay per every

completed year, but was not paid compensation for the

service of 8 months he rendered and as per the law he was

entitled to 15 days average pay as compensation. Thus,

the compensation paid to the workman is less by 15 days

average pay and the retrenchment compensation paid

cannot be held as valid compensation as provided under

Section 25F(b) of the Act.

Mr. Ravinder Rana, representing the management

has relied on Ravinder Kumar Vs. Labour Court, Patiala

and Others reported in 2006(4) SLR 795 to contend that if

there is any technical violation of Section 25F, that would

not entitle the workman to get any relief. This contention

is devoid of any service. In the said case there was a

mistake of Rs.73.50/- in the calculation of compensation

and the Court assessed the compensation at Rs.500/- and

the Hon’ble High Court has held that if there is a mistake

in the calculation, the same is not a violation of the

provisions of law. But in the present case the management

has omitted to pay him compensation for eight months of

service rendered by him and no explanation whatsoever

has been given in the written statement or in the affidavit

of its witness who rather specifically deposed that

workman was paid compensation equivalent to 15 days

average pay for every completed year. Thus in the present

case, there is no error in the calculation of compensation

but the management has intentionally omitted to pay him

compensation for the services he rendered in excess of

two years i.e. for more than 8 months which the workman

was entitled to get as per provisions of the law, stated

above. Thus, the retrenchment compensation paid by the

management to the workman and accepted by the workman

without any objection cannot be termed as legal and valid

and being so, the retrenchment of the workman cannot be

termed as legal and justified.

Now the question is whether the workman can be

ordered to be reinstated in service. He was appointed

from time-to-time on 89 days basis and lastly, the extension

was given vide letter dated 1.10.2005. He was not working

on any regular post. Thus he cannot be ordered to be

526

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

reinstated in service more particularly when he was

appointed on 89 days basis. Since the retrenchment is not

legal, it is a fit case where compensation can be awarded

to the workman. Considering the length of service and

other circumstances, Rs.1,00,000/- is a just compensation

which can be awarded to the workman.

In result, the reference is answered holding that the

termination of the workman is not legal and justified and

he is entitled to get Rs.1,00,000/- by way of compensation

from the respondent management, who shall pay the

amount to the workman within 2 months of the publication

of the award failing which the workman will be entitled to

get interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the

date of the award till realization.

KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 22 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 213-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Mh- Mh- ,- 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; ua- 2] ubZ fnYyh ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 37@2009) dks

izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 22@01@2015 dks izkIr

gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&42012@223@2005&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º

eks- tkfgn 'kjhiQ] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 22nd January, 2015

S.O. 213.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 37/2009)

of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court No. 2, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure

in the Industrial Dispute between the management of the

Delhi Development Authoirty, and their workmen, received

by the Central Government on 22/01/2015.

[No. L-42012/223/2005-IR(CM-II)]

Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,

DELHI

Present : Shri Harbansh Kumar Saxena

ID No. 37/2009

Sh. ShyamYadav& Others,

The General Secretary,

Municipal Employees Union,

Aggarwal Bhawan, G.T. Road,

Tis Hazari, Delhi-110054.

Versus

The Dy. Director (Hort.), Division No.1,

Delhi Development Authority,

Shekh Sarai Ph-II, New Delhi-110017

NO DISPUTE AWARD

The Central Government in the Ministry of Labour

vide notification No. L-42012/223/2005-IR (CM-II) dated

13.05.2009 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this

tribunal for adjudication :-

On 18.05.2009 reference was received in this tribunal.

Which was register as I.D No. 37/2009 and claimants were

called upon to file claim statement with in fifteen days

from date of service of notice.Which was required to be

accompanied with relevant documents and list of

witnesses.

After service of notice workmen/claimants

Sh. Shyam Yadav & others filed claim statement on

13.11.2009 but against claim statement management not

filed written statement.

Case proceeded ex-parte against management on

16.08.2012 and fixed 22.11.2012 for ex-parte evidence of

workmen. Several opportunity given to workmen for their

ex-parte evidence. On 25.08.2014 even Ld. A/R for the

workmen Sh. Pradeep Kaushik himself expressed his desire

to close the evidence to workmen. As workmen are not at

all interested to proceed further.They are not contacting

me. (Ld. A/R for the management).

So Evidence of the workmen has been closed.

There is no evidence on record in favour of workmen

so there is no option to me except to pass the No Dispute

Award in the instant case.

No Dispute Award is accordingly passed.

Dated:-17/10/2014

HARBANSH KUMAR SAXENA, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 22 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 214-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ,iQ- lh- vkbZ-

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;] y[kuÅ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 47@2008)

dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 22@01@2015 dks izkIr

gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&22011@14@2008&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º

eks- tkfgn 'kjhiQ] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 22nd January, 2015

S.O. 214.—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 % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

527

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 47/2008)

of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Lucknow as shown in the Annexure in the

Industrial Dispute between the management of the Food

Corporation of India, and their workmen, received by the

Central Government on 22/01/2015.

[No. L-22011/14/2008-IR(CM-II)]

Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

LUCKNOW

PRESENT : RAKESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer

I.D. No 47/2008

L-22011/14/2008-IR(CM-II) dated 01.09.2008

BETWEEN :

The State Secretary

Bharatiya Khadya Nigam Karamchari Sangh

TC/3V, Vibhuti Khand,

Gomti Nagar, Lucknow

AND

1.

The General Manager

Food Corporation of India

TC/3V Vibhuti Khand

Gomti Nagar, Lucknow

2.

The Executive Director (North)

Food Corporation of India

Plot No. 2A,2B Sector 24,

Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida (U.P)

3.

Area Manager

Food Corporation of India

1/12/203 b, Civil Lines

Farizabad

AWARD

1.

By order No. L-22011/14/2008-IR(CM-II) dated

01.09.2008, the Central Government in the Ministry of

Labour, New Delhi in exercise of powers conferred by

clause (d) of sub section (1) and sub section (2A) of Section

10 of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 (14 of 1947) referred

this industrial dispute between The State Secretary,

Bharatiya Khadya Nigam Karamchari Sangh, TC/3V,

Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow and The General

Manager(UP) Food Corporation of India, TC/3V Vibhuti

Khand Gomti Nagar, Lucknow and the Executive Director

(North) Food Corporation of India, Plot No. 2A, 2B, Sector

24, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida (UP) for adjudication.

1.

The reference under adjudication is:

“WHETHER

THE

ACTION

OF

THE

MANAGEMENT OF FOOD CORPORATION OF

INDIA IN IMPOSING PUNISHMET OF SRI RAM

KRISHAN VIDE THEIR ORDERS, AS PER LIST

ENCLOSED, AND OF REJECTING COMMON

APPEAL FILED THEREON BY THE WORKMAN

CONCERNED IS LEGAL AND JUSTIFIED? TO

WHAT RELIEF IS THE CONCERNED WORKMAN

ENTITLED?”

2.

The union (espousing cause of workman Sri Ram

Krishan) filed claim statement. The union stated that

management issued seven charge sheets to him in the

month of retirement of the workman. The workman filed

the replies of the aforesaid charge sheets. The opposite

party no. 2 has illegally and arbitrarily not granted the

relief wh ic h he is entitled It is stated by the applicant that

the opposite party no. 1 & 2 instead of granting relief to

the workman imposed recovery of Rs. 170525/ - against

workman in the said seven orders. The opposite party

no. 2 had agreed that there were bird/squirrel/monkey

trouble in the depot apart from others for which workman

had taken due steps and apprised the position to the

higher authorities butthey failed to take appropriate

measure. The opposite party no. 2 has modified the

punishment orders and reduced the recovery of

Rs. 170525/- to Rs. 108634/ - by means of impugned order

dated 31.05.2007. The workman union stated that opposite

party had not followed any written norms and the basis of

the storage losses a nd balance was unjustified. The

workman union has prayed for direction to the Management

to set aside the unjust punishment orders and the

impugned appellate order and the said penalty orders.

3.

The managemenl has filed written statement M-9

stating therein that the claim statement is wrong and charge

sheets were given to the workman within rule, and well

reasoned and speaking order was passed on the

representation given by the workman, there is no provision

of personal hearing under Regulation 60, such demand

was untenable and against the law and rules. The

management requested to reject the claim with cost.

4.

Amended statement of claim W-11 and rejoinder

W-12 was filed by the workman denying the averments of

the written statement and reitcrated the claim statement.

Vide list C-6, 46 papers have been filed by the workman

union.

5.

The work ma n did not t ur n up before this Tribunal

for evidence although sufficient opportunity was glven

to him. On 17.1l.2014 learned authorized representative of

both the parties appeared before Tribunal and requested

for fixing the case in the National Lok Adalat on 06.12.2014.

Learned authorised representative of the management

moved an application mentioning therein that perhaps

grievances of the workman have been redressed and

528

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

therefore the workman has not been appearing in the court

for several dates. Learned authorised representative of

the workman in writirig accepted this version of the

management.

6.

Under the circumstances and the facts mentioned

herein, no relief is legally required to be given to the

applicants/workmen. The reference under adjudication is

answered as NO CLAIM AWARD.

7.

Award as above.

LUCKNOW

06.12.2014

RAKESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 22 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 215-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj osLVuZ dksyfiQYMl~

fyfeVsM 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;] uxiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 16@2010)

dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 22@01@2015 dks izkIr

gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&22012@83@2010&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º

eks- tkfgn 'kjhiQ] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 22nd January, 2015

S.O. 215.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 16/2010)

of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Nagpur as shown in the Annexure in the

Industrial Dispute between the management of the Western

Coalfields Limited, Central Workshop Tadali of WCL, and

their workmen, received by the Central Government on

22/01/2015.

[No. L-22012/83/2010-IR(CM-II)]

Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI J. P. CHAND,

PRESIDING OFFICER,

CGIT-CUM-LABOURT COURT,

NAGPUR

Case No. CGIT/NGP/16/2010

Date: 30.12.2014.

Party No.1 (a)

:

The Chairman-cum-Managing Director,

Western Coalfields Limited,

Coal Estate,

Civil Lines, Nagpur. 440001.

(b)

:

The General Manager,

Central Workshop Tadali of WCL,

Post UrjagramTadali,

Chandrapur (M.S.).

Versus

Party No.2(a)

:

The President/Secretary,

Rashtriya Koyala Khadan,

Mazdoor Sangh (INTUC),

CWS, Tadali Branch,

Post UrjagramTadali,

Chandrapur (MS).

(b)

:

The President/Secretary,

Koyala Shramik Sabha (HMS),

CWS, Tadali Branch,

Post UrjagramTadali,

Chandrapur (MS).

(c)

:

The President/ Secretary,

Lalzhanda Coal Mines

Mazdoor Union (CITU),

CWS, Tadali Branch,

Post Urjagram Tadali,

Chandrapur (MS).

(d)

:

The President/Secretary,

Sanyukta Khadan

Mazdoor Sangh (AITUC),

CWS, Tadali Branch,

Post Urjagram Tadali,

Chandrapur (MS).

AWARD

(Dated: 30th December, 2014)

In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of

sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of section 10 of

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) (“the Act” in

short), the Central Government has referred the industrial

dispute between the employers, in relation to the

management of Western Coalfields Limited and the

workmen of CWS, Tadali, for adjudication, as per letter

No.L-22012/83/2010-IR (CM-II) dated 04.02.2011, with the

following schedule:-

“Whether the action of WCL HQ in denying the

incentive to the employees of CWS,Tadali for the

year 2007-08 and 2008-09 and for the years ahead is

right and justified? To what reliefthey are entitled

to?”

2.

On receipt of the reference, the parties were noticed

to file their respective statement of claim and written

statement and accordingly, the four unions named above,

(“the unions” in short) filed the joint statement of claim on

behalf of the workmen of CWS, Tadali (‘the workmen” in

short) and the management of WCL (“Party No. 1” in

short) filed their written statement.

The case of the workmen as presented by the unions

in the statement of claim is that the employees of CWS

Tadali were initially covered by an “Incentive Scheme”

mooted by the Party No. 1 for the years 2003-2004 and

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

529

2004-2005 and under the said scheme, some incentives

were provided to the employees in kind and Party No.1

sanctioned a detailed “productivity improvement scheme”

for the year 2005-2006 exclusively for the employees of

Central Workshop, Tadali and the scheme was circulated

under office order dated 15.10.2005 and although the said

scheme was approved by the Competent Authority for the

year 2005-2006, the same was reviewable after completion

of one year and as such, the said scheme was continued

for the year 2006-2007 and though the said scheme was to

be continued for 2007-2008 onwards, the same was not

done and at the instance of the unions, though a proposal

to continue the scheme was submitted to the Head

Quarters of WCL for approval, no fruitful result came out,

inspite of repeated assurances made by the management

in different I.R. forum and the Party No. 1 had formulated

incentive schemes for the year 2007-2008 and 2008-2009

for the employees of the WCL, but the said scheme was

not applicable to the employees of CWS,Tadali pm the

specific ground that there existed a separate incentive

scheme for them and on persistent quarries made by the

unions, the Party NO. 1 came out with the answer that the

FD’s of the company has taken a decision not to continue

the incentive scheme for the employees of CWS, Tadali

and the Party No. 1 thus adopted discriminatory attitude

and pick and choose tactics in the matter of implementing

incentive scheme against the employees of CWS, Tadali,

in breach of the provisions of Article 14 and 16 of the

Constitution of India and the action of the Party No. 1 was

unjustified.

The unions have prayed to answer the reference in

favour of the employees of CWS, Tadali and to declare the

action of Party No. 1 as illegal and to direct the Party No.

1 to give the benefits of the said scheme.

3.

Party No. 1 in the written statement has pleaded

inter-alia that any incentive scheme promoted by the

employer is the sole prerogative of the employer and no

employee can claim the same as a matter of right and the

employees of CWS, Tadali want to grab money for which

they are not entitled, by putting pressure on it and there

was no incentive scheme for the years 2003-04 and 2004-

05 in CWS, Tadali, but there was a scheme for the year

2005-06 and the said scheme was to be reviewed every

year and the same was also subject to be modified or

withdrawn at the desire of the management and the scheme

was also there for the year 2006-07 with similar conditions

and at no point of time, any objection was raised by

anybody regarding the imposition of the conditions and

as such, the unions are estopped from making any claim

against the withdrawal of the said scheme and similar

schemes were applicable in different Areas for different

class of workmen and at present, the incentive scheme is

available only for the workmen working in underground

mines and the incentive schemes are based on various

factors and if the management is of the opinion that the

incentive scheme should be made available for a particular

standard of work only, the same cannot be termed as

discriminatory and the reference is devoid of merit and is

liable to be rejected.

4.

In the rejoinder, after denying the adverse

allegations, the unions have pleaded that the incentive

scheme mooted by the management was in the mutual

interest of both the parties and the party No.1 withdrew

the facility of incentive scheme in a clandestine manner

after achieving the necessary target of production and

productivity and the same was manifestation of colorable

exercise of employer’s right and hence an unfair labour

practice and though party No.1 has repeatedly stated that

the incentive scheme is based on various factors, but they

have not spelled out as to why such factors are not

applicable to the employees of CWS, Tadali and a public

authority cannot be allowed to withdraw at it sweet will

from a part of its employees the facility of the incentive

scheme which has become a part of their monthly earning.

5.

In order to prove their respective case, both the

parties have placed reliance on documentary evidence.

Besides the documentary evidence, the unions have also

examined one PrahalladWaghmare as a witness. It is to be

mentioned here that party No. 1 has not adduced any oral

evidence.

6.

The evidence of witness, PrahalladWagmare is on

affidavit. This witness has reiterated the facts mentioned

in the statement of claim, in his evidence. In his cross-

examination, this witness has stated that productivity

improvement scheme of incentive is not a service condition

and in clause 15 of the office order dated 15.10.2005, the

productivity improvement scheme for 2005-2006 of Central

Workshop, Tadali, it has been mentioned that, “The

management reserves the right to withdraw, change or

modify the incentive scheme from time to time with the

approval of FD’s of WCL” and the unions had never

challenged the said clause. This witness has further stated

that as management did not formulate any scheme for

Tadali Central Workshop in 2007- 2008 and did not pay the

incentive in 2008-2009, they raised the dispute and at

present, except the employees working in the underground,

the incentive scheme has been withdrawn for all other

employees of WCL.

7.

At the time of argument, it was submitted by the

learned advocate for the unions that though the

management of the party No.1 formulated incentive scheme

for the years 2007-08 and 2008-09 for all its employees, the

same was not made applicable to the employees of CWS,

Tadali on the sole ground of existence of a separate

incentive scheme for the said years and party No.1 adopted

discriminatory and pick and choose tactics in the matter

of implementing the incentive scheme, in violation of

Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and such

action of Party No.1 was illegal and unjustified and the

530

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

employees of CWS, Tadali are entitled for the monetary

benefits as provided in the incentive scheme for 2007-08

and 2008-09 and onwards.

8.

Per contra, it was submitted by the learned advocate

for the party No.1 that promotion of any Incentive scheme

is the sole prerogative of the employer and the same cannot

be claimed as a matter of right and floating of incentive

scheme is based on many factors and in the incentive

scheme for the year 2005-06 itself, there was a clause that,

“The management reserves the right to revoke this scheme

at any time without assigning any reasons thereof.” And

at no point of time, any objection was raised by any union

or anybody else about the imposition of the said condition

and as such, the unions are estopped from challenging

the action of the party No.1 of withdrawing the said scheme

and as such, the employees of CWS, Tadali are not entitled

to any relief.

9.

On perusal of the materials on record and taking

into consideration the submissions made by the learned

advocates for the parties, the following undisputed facts

are found:

(i)

The party No.1 floated “the productivity

Improvement Scheme” for the years 2005-06

and 2006-07 for the employees of CWS, Tadali

and gave the benefits of such scheme to such

employees.

(ii)

The party No.1 floated the Incentive scheme

for the years 2007-08 and 2008-09 for its

employees (all the employees of WCL), but

the application of the said scheme was

excluded to the employees of CWS, Tadali on

the ground of existence of a special scheme

for them and party No.1 gave the benefits of

such scheme to all its employees for the years

2007-08 and 2008-09, except the employees of

CWS, Tadali.

(iii)

The party No.1 withdrew the incentive scheme

after 2009 for all other employees of WCL,

except the employees working in the

underground.

11.

It is not disputed that floating of incentive scheme

is the sole prerogative of the employer and no employee

can claim the same as a matter of right. As the party No.1

has already withdrawn the incentive scheme after 2009 for

all its employees, except for the employees working in the

underground, the employees working in CWS, Tadali

cannot ask the party No.1 to float the incentive scheme

beyond 2008-09. Hence, the employees working in CWS,

Tadali are not entitled to any benefit of the Incentive

Scheme.

11.

Now, the only question remains for consideration is

as to whether the employees of CWS, Tadali are entitled

for the benefits of the incentive scheme for the years 2007-

08 and 2008-09.

As already mentioned above, the party No.1

formulated the Incentive scheme for all the employees of

WCL for the years 2007-08 and 2008-09 and gave the

benefits of such scheme to the employees, except the

employees of CWS, Tadali, only on the ground that a

special scheme was there for the said employees. It is

clear from the above admitted facts that the special

incentive scheme floated for the employees of CWS, Tadali

was not reviewed or the same was not withdrawn for the

years 2007-08 and 2008-09. No document has also been

filed by the party No.1 to show that the said scheme wa

withdrawn for the employees of CWS, Tadali. So, the action

of the party No.1 can be said to be discriminatory. From

the materials on record, it is clear that the employees of

CWS, Tadali are entitled to get the benefits of the Special

Incentive Scheme as floated in 2006-07, for the years 2007-

08 and 2008-09. Hence, it is ordered:

ORDER

The action of WCL HQ in denying the incentive to

the employees of CWS, Tadali for the years 2007-08 &

2008-09 is unjustified. The employees of Cws, Tadali are

entitled for the monetary benefits of the Special Incentive

Scheme as floated in the year 2006-07, only for the years

2007-08 and 2008-09. The said employees are not entitled

to any other relief.

J. P. CHAND, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 22 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 216-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj osLVuZ dksyfiQYMl~

fyfeVsM 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;] ukxiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 153@2003)

dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 22@01@2015 dks izkIr

gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&22012@378@2002&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º

eks- tkfgn 'kjhiQ] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 22nd January, 2015

S.O. 216.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 153/

2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Nagpur as shown in the Annexure in the

Industrial Dispute between the management of the Western

Coalfields Limited, New Majri U/G Sub Area of WCL, and

their workmen, received by the Central Government on

22/01/2015.

[No. L-22012/378/2002-IR(CM-II)]

Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

531

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI J. P. CHAND, PRESIDING

OFFICER, CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR

Case No. CGIT/NGP/153/2003

Date: 09.01.2015.

Party No. 1

:

The Sub Area Manager,

New Majri U/G Sub Area of WCL

Post- Shivjinagar,

Chandrapur (MS)

Versus

Party No. 2

:

Shri Lomesh Khartad,

General Secretary,

Rashtriya Colliery Workers Congress

Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, Ballarpur,

Post and Tah. Ballarpur,

Chandrapur (MS)

AWARD

(Dated: 9thJanuary, 2015)

In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of

sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) (“the Act” in

short), the Central Government has referred the industrial

dispute between the employers, in relation to the

management of New Majri U/G Sub Area of WCL and their

workman, Shri Iqbal Hasan, for adjudication, as per letter

No.L-22012/378/2002-IR (CM-II) dated 11.07.2003, with the

following schedule:-

“Whether the action of the management in relation

to New Majri U/G Sub Area of Western Coalfields

Ltd. in dismissing Shri Iqbal Hasan S/o Imamuddin,

U/G loader vide office order No. Wcl/NMUGSA/

PER/93/922 dated 13/17.05.1993 is legal and justified?

If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?”

2.

On receipt of the reference, parties were noticed to

file their respective statement of claim and written

statement, in response to which, the workman Shri Iqbal

Hasan, (“the workman” in short) through the union, the

Rashtriya Colliery Workers Congress (“the union” in short)

filed the statement of claim and the management of New

Majri U/G Sub Area of Western Coalfields Limited (“party

No.1” in short) filed the written statement.

The case of the workman as presented by the Union

in the statement of claim is that it is a registered trade

union under the Trade Unions Act,1926 and the party No.1

is a government company and is a “state” within the

meaning of Article 12 of the constitution of India and the

workman was working as a wagon loader on surface of the

mine in 1978 and he was discontinued by party No.1 and

against the illegal discontinuance of the workman and some

others, the union, Rashtriya Colliery Mazdoor Sangh raised

a dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner

(Central) Chandrapur and a tripartite settlement was arrived

between the management and the said union during the

course of the conciliation proceedings and as per the said

settlement, the workman was given employment as

underground loader at New Majri Mine No.3 by the party

No.1 and the appointment letter was given to the workman

on the basis of his previous work and on verification of

his photograph and during the conciliation proceedings

before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, documents

and photograph of the workman were authenticated by

the union representative and the affidavit sworn in by the

workman before the Magistrate was filed by the workman

and the same was verified by the management and after

completion of the other formalities of appointment, initial

medical examination, vocational training and filling up of

the statutory and non statutory forms and records, the

workman was allowed to join duty at Majri Mine No.3

w.e.f. 27.12.1989, vide office order No. 6552 dated 26/

28.12.1989 and the workman rendered continuous service

and put in more than 190 days of attendance in the

underground in the years, 1990, 1991 and 1992 and he also

worked regularly in 1993, till he was illegally dismissed

from service.

The further case of the workman as presented by

the union is that in the mean while necessary actions for

verification of character and antecedents of the workman

were taken up by the party No.1, by sending the necessary

information to Saini police in the district of Allahabad, UP,

under which, the native village “Nandeymai” of the

workman is situated and due to political rivalry, bias, family

feud and personal grudge, the then Pradhan of the Gram

Panchayat of the workman submitted a wrong, frivolous

and prejudicial report against the workman and on the

basis of such false report, police also submitted a false

report without any physical verification about the workman

and for that the party No.1 submitted a charge sheet dated

15.06.1991 against the workman under clauses 18 (i) (a)

and 18 (i) (o) of the standing orders and the charge sheet

was vague and suffered from several infirmities and the

documents and list of witnesses were not supplied to the

workman and the workman was stopped illegally and

without any notice from performing his duties for about

10 days and he had not been paid the wages for those

days and on that ground alone, the entire action of the

party No.1 was vitiated and the workman vide his letter

dated 28.06.1991, requested the party No.1to direct a re-

enquiry in to the verification of his character and

antecedents, so as to arrive into an impartial conclusion,

but the request of the workman was not considered and

without application of mind, mechanical order for initiation

of the departmental enquiry against the workman was

passed and that too by an incompetent person and the

copy of the alleged reports/certificates submitted by the

Grampanchayat, Nandeymai and the police were not

supplied to the workman and the Enquiry Officer travelled

beyond his jurisdiction and guided by the management in

the matter of as to how to proceed with the enquiry and

the Enquiry Officer was biased and prejudiced and he did

not act impartially and he worked merely as a recorder and

during the enquiry, the workman examined two witnesses,

who fully supported the workman, but the evidence of the

532

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

said witnesses was discarded by the Enquiry Officer and

it was wrongly held by the Enquiry Officer that the charges

were proved against the workman and the copy of the

report of the Enquiry Officer was not supplied to the

workman and second show cause notice was also not

issued by the party No.1 and the workman was abruptly

dismissed from service vide order dated 13/17.05.1993 of

the Sub Area Manager and though the workman requested

to supply of the copy of the report submitted by the

Enquiry Officer vide his letters dated 03.06.1993, 12.01.1994,

12.11.1996, 11.02.1997 and 30.03.1998, the same was not

supplied to him.

The further case of the workman as presented by

the union is that the enquiry conducted against the

workman is illegal and in violation of the principles of

natural justice and no proper opportunity was afforded

to the workman to defend himself and the report of the

Enquiry Officer suffers from several infirmities and the

order of dismissal also suffers from several infirmities

and the same was signed by the authority, who was

superior to the punishing authority/disciplinary authority

and the same vitiated the departmental enquiry and so

also the entire actions taken by the party No.1 and though

the workman approached the party No.1 by his letters

dated 25.05.1993, 16.08.1993, 02.01.1996, 03.04.1996,

10.04.1997, 02.04.1998 and 06.06.1998 for his reinstatement

in service, party No.1 did not consider his request and

Shri Bhupati, the Labour/Welfare officer was appointed

as the management representative in the enquiry held

against the workman and a Labour/Welfare officer is not

entitled under the Mine (Central) Rules to participate in

the enquiry, so the entire enquiry conducted against the

workman is illegal on that ground and there was no

complaint what so ever by anybody claiming himself to

be the real IqbalHasan S/o Imamuddin and the workman

was not the real Iqbal Hasan S/o Imamuddin and he

(workman) took the name of the name of Iqbal Hasan

S/o Imamuddin and such facts vitiated the enquiry in

totality and the Enquiry Officer failed to consider the

documents in possession of the party No.1 in regard to

the age of the workman that his age was 29 years as on

12.11.1989 and the Enquiry Officer at a wrong and

erroneous conclusion and the workman on 12.07.1995

obtained a fresh certificate from the Grampanchayat,

Nandeymai, which shows the correct name and identity

of the workman and the said certificate clarified that the

earlier certificate issued by the then Pradhan was issued

out of bias, enmity and personal prejudice and the said

certificate was duly submitted by the workman to the

management alongwith his representations and the

workman also obtained a certificate dated 28.10.1998 from

the Tahsildar and submitted the same to the management,

but the sais certificates were not considered by the

management and if there was another person named Iqbal

Hasan S/o Imamuddin allegedly employed in Chanda

Colliery of WCL, as mentioned in the earlier certificate

issued by the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat, then

management should have examined him as a witness in

the enquiry to prove the charges levelled against the

workman and since, the so called Iqbal Hasan as alleged

by the management was not examined , it can be held

that management miserably failed to prove the charges

against the workman and the workman was also not

subjected to ossification test to determine his exact age

and in absence of such test, the finding of the Enquiry

Officer that the workman might be a minor in 1977-78 has

no substance and the Enquiry Officer also ignored the

provisions of employment of adolescent under Mines

Act, 1952, during the relevant time and the practice

prevalent then.

It is also pleaded by the union on behalf of the

workman that in the departmental enquiry, neither any

witness was produced nor examined by the management

to substantiate the charges levelled against the workman

and at any rate, the charge under S.O. 18(i)(a) i.e. theft,

fraud or dishonesty in connection with the employers

business or property cannot be said to have been proved

against the workman by any stretch of imagination and

the said charge was totally vague and irrelevant and the

entire enquiry proceeding was illegal and void ab-initio

and is therefore liable to be quashed and set aside and the

punishment is too harsh and disproportionate.

Prayer has been made for the reinstatement of the

workman in service with continuity and all consequential

benefits including back wages.

3.

The party No.1 in the written statement has pleaded

inter-alia that the present dispute has been raised by the

union and the said union is a non-existing union and have

no followers and the said union remains on paper only

and there is nothing on record to show that the workman

was a member of the union and the union has authorized

Shri Lomesh Khartad to raise the present dispute on his

behalf and as such, the union has no locus standi to raise

the dispute and the union has raised the dispute without

any authority and the workman was dismissed from

services vide order dated 17.05.1993, where as the present

dispute was raised in 2003 and there was inordinate delay

in raising the dispute and as such, the dispute is not

maintainable.

It is further pleaded by the party No.1 that Coal

India Limited is a government undertaking and Coal India

has several subsidiaries including the WCL and Coal India

has a recruitment policy and appointment is done only in

accordance with the appointment Rules and a person

seeking employment in WCL has to go through the

prescribed procedure for getting appointment and Coal

Mines in India were owned by the private owners and the

Coal Mines were nationalized in the year 1973 and during

the year 1976, there were provisions of having casual

wagon loaders in the pool of the collieries and the same

was for the simple reason that placing of the wagon was

not under the control of the management and it was the

railways, who used to provide wagon as per their

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

533

convenience and under such circumstances, it was not

advisable for the management to have permanent wagon

loaders on their own roll and after 1979, loading of coal

was being done by mechanical process and no manpower

was required for coal loading and the persons engaged in

the process of wagon loading during the relevant period

were regularized, subject to their working for more than

240 days preferably and whose names were sponsored

through the Employment Exchange an preference was

given to those, who were in possession of prove that they

worked as casual workers and there was agitation by the

union for regularization of the ex-casual workers and with

a view to keep industrial peace, a settlement was arrived at

with the union for providing employment to the ex-casual

workers and as per the terms and conditions of the said

settlement, ex-casual workers were given employment and

on the basis of the said settlement, on person namely,

Iqbal Hasan as underground piece rated loader at New

Majri Mine, vide offer of appointment No. 5850 dated

28.11.1989, on the terms and conditions enumerated in the

offer of appointment itself and Iqbal Hasan accepted the

terms and condition of the appointment by putting his

signature on the said letter and the said offer of

appointment was given to him on the said letter and the

said offer of appointment was given to him on the claim

made y him that he had worked as casual loader for the

years 1976 to 1979 and the said offer of appointment was

subject to verification of antecedents and after joining of

duty, the workman was asked to fill up a verification form

giving all necessary particulars and as per the declaration

of the workman in the verification form, verification of

antecedents was made through the District Police of his

home town and the District Police sent a report after

obtaining the particulars from the Grampanchayat in the

said report, it was reported by the Police that the person

whose photograph was affixed on the form was that of

another person and not of Iqbal Hasan and it was evident

from the report that the workman had obtained the

employment by impersonating himself as IqbalHasan and

on receipt of the report, in terms of the specific conditions

of his employment, it could have summarily terminated his

service, but having regard to the principles of natural

justice, it was decided to give an opportunity to the

workman to explain his conduct and accordingly, charge

sheet dated 15.06.1991was issued against him, specifically

mentioning therein that his antecedent verification form

was sent to the Superintendent of Police and it was reported

by the police that the photo affixed on the form was of Shri

Massu S/o Shri Mansoor Hasan and the workman was

asked to explain his conduct and as the reply submitted

by the workman was found to be unsatisfactory, it was

decided to conduct a departmental enquiry and

accordingly, Shri B. B. Mishra, the Personnel Manager

was appointed as the Enquiry Officer and Shri G. S. Bhupati

was appointed as the Management representative and the

Enquiry Officer fixed the first sitting of the enquiry on

13.07.1992 and the workman attended the enquiry in person

and the Enquiry Officer advised him to take the service of

a co-worker and accordingly, the workman engaged

ShriSatruddinRamzan Khan as his co-worker and though

the enquiry was fixed to 18.07.1992, 25.07.1992, 18.08.1992,

27.08.1992 and 04.09.1992, the enquiry could not be taken

up due to the absence of the management representative

and on 20.09.1992, the workman, his co-worker and the

management representative attended the enquiry and being

asked by the Enquiry Officer, the workman admitted to

have received the charge sheet and to have understood

the charges and he pleaded not guilty to the charges, so

the management representative was asked to lead

evidence to prove the charges and the management

representative stated the case of the management and

produced documents and after the cross-examination of

the management witness and production of documents,

management’s case was case was closed and the workman

was given the opportunity to adduce evidence in his

defence and the workman examined three witnesses

including himself and the Enquiry Officer after hearing

both the parties closed the enquiry and the Enquiry Officer

submitted his report on 11.12.1992 and the entire

documents in connection with the departmental enquiry

were placed before the Disciplinary Authority and the

Disciplinary Authority after examination of the record and

being satisfied with the correctness of the conclusions

done by the Enquiry Officer, agreed with the findings of

the Enquiry Officer that the charges levelled against the

workman were proved and passed the order of punishment

of dismissal of the workman from services w.e.f. 15.08.1993

and its action was legal and proper and the departmental

enquiry conducted against the workman is in accordance

with law and looking into the seriousness of the

misconduct proved against the workman, the punishment

imposed against him is just and proper.

It is also pleaded by the Party No.1 that under the

Mines Act, persons below 18 years are prohibited from

working in the mines and medical examination and

vocational training are given to the employees as per the

requirement of law and there existed no reason for making

re-enquiry as claimed by the workman and as the workman

denied the charges, it was correctly decided to conduct a

departmental enquiry against him and the enquiry was

not conducted by incompetent person and the document

produced in the departmental enquiry were provided to

the workman for inspection and the workman never

demanded to supply any document to him during the

enquiry and the workman was supplied with the enquiry

report and he was dismissed from service vide order dated

17.05.1993 and the correspondence made by him

subsequent to the submission of the enquiry report by

the Enquiry Officer are of no help to the workman and the

workman did not challenge the order of dismissal and the

workman is not entitled to any relief.

4.

In the rejoinder, it is pleaded by the union on behalf

of the workman that it is well settled that a workman, who

534

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

is not a member of any union can be represented in any

proceedings under the Act, by any member of the executive

or other office bearers of any trade union connected with

or by any other workman employed in the industry in which

the worker is employed and authorized in such manner as

may be prescribed and it is also settled by the Hon’ble

Apex Court that once a reference has been validly made

by the Central Government, then the same has to be

adjudicated and disposed of on merit by the Tribunal and

practice raising preliminary objection regarding the

maintenance of the reference raised at the instance of the

employer should not be allowed and law of limitation is

not applicable to the disputes raised under the Act. The

union has also reiterated the facts mentioned in the

statement of claim in the rejoinder.

5.

As this is a case of dismissal of the workman from

service, as a punishment in the departmental enquiry held

against him, the validity or otherwise of the departmental

enquiry was taken up as a preliminary issue for

consideration and by order dated 19.11.2014, the

departmental enquiry conducted against the applicant was

held to be legal, proper and in accordance with the principles

of natural justice.

6.

At the time of argument, the learned advocate for

the workman submitted that the findings of the Enquiry

Officer are perverse as without any legal evidence on

record, he had determined the age of the workman and the

Enquiry Officer did not consider the evidence adduced by

the workman in his defence. It was further submitted by

the learned advocate for the workman that the Enquiry

Officer submitted his report dated 02.11.1992 to the Sub

Area Manager and the Sub Area Manager recommended

the punishment for approval of the General Manager on

04.05.1992, i.e. before the date of submission of the enquiry

report and from such facts, it is crystal clear that the papers

were manipulated and the Appellate authority passed the

order mechanically and without application of mind and

as the Appellate Authority has approved the punishment,

the workman lost the chance of appeal and the copy of the

enquiry report and second show cause notice were not

given to the workman and the workman was prejudiced

and there was violation of the principles of natural justice

and therefore, the order of punishment is liable to be

quashed and set aside and the workman is entitled for

reinstatement in service with continuity and full back

wages.

In support of the contentions, the learned advocate

for the workman placed reliance on the decisions reported

in (1999) 7 SCC-7399 (Yoginath D.Bagde Vs. State of

Maharashtra), 2000 III CLR-99 (Gajanan Vs. MSRTC) and

AIR 1988 S.C.-344 (Union of India Vs. Baburam)

It is to be mentioned here that in the written notes of

argument, the learned advocate for the workman has

reiterated some submissions regarding the validity of the

departmental enquiry, which had already been considered

at the time of deciding the preliminary issue of the fairness

or otherwise of the departmental enquiry, as such, there is

no scope for consideration of the same again.

7.

On the other hand, it was submitted by the learned

advocate for the party No.1 that the preliminary issue of

fairness of the departmental enquiry has already been

answered in favour of the party No.1 and the findings of

the Enquiry Officer are based on the evidence on record

of the enquiry and the same are not perverse and the sub

Area Manager recommended the approval of the

punishment on 04.05.1993 and not on 04.05.1992 a

submitted by the learned advocate for the workman and

copy of the enquiry report was supplied to the workman,

which is evident from the endorsement made by the

workman on the said report itself and the order of

punishment was passed by the Disciplinary Authority and

not by the appellate Authority.

It was further submitted by the learned advocate for

the party No.1 that the workman committed gross

misconduct and such misconduct was proved against him

in a properly conducted departmental enquiry and as such,

the punishment imposed against him cannot be said to be

shockingly disproportionate and the punishment imposed

against the workman is just and proper and in view of the

principles enunciated by the Hon’ble Apex Court and the

Hon’ble High Courts in different pronouncements, there

is no scope to interfere with the punishment and the

workman is not entitled to any relief.

In support of the contentions, the learned advocate

for the party No.1 placed reliance on the decisions reported

in (2003) 3 SCC-437(KendriyaVidyalaya vs.

RamratanYadav), (1996) 7 SCC-118(State of M. P. Vs.

Shyama Pardhi), Air 1998 SC-300(union of India Vs.

B.K.Shrivastava), 2009 I LLJ-220(west Bokaro Colliry vs.

Ramprakash Singh and order of the Hon’ble High Court of

M. P. in W. P. No.17687/07(ratanlal Vs. SECL) dated

27.03.2012 and orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court

of Chhatishgarh in W.P. No.57/2007(C.M.D., SECL Vs.

Naval Kishore Mishra) dated 01.04.2009.

8.

The first contention raised by the learned advocate

for the workman is that the Sub-Area Manager

recommended the punishment for approval on 04.05.1992,

which was prior to the submission of the report of enquiry

dated 02.11.1992 by the enquiry officer. However, on

perusal of the document, Ext. M-IV, it is found that the

recommendation of the punishment for approval was made

on 04.05.1993 and not on 04.05.1992 as claimed by the

learned advocate for the workman. Hence, there is no

force in the contention raised by the learned advocate for

the workman on that score.

9.

On perusal of Ext. M-IV, the report of the enquiry

submitted by the enquiry officer, it is found that the

workman has made the endorsement “KAPI PRAPTA

KIYA” and signed the same. Such endorsement clearly

shows the copy of the enquiry report was supplied to the

workman.

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

535

10.

It is also found from record that the order of

punishment was passed against the workman by the

Disciplinary Authority and not the Appellate Authority

and as per the practice in vogue, the recommendation about

the proposed punishment was submitted for approval of

the General Manager (MA).

As the facts and circumstances of the present case

are quite different from the facts and circumstances of the

cases referred in the decisions cited by the learned advocate

for the workman, with respect, I am of the view that the

said decisions have no clear application to the case in

hand.

11.

In view of the submissions made by the learned

advocate for the parties, I think it apropos to mention the

principles settled by the Hon’ble Apex court in a string of

decisions including the decisions cited by the learned

advocate for the party No.1 regarding the jurisdiction and

the power of the Tribunal in regard to interference with

the findings and punishment in a departmental enquiry.

It is well settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court that:-

“The jurisdiction of the Tribunal to interfere with

the disciplinary matters or punishment cannot be

equated with an appellate jurisdiction. The Tribunal

cannot interfere with the findings of the enquiry

officer or competent authority where they are not

arbitrary or utterly perverse. The power to impose

penalty on a delinquent officer is conferred on the

competent authority either by an Act of legislature

or rules made under the proviso to Art.309 of the

Constitution. If there has been an enquiry consistent

with the rules and in accordance with principles of

natural justice what punishment would meet the ends

of justice is a matter exclusively within the

jurisdiction of the competent authority. If the penalty

can lawfully be imposed and is imposed on the

proved misconduct, the Tribunal has no power to

substitute its own discretion for that of the authority.

The adequacy of penalty unless it is mala fide is

certainly not a matter for the Tribunal to concern

itself with. The Tribunal also cannot interfere with

the penalty if the conclusion of the enquiry officer

or the competent authority is based on evidence

even if some of it is found to be irrelevant or

extraneous to the matter.”

It is also settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court that:-

“A review of the above legal position would

establish that the disciplinary authority and on

appeal, the appellate authority, being fact finding

authorities have exclusive power to consider the

evidence with a view to maintain discipline. They

are invested with the discretion to impose

appropriate punishment keeping in view the

magnitude or gravity of the misconduct. The High

Court/Tribunal, while exercising the power of judicial

review, cannot normally substitute its own

conclusion on penalty and impose some other

penalty. If the punishment imposed by the

disciplinary authority or the appellate authority

shocks the conscience of the High Court/Tribunal,

it would appropriately mould the relief, either

directing the disciplinary/appellate authority to

reconsider the penalty imposed, or to shorten the

litigation, it may itself, in exceptional and rare cases,

impose appropriate punishment with cogent reasons

in support thereof.”

In departmental proceedings, the disciplinary

authority is the sole judge of facts and in case an appeal is

presented to the appellate authority, the appellate authority

has also the power/and jurisdiction to re-appreciate the

evidence and come to its own conclusion, on facts, being

the sole fact-finding authorities. Once findings of fact,

based on appreciation of evidence are recorded, the High

Court in writ jurisdiction may not normally interfere with

those factual findings unless it finds that the recorded

findings were based either on no evidence or that the

findings were wholly perverse and/or legally untenable.

The adequacy or inadequacy of the evidence is not

permitted to be canvassed before the High Court. Since

the High Court does not sit as an appellate authority over

the factual findings recorded during departmental

proceedings, while exercising the power of judicial review,

the High Court cannot, normally speaking, substitute its

own conclusion, with regard to the guilt of the delinquent,

for that of the departmental authorities. Even insofar as

imposition of penalty or punishment is concerned, unless

the punishment or penalty imposed by the disciplinary or

the departmental appellate authority, is either impermissible

or such that it shocks the conscience of the High Court, it

should not normally substitute its own opinion and impose

some other punishment or penalty. Both the learned Single

Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court, it appears,

ignored the well-settled principle that even though judicial

review of administrative action must remain flexible and

its dimension not closed, yet the Court, in exercise of the

power of judicial review, is not concerned with the

correctness of the findings of fact on the basis of which

the orders are made so long as those findings are

reasonably supported by evidence and have been arrived

at through proceedings which cannot be faulted with for

procedural illegalities or irregularities which vitiate the

process by which the decision was arrived at. Judicial

review, it must be remembered, is directed not against the

decision, but is confined to the examination of the decision-

making process.”

It is also settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court that:-

“A review of the above legal position would

establish that the disciplinary authority and on

appeal, the appellate authority, being fact finding

authorities have exclusive power to consider the

evidence with a view to maintain discipline. They

536

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

are invested with the discretion to impose

appropriate punishment keeping in view the

magnitude or gravity of the misconduct. The High

Court/Tribunal, while exercising the power of judicial

review, cannot normally substitute its own

conclusion on penalty and impose some other

penalty. If the punishment imposed by the

disciplinary authority or the appellate authority

shocks the conscience of the High Court/Tribunal,

it would appropriately mould the relief, either

directing the disciplinary/appellate authority to

reconsider the penalty imposed, or to shorten the

litigation, it may itself, in exceptional and rare cases,

impose appropriate punishment with cogent reasons

in support thereof.”

It is also settled beyond doubt that departmental

enquiry is not bound by strict rules of Evidence Act, but

by fair play and natural justice. Only total absence, but

not sufficiency of evidence before Tribunal is ground for

interference. If the enquiry has been properly held the

question of adequacy or reliability of evidence cannot be

canvassed before the court and in a departmental enquiry,

penalty can be imposed on the delinquent officer on a

finding recorded on the basis of “preponderance of

probability”.

12.

Judging the present case in hand with the touch

stone of the principles enunciated by the Hon’ble apex

Court as mentioned above, it is found that the Enquiry

Officer has based his findings on the evidence on record

of the enquiry, after properly analyzing the evidence and

the Enquiry Officer has also assigned cogent reasons in

support of his findings. It is also found that this is not a

case of no evidence at all or that the findings of the enquiry

Officer are totally against the whole body of the evidence

on record of the enquiry. Hence, the findings of the

Enquiry Officer cannot be said to be perverse.

13.

So far the proportionality of the punishment is

concerned, commission of grave misconduct under clauses

18(i)(a) and 18(i)(o) of the Certified Standing order has

been proved against the workman in a properly conducted

departmental enquiry against him. Hence, the punishment

of dismissal from service cannot be said to be shockingly

disproportionate to the gravity of the misconduct

committed by him. Hence, there is no scope to interfere

with the punishment imposed against the workman. Hence,

it is ordered:

ORDER

The action of the management in relation to New

Majri U/G Sub Area of Western Coalfields Ltd. in

dismissing Shri Iqbal Hasan S/o Imamuddin, U/G loader

vide office order No. WCL/NMUGSA/PER/93/922 dated

13/17.05.1993 is legal and justified. The workman is not

entitled to any relief.

J. P. CHAND, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 23 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 217-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ;wfu;u cSad

vkWiQ bafM;k 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; ua- 2] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

307@1999) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks

23@12@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&12011@75@99&vkbZvkj (ch&II)º

jfo dqekj] MsLd vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 23rd January, 2015

S.O. 217.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 307/

1999) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court No. 2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure

in the Industrial Dispute between the management of the

Union Bank of India, and their workmen, received by the

Central Government on 23/12/2014.

[No. L-12011/75/99-IR(B-II)]

RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2),

AT DHANBAD

PRESENT : Shri KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer.

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section

10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act.,1947.

REFERENCE NO. 307 OF 1999.

PARTIES :

The General Secretary,

Union Bank Employees’ Association, Bihar State,

C/O Union Bank of India, Frazer Road, Abhay

Bhawan, Patna, Bihar.

Versus

Asst. General Manager,

Union Bank of India, Regional Office,

Nasheman, Mazhrul Haque

Path, Patna.

Ministry’s Order No L-12011/75/99 IR (B-II) dt.27.10.1999

APPEARANCES :

On behalf of the workman/Union : None.

On behalf of the Management

:

Mr. D. K. Verma

Ld. Adv.

State : Bihar

:

Industry Banking

Dated, Dhanbad, the 18th Dec., 2014.

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

537

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in

exercise of the powers conferred on them under Sec.10 (1)

(d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 has referred the following dispute

to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No.

L-12011/75/99-IR (B-II) dt. 27.10.1999.

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the Management of Union

Bank of India, Patna in not paying the officiating

allowance as per terms of Bipartite Settlement dated

19.10.1966 & 8.11.1973 to Peon/Armed Guard and

part time Sweepers for doing clerical work was not

justified? If so, to what relief the workman is

entitled?”

2

Neither Union representative for the Union Bank

Employees’ Association, Bihar State, and nor workman

appeared nor any witness on behalf of the workman

produced, though Mr. D. K.Verma, Ld. Advocate for the

OP/Management is present.

On perusal of the case record, I find in the present

Reference which is related to an issue over non-payment

of officiating allowance to the Pen/Armed Guard and Part

Time Sweepers for performing their clerical work, the

Union/Representative had failed to produce any witness

in support of their case, so it was closed on the very

28th Sept, 2005 and since thereafter the case has been

running for the evidence of the OP/Management which is

in my view quite useless to proceed with, because the

onus of poof lying upon the Union concerned to prove it

could not be effected.However,twice Regd.notices

dtt.30.6.14 and 6.8.14 were issued to the General Secretary

of the Union concerned for his appearance. The Union

Representative by his conduct appear to be quite reluctant

to contest the case. Hence the case is closed as no

Industrial Dispute existing. Accordingly an order of No

Dispute Award is passed.

KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 27 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 218-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj bafM;u cSad 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 23@2013) dks izdkf'kr

djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 27@01@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&12011@53@2012&vkbZvkj (ch&II)º

jfo dqekj] MsLd vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 27th January, 2015

S.O. 218.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 23/2013)

of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the

Industrial Dispute between the management of Indian Bank,

and their workmen, received by the Central Government

on 27/01/2015.

[No. L-12011/53/2012-IR(B-II)]

RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR

COURT, CHENNAI

Friday, the 16th January, 2015

Present : K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer

Industrial Dispute No. 23/2013

(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 Indian Bank and their

workman)

BETWEEN :

The General Secretary

:

1st Party/Petitioner

Indian Bank Employees

Union

Association (T. Nadu)

17, Ameerjan Street

Choolaimedu

Chennai-600094

AND

The Asstt. General Manager

:

2nd Party/Respondent

Indian Bank, Zonal Office

Katpadi Road

Vellore

Appearance :

For the 1st Party/

:

Sri G. Gopal, Authorized

Petitioner Union

Representative

For the 2nd Party/

:

M/s. T.S. Gopalan & Co.,

Respondent

Advocates

AWARD

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour &

Employment vide its Order No. L-12011/53/2012-IR (B-II)

dated 01.02.2013 referred the following Industrial Dispute

to this Tribunal for adjudication.

The schedule mentioned in that order is :

“Whether the action of the Management of Indian

Bank, Chennai in imposing the punishment of

Compulsory Retirement from service upon Sri G.

Soundarajan, Part-Time Sweeper, Ranipet Industrial

538

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Complex Branch vide order dated 30.01.2010 is legal

and justified? To what extent the workman is entitled

to relief?”

2.

On receipt of the Industrial Dispute this Tribunal

has numbered it as ID 23/2013 and issued notices to both

sides. The petitioner entered appearance through

Authorized Representative and the Respondent through

the 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 is a registered union having

substantial following among the workmen of the

Respondent Bank. The union takes up genuine grievances

of its members working in the bank. Soundarajan, Part-

Time Sweeper of Ranipet Industrial Complex Branch of

the Respondent was issued a Charge Sheet on 27.04.2009

alleging that he had removed cash from the Cash Counter.

Before issuing charge sheet Soundarajan was placed under

suspension. As per the Charge Sheet Soundarajan is

alleged to have removed a bundle of Rs. 10/- denomination

from the drawer of the Single Window Operator on

19.03.2009. Rs. 10,000/- is said to have been given to

Elizabeth Sundar, the Single Window Operator of the period

by a customer for changing to Rs. 10/- denomination. He

had agreed to come and collect the notes in the evening.

The Single Window Operator is said to have exchanged

the notes to Rs. 10/- denomination notes and kept it at the

drawer of the counter. In the evening she forgot to take

the amount before leaving the branch. On the next day

morning when she opened the drawer the bundle was

found missing. On 21.03.2009, Soundarajan is said to have

entrusted the amount to the Manager who in turn handed

it over to Elizabeth Sundar, the Single Window Operator.

Subsequently, the bank has issued Charge Sheet alleging

that Soundarajan has removed the bundle. A domestic

enquiry was conducted and Soundarajan was found guilty

of the charges. The punishment of Compulsory Retirement

from service was imposed on Soundarajan by the

Disciplinary Authority. Though, appeal was filed by

Soundarajan against the order, Appellate Authority upheld

the order of Disciplinary Authority. Soundarajan has not

committed any misconduct. Soundarajan who found the

amount in the Cash Cabin thought that it is the personal

amount of Single Window Operator and took it and kept it

in safe custody. Soundarajan was on leave on 20.03.2009.

When he reached the branch on 21.03.2009 he was

informed of the missing of the cash and he immediately

remembered about the cash kept by him and returned it to

the Manager. This would show that Soundarajan had no

intention to commit any fraud. There is no justification in

imposing the punishment on Soudarajan. An order may be

passed setting aside the punishment of Compulsory

Retirement from service.

4.

The Respondent has filed Counter Statement

contending as follows :

On 19.03.2009, Mr. Elizabeth Sundar was working as

Single Window Operator. According to her one

Shivashaktivelan, a customer of the Bank had tendered

Rs. 10,000/- to her for fresh currency in the denomination

of Rs. 10/- and had told her that he would collect the amount

in the evening. She got the notes of Rs. 10/- denomination

and kept it in the drawer of the Counter at which she was

working. The customer had not turned up in the evening

and the Single Window Operator had forgotten to take the

amount from the counter drawer before she left the Branch.

On 20.03.2009 she found that the cash kept in the drawer

was missing. Soundarajan had not reported for work on

that day. On 21.03.2009 when the Branch Manager reached

the branch at 07.30 in the morning Soundarajan also had

reached there. When he was questioned about his coming

for work early, he informed that Elizabeth Sundar had

requested to search the entire branch while cleaning the

premises. By about 08.00 AM Soundarajan called the

Branch Manager and pointed out a bundle of fresh

currency of Rs. 10,000/- wrapped in a carry bag lying inside

the cupboard near the server room. The Manager collected

the amount and handed it over to Elizabeth Sundar at 10.00

AM. While reviewing the CCTV recording of 19.03.2009

on 21.03.2009 it was observed that Soundarajan had

entered the Cash Cabin at about 05.05 PM and removed

the bundle from the Cash Cabin. He admitted before the

other staff that he had removed the cash from the place

where it was kept. On the same day the Branch Manager

sent a report to the Circle Office. An investigation was

conducted and charge sheet was issued to Soundarajan

on the basis of the Investigation Report. After enquiry the

punishment of compulsory retirement from service was

imposed on Soundarajan. He had received the Gratuity

and PF amount due to him. The petitioner is not entitled to

any relief.

5.

The evidence in the case consists of oral evidence

of WW1 and documentary evidence marked as Ext.W1 to

Ext.W12 and Ext.M1 to Ext.M13

6.

The points for consideration are:

(i)

Whether the action of the Respondent in

imposing the punishment of Compulsory

Retirement on Soundarajan is legal and

justified?

(ii)

What, if any is the relief to which Soundarajan

is entitled?”

The Points

7.

The Petitioner Union has raised the dispute on behalf

of Soundarajan, a member of the Union. Soundarajan had

been working as Part-Time Sweeper at Ranipet Industrial

Complex Branch of the Respondent. A charge sheet dated

27.04.2009 was issued to him alleging that on 19.03.2009

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

539

he had fraudulently removed a bundle of Rs. 10,000/- from

the drawer of the counter of Single Window Operator. On

enquiry Soundarajan was found guilty of the charges

against him and the punishment of Compulsory Retirement

from service was imposed on him.

8.

The stand of the Petitioner Union as well as

Soundarajan, the concerned workman is that he happened

to find the money in the drawer of the Single Window

Operator and he took the money and kept it in a safe place

to be handed over to Single Window Operator. According

to them, only because Soundarajan was on leave on

20.03.2009 it could not be entrusted to Elizabeth Sundar,

the Single Window Operator. It is also the case of the

petitioner that the confession statement which is relied

upon by the Enquiring Authority was obtained by threat

and force and it is not a voluntary one.

9.

The General Secretary of the Union has been

examined before this Tribunal as WW1. Soundarajan the

affected person has not come forward to give evidence

here. WW1 seems to have given evidence in the capacity

as the General Secretary of the Union. He had nothing to

do with the incident. He did not even defend Soundarajan

in the enquiry proceedings. Someone else was defending

Soundarajan.

10.

On the basis of the report given by the Branch Manager

to the Circle Office after the incident, an investigation was

conducted. It was based on the investigation report, charge

sheet was issued to Soundarajan and an enquiry was

conducted on the charge against him. In the enquiry

proceedings the Management had examined the

Investigating Officer and also two Daftaries of the Branch.

The Manager of the Branch, Elizabeth Sundar, the Single

Window Operator and another staff of the Bank were

examined on the side of the charge sheeted employee.

The charge sheeted employee also has given evidence.

11.

As already stated, Soundarajan, the concerned

workman had admitted that he has taken the money from

the drawer of the Single Window Operator’s counter.

However, his stand is that it was for safe keeping he had

removed the bundle. On the other hand, according to the

Management this is only a ploy on the part of the workman.

The stand of the bank is that the concerned workman

decided to return the money when he came to know about

the intention of the Manager to review the CCTV recording

of 19.03.2009.

12.

The witnesses on the side of the Management as

well as on the side of the workman have given evidence

on what happened after Elizabeth Sundar reported that

the money is found missing. Elizabeth Sundar examined

as DW1 has stated that when cash was found missing,

she was in tension and she had discussed the matter and

the incident had become known to the entire branch. She

has further stated that the bundle put in the drawer had

RBI wrapper. When she received it back also it had the

same RBI wrapper. DW3, the Manager had stated that

he has written to the Vigilance Officer about the incident

on 29.03.2009. The incident was reported to him on

20.03.2009 morning. They have searched the entire branch

for the money. On 21.03.2009 he had reached the office by

07.30 AM. The concerned workman came to the office by

07.45 AM. The Manager asked him why he was so early

on the day and he was told that Elizabeth Sundar had

requested him to search the entire premises for the money.

By 08.00 AM the concerned workman informed the

Manager that he found the bundle of currency from the

table adjoining the system room. Even though the cash

was found he wanted to know how the cash was removed

from the particular place. So he reviewed the CCTV

recording of 19.03.2009 and found the concerned workman

entering the cabin at 08.00 PM and removing the bundle.

However, where the workman had kept the bundle could

not be seen as it was not within the focus of CCTV. MW1

and MW2, the Daftries also were with him when he

viewed the CCTV recording. On noticing that the bundle

was removed by the concerned workman, they took him to

the record room and enquired with him. After 10 minutes

they came back to the Manager and informed him that the

concerned workman had admitted that he had removed

the cash.

13.

The evidence given by MW1 and MW2, the two

Daftries are regarding their viewing the CCTV recording

and on how the concerned workman had admitted that he

had removed the bundle. MW3, the Investigating Officer

had deposed that the CCTV was played to him also and he

had noticed the concerned workman removing the bundle

by about 08.00 PM on 19.03.2009. DW2, the armed guard

of the Branch had deposed that it was the practice of the

concerned workman to pick up and hand over any missing

piece found in the Currency Chest while cleaning the area.

Soundarajan himself examined as DW4 has stated that on

19.03.2009 he had opened the drawer to put a pad or paper

inside. According to him, he used to put in the cupboard

whatever things found in the floor during cleaning. He

deposed that he used to reach the branch daily by 0730

AM and not at 0900 AM as deposed by the Branch

Manager. He has stated that he had handed over the cash

bundle to the Manager on the morning of 21.03.2009.

According to him on seeing the CCTV recording, MW2

had told him that he has removed the cash from the

cupboard and he is to give confession letter to the Branch

Manager.

14.

The witnesses seem to have given statement to the

Investigation Officer. The examination of these witnesses

were based on the statements. It is clear from this that a

search was made for the bundle on 20.03.2009 and still it

could not be found. It is also clear that the concerned

workman had handed over the cash bundle to the Branch

Manager on 21.03.2009 by 08.00 AM.

540

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

15.

The petitioner challenges the finding of the Enquiry

Officer justifying the conduct of the concerned workman

stating that he has taken away the cash bundle with the

good intention of keeping it safely and it was not a

fraudulent act on his part. Will the available evidence and

circumstances justify such a conclusion? It is very much

clear that the concerned workman entered the counter of

the Single Window Operator at 08.00 PM and it was on

this occasion he had removed the cash bundle. It has

come out during the evidence of Branch Manager that

while viewing the CCTV recording it was noticed that the

concerned workman had entered the counter of the Single

Window Operator by about 05.05 PM also. Initially it was

thought that the removal of the cash bundle was done by

the concerned workman at this time. However, further

playing of the CCTV recording had revealed that the

concerned workman had entered the counter at 08.00 PM

also and actual removal of the cash bundle was done at

this occasion. Though none of the witnesses have stated

whether the Single Window Operator herself was at the

counter at 05.05 PM when the concerned workman entered

the counter, the assumption to be made is that she had

already left by this time. It is clear that the concerned

workman who opened the drawer had noticed the cash

bundle at that time and had later returned to the counter

and had removed the cash bundle. The evidences and

circumstances would reveal that it was a deliberate act on

the part of the concerned workman and not an act with the

bonafide intention of keeping the amount in safe custody.

For one thing, a person who is working as Part-Time

Sweeper, even though he was at times employed by the

Single Window Operator to accompany her while carrying

cash, is not expected to meddle with the drawer in the

counter of Single Window Operator. The drawer is under

the custody of the Single Window Operator and he had

no right to open the same. Even though the Single Window

Operator had been negligent enough in not keeping the

drawer locked, still the place was safe enough and the

bundle would have remained in the drawer until next day,

till the arrival of the operator for work in the next morning.

There was no necessity for the concerned workman to

remove the same. Even as stated by the concerned

workman his habit was to put papers and other things

found at the floor in the cupboard. He was not in the habit

of carrying them away. So there was no necessity to remove

the bundle at all.

16.

There are other circumstances also which would

reveal the malafide intention of the concerned workman.

What he found on the particular day was not a paper or

pad or some other thing which are not of much importance.

If the case that he had removed the bundle with the

bonafide intention is accepted it was incumbent upon him

to inform the Single Window Operator of the same. At the

time of the removal, necessarily the Manager or some other

responsible person would have been available at the Bank.

If the intention was bonafide the concerned workman

would have entrusted the bundle with any of them, rather

than keeping it aside. At least he would have informed

them of the find. Even assuming that the concerned

workman had kept it safely, on the next day when he has

decided to take leave he would have informed the Single

Window Operator that he has removed the bundle and

kept it in the particular place. Having been an employee of

the Bank for several years naturally he would have known

what would have been the pandemonium in the Bank when

it was noticed that the money is missing. He kept silence

for the entire day.

17.

Another circumstance that points against the

concerned workman is his early arrival on the next day.

The Manager has deposed that the concerned workman

used to reach the bank only at 0900 AM usually and he

was doing most of the work only in the evening. So it is

clear that the concerned workman had got information

about the happenings in the branch about the missing

bundle. What he told the Manager is that Elizabeth Sundar,

the Single Window Operator had requested him to search

the premises for the money while he is doing the cleaning.

However, the evidence given by Elizabeth Sundar is that

though a search was made in the entire premises she did

not contact the concerned workman or make any request

to make a search. The concerned workman himself has no

case in his confessional statement that anyone enquired

with him. This makes it clear that the concerned workman

had reached the office early not for the purpose of making

a search. The Manager had stated during his examination

that on 20.03.2009 itself he had made known that he will be

viewing the CCTV and the petitioner must have come to

know about this also. He apprehended the danger of his

removal of the bundle being viewed in the recording of

CCTV.

18.

After CCTV was viewed the concerned workman

was taken aside and questioned. The evidence given by

MWs 1 and 2 is that he has admitted that he had removed

the bundle. Even without the admission it is clear that he

had removed the bundle. The case of the workman is that

pressure was exercised on him to make the confession.

There is no specific case for the workman that it was by

threat and coercion that he was made to confess. He has

not cared to give evidence before this Tribunal. The

evidence given by the General Secretary regarding the

incident is not of any consequence in so far as he had

nothing to do with the incident. It was clearly a case of

removal of the bundle from the drawer of the Single Window

Operator’s counter. The bundle was returned only when

the concerned workman came to know that the CCTV

recording will reveal his malafide act. The Enquiry Officer

had every justification in finding the charges against the

concerned workman proved.

19.

There is no necessity to interfere with the

punishment imposed on the concerned workman also.

Rather than the major punishment of removal from service,

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

541

Compulsory Retirement from service which is a lesser one

has been imposed on the concerned workman. This

commensurate with the offence for which he is found guilty.

The concerned workman is not entitled to any relief.

20.

In view of my findings above, the reference is

answered against the petitioner. An award is passed

accordingly.

K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined:

For the 1st Party/

:

WW1, Sri K. Krishnan

Petitioner Union

For the 2nd Party/

:

None

Management

Documents Marked:

On the petitioner’s side

Ex.No.

Date

Description

Ex.W1

21.03.2009

Letter from Branch Manager,

Ranipet to Circle Office, Vellore

regarding personal cash missing

from Branch Premises

Ex.W2

31.03.2009

Preliminary Investigation Report

with Annexures 1 to 7

Ex.W3

27.04.2009

Charge Sheet CO/VLR/VIG/F339/

198/2009 issued to Sri G.

Soundarajan by Indian Bank,

Circle Office, Vellore

Ex.W4

04.05.2009

Letter from Sri G. Soundarajan

(CSE) to Circle Office, Vellore

protesting his suspension and

denying charges against him

Ex.W5

13.10.2009

Written submission by Sri G.

Soundarajan in the domestic

enquiry

Ex.W6

22.12.2009

Comments by Sri G. Soundarajan

(CSE) on the findings of the

Enquiry Officer’s Report

Ex.W7

30.01.2010

Order CO/VLR/VIG/F339/028/2010

of the Disciplinary Authority

imposing punishment

Ex.W8

06.03.2010

Appeal letter by G. Soundarajan

(CSE) to the Appellate Authority

against the punishment imposed

on him by the Disciplinary

Authority

Ex.W9

03.12.2010

Order HRM/DPC/724/2010-11

confirming the punishment

imposed on CSE

Ex.W10

04.05.2011

Letter IBEA/GEN/81/2010-13 by

the Union to the Asstt. Labour

Commissioner

raising

an

Industrial Dispute against the

punishment

Ex.W11

30.01.2012

Rejoinder by the Union for the

above letter dated 09.06.2011

Ex.W12

09.09.2009

Domestic Enquiry Proceedings

and other

dates

On the Management’s side

Ex.No.

Date

Description

Ex.M1

09.04.2009

Letter from bank placing G.

Soundararajan under Suspension

Ex.M2

18.07.2009

Letter appointing Mr. S.

Bagyanathan as Enquiry Officer

Ex.M3

18.07.2009

Letter appointing Mr. A. Kalyana

Raman as Presenting Officer

Ex.M4

09.08.2009

Letter from G. Soundararajan

authorizing

Mr.

C.

Baladhandayudhapani as his

Defence Representative

Ex.M5

01.10.2009

Letter from EO to Mrs. Elizabeth

Sundar

Ex.M6

01.10.2009

Letter from EO to Mr. E. Chitti Babu

Ex.M7

01.10.2009

Letter from EO to Mr. M.

Narayanasamy

Ex.M8

09.04.2009

Letter from EO to Mr. G.

Soundararajan

Ex.M9

01.10.2009

Letter from EO to Mr. R.

Sivasakthivelan

Ex.M10

-

Statement of Mr. G. Soundararajan

before Mr. S. Bagyanathan

Ex.M11

19.11.2009

Findings of Enquiry Officer Mr. S.

Bagyanathan

Ex.M12

19.01.2010

Second Show Cause Notice to

Mr. G. Soundararajan proposing

punishment and offering personal

hearing on 25.01.2010

Ex.M13

25.01.2010

Proceedings of personal hearing

and Mr. G. Soundararajan’s written

representation

before

the

Disciplinary Authority.

ubZ fnYyh] 28 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 219-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj fczfV'k ,vjost

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

542

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] psUubZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 126@2014)

dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 28@01@2015 dks izkIr

gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&11012@39@2014&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- ds- flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 28th January, 2015

S.O. 219.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 126/2014)

of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour

Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial

Dispute between the management of The Regional HR

Management, British Airways, and their workmen, received

by the Central Government on 28/01/2015.

[No. L-11012/39/2014-IR(CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR

COURT, CHENNAI

Tuesday, the 12th January, 2015

Present : K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer

Industrial Dispute No. 126/2014

(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 British Airways and their

workman)

BETWEEN :

Sri Sathish Loganathan

:

1st Party/Petitioner

AND

1. The Regional HR Management

:

2nd Party/1st

British Airways

Respondent

South Asia, DLF Plaza Tower,

DLF City Phase-I, Gurgaon,

Haryana-122022

2. The Customer Service Manager

:

2nd Party/2nd

British Airways

Respondent

No. 3 & 4, New Integrated

Air Cargo Complex

Meenambakkam, Chennai-600027

Appearance :

For the 1st Party/Petitioner

:

None

For the 2nd Party/1st & 2nd Respondent :

None

AWARD

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour &

Employment vide its Order No. L-11012/39/2014-IR (CM-I)

dated 28.10.2014 referred the following Industrial Dispute

to this Tribunal for adjudication.

The schedule mentioned in that order is :

“Whether the action of the management of British

Airways regarding termination of the service of the

petitioner, Sri Sathish Loganathan is justifiable or

not? To what relief the concerned workman is entitled

to?”

2.

The petitioner has entered appearance in the ID on

notice.

3.

The petitioner does not want to proceed with the ID

as a similar matter filed by him directly on the same subject

is pending before this Tribunal as ID 93/2014. The petitioner

has made endorsement to this effect. So there is no need

to proceed with this ID.

4.

Accordingly the ID is closed. An award is passed to

this effect.

K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined:

For the 1st Party/Petitioner

:

None

For the 2nd Party/Management

:

None

Documents marked:

On the petitioner’s side

Ex.No.

Date

Description

N/A

On the Management’s side

Ex.No.

Date

Description

N/A

ubZ fnYyh] 28 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 220-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj fczfV'k ,vjost

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 127@2014)

dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 28@01@2015 dks izkIr

gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&11012@38@2014&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- ds- flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 28th January, 2015

S.O. 220.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 127/

2014) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

543

Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the

Industrial Dispute between the management of The

Regional HR Management, British Airways, and their

workman, received by the Central Government on

28/01/2015.

[No. L-11012/38/2014-IR(CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR

COURT, CHENNAI

Monday, the 12th January, 2015

Present : K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer

Industrial Dispute No. 127/2014

(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 British Airways and their

workman)

BETWEEN :

Smt. T. Jenifer Prasanna Kumari

:

1st Party/Petitioner

AND

1. The Regional HR Management

:

2nd Party/1st

British Airways

Respondent

South Asia, DLF Plaza Tower,

DLF City Phase-I, Gurgaon,

Haryana-122022

2. The Customer Service Manager

:

2nd Party/2nd

British Airways

Respondent

No. 3 & 4, New Integrated

Air Cargo Complex

Meenambakkam, Chennai-600027

Appearance :

For the 1st Party/Petitioner

:

None

For the 2nd Party/1st & 2nd Respondent :

None

AWARD

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour &

Employment vide its Order No. L-11012/38/2014-IR (CM-I)

dated 28.10.2014 referred the following Industrial Dispute

to this Tribunal for adjudication.

The schedule mentioned in that order is :

“Whether the action of the management of British

Airways regarding the termination of the service of

the petitioner, Ms. T. Jenifer Prasanna Kumari is

justifiable or not? To what relief the concerned

workman is entitled to?”

2.

The petitioner has entered appearance in the ID on

notice.

3.

The petitioner does not want to proceed with the ID

as a similar matter filed by her directly on the same subject

is pending before this Tribunal as ID 91/2014. The petitioner

has made endorsement to this effect. So there is no need

to proceed with this ID.

4.

Accordingly the ID is closed. An award is passed to

this effect.

K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined:

For the 1st Party/Petitioner

:

None

For the 2nd Party/Management

:

None

Documents marked :

On the petitioner’s side

Ex.No.

Date

Description

N/A

On the Management’s side

Ex.No.

Date

Description

N/A

ubZ fnYyh] 30 tuojh] 2015

dk-vk- 221-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj dekaMsaV ,oa

eq[; izf'k{kd] Hkkjrh; lSU; vdkneh] nsgjknwu 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;

ua- 2] fnYyh ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 23@13) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS]

tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 29@01@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&14012@12@2012&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 30th January, 2015

S.O. 221.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 23/13) of

the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour

Court-II, Delhi now as shown in the Annexure in the

Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the

management of the Commandant and Chief Trainer, Indian

Military Academy, Dehradun, and their workmen, which

was received by the Central Government on 29/01/2015.

[No. L-14012/12/2012-IR(DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

544

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-

CUM-LABOUR COURT - II, DELHI

Present : Shri Harbansh Kumar Saxena

ID No. 23/13

Sh. Shamshad Ali,

S/o Sh. Mazsood Ali,

Nanda ki Chowki, PO: Chandrabani, Dehradun

Versus

The Commandant and Chief Trainer,

Indian Military Academy,

Dehradun,

Ex-parte AWARD

The Central Government in the Ministry of Labour

vide notification No L-14012/12/2012(IR(DU)) dated

28.02.2013 referred the following industrial Dispute to this

tribunal for adjudication :-

“Whether the action of the management of Indian

Military Academy, Dehradun in terminating the

services of Sh. Shamshad Ali, Cycle Repairer w.e.f.

01.03.2012 in violation of provisions of Section 25 F,

G, H of ID Act, 1947 is unjustified? If so, what relief

the workman is entitled to?

On 2.4.2013 reference was received in this tribunal.

Which was register as I.D No. 23/13 and claimant was

called upon to file claim statement with in fifteen days

from date of service of notice. Which was required to be

accompanied with relevant documents and list of witnesses

After service of notice workman/claimant Sh.

Shamshad Ali filed claim statement on 23.05.2013 in this

tribunal. Wherein he prayed as follows:-

(i)

An Award be made in favour of the workman

and against the management for regular

appointment on the basis of long work

experience of bicycle repairer.

(ii)

To reinstate on the post bicycle repairer.

(iii)

Back wages be granted.

(iv)

Any other relief , if court thinks fit.

10.07.2013 was fixed for filing written statement but

inspite of service management filed no written statement.

So case proceeded ex-parte against management on

30.12.2013.

Claimant in support of his case filed affidavit in his

evidence on 18.02.2014 alongwith certain Photostat copies

of documents. He tendered his affidavit alongwith annexed

Photostat copies of documents on 28.04.2014.

None appear to cross-examine the workman as case

proceeded ex-parte against management.

I have heard the arguments of Ld. A/R of the

workman at length and perused the record.

In the light of contentions of Ld. AR for the workman

I perused the pleadings in claim statement and evidence

of workman on record which shows that evidence of

workman is unrebutted evidence. So it comes within the

ambit of reliable and credible evidence.

On the basis of evidence of workman/ claimant on

record. Claim statement is liable to be allowed but it is to

be determined what relief is to be provided to the workman/

claimant.

In the light of contentions and counter contentions

I perused the settled law of Hon’ble Supreme court on the

point of reinstatement and grant of back wages. Which

shows that reinstatement is not a necessary consequence

wherever termination is held illegal. Depending upon the

facts of each case a suitable compensation can be awarded.

In Assistant Engineer, Rajasthan Dev. Corporation and

Anr Vs. Gitam Singh, (2013)II LLJ 141 Hon’ble Supreme

Court has held that reinstatement of workman with

continuity of service and 25% back wages was not proper

in the facts and circumstances of the case and the

compensation of Rs.50,000/-(Rs. Fifty Thousand Only)

shall meet the ends of justice. In Jagbir Singh Vs. Haryana

State Agriculture Marketing Board & Anr AIR 2009

Supreme Court 3004, Hon’ble Supreme Court held thus

“the award of reinstatement with full back wages in a case

where the workman has completed 240 days of work in a

year preceding the date of termination particularly, daily

wagers has not been found to be proper by this Court and

instead compensation has been awarded.” In catena of

Judgments, Hon’ble Supreme Court has taken a view that

reinstatement is not automatic, merely because the

termination is illegal or in contravention of S-25-F of the

Industrial Dispute Act. In Talwara Co-operative credit and

service society Limited Vs. Sushil Kumar (2008) 9 SCC

486, Hon’ble Supreme Court held thus,” grant of relief of

reinstatement, it is trite, is not automatic. Grant of back

wages is also not automatic.”

Workman of the instant case was not appointed by

following due procedure and as per rules. He had rendered

service with the respondent as a casual worker, thus,

Compensation of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand only)

by way of damages as compensation to the workman/

claimant by Management after expiry of period of limitation

of available remedy against Award. That will meet the ends

of Justice.

Thus Reference is decided in favour of workman

and against Management.

Ex-parte Award is accordingly passed.

Dated:-25.11.2014

HARBANSH KUMAR SAXENA, Presiding Officer

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

545

ubZ fnYyh] 3 iQjojh] 2015

dk-vk- 222-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj egkizca/d]

Hkkjr lapkj fuxe fyfeVsM 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; ua- 2] fnYyh

ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 44@2012) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks

dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 03@02@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&40012@32@2011&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º

ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 3rd February, 2015

S.O. 222.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 44/2012)

of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court-II, Delhi now as shown in the Annexure in

the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation

to the management of the General Manager, Bharat Sanchar

Nigam Limited, and their workmen, which was received

by the Central Government on 03/02/2015.

[No. L-40012/32/2011-IR(DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II, DELHI

Present : Shri Harbansh Kumar Saxena

ID No. 44/12

Sh. Manoj Kumar,

S/o Sh. Rajender,

R/o- MCF 2941/1, Sanjay Colony,

Sector-23 , Faridabad.

Versus

The General Manager,

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited,

Sector-15, Faridabad.

NO DISPUTE AWARD

The Central Government in the Ministry of Labour

vide notification No L-40012/32/2011-IR(DU) dated

13.01.2012 referred the following industrial Dispute to this

tribunal for adjudication :-

“Whether the contract awarded by G.M, BSNL,

Faridabad is a sham contract in nature? Whether

action taken by the management in terminating the

services of Sh. Manoj Kumar, S/o Sh. Rajender , Ex-

cable jointer, w.e.f. 23.08.2010 is just, fair and legal?

What relief the workman is entitled to and from which

date?”

On 30.1.2012 reference was received in this tribunal.

Which was register as I.D No. 44/2012 and claimant was

called upon to file claim statement with in fifteen days

from date of service of notice. Which was required to be

accompanied with relevant documents and list of

witnesses.

After service of notice workman/claimant Sh. Manoj

Kumar not filed claim statement but management in

response to reference filed written statement. wherein it

mentioned as follows:-

1.

That there exists /existed no relationship of employer

and employee between the workman and the management.

The workman/claimant had never been taken into

employment by the respondent/management at any point

of time. The respondent has sufficient staff of Group ‘C’

and ‘D’ and, therefore, the respondent department does

not engage daily wagers for any work. If any petty work is

to be done then that work is done through the contractors

engaged by the respondent . A list of contractors engaged

by the respondent/department is as under:-

Name of Contractor

Period

1.

M/s. Keshav Security Service

31.08.1998 to 30.08.1999

2.

M/s. Laxman Security Service

31.08.1998 to 30.08.1999

3.

M/s. Om Prakash Bhulania

1.02.2001 to 31.01.2002

4.

M/s. Keshav Security Service

2.02.2001 to 1.02.2002

5.

M/s. Keshav Security Service

21.10.2002 to 20.10.2003

6.

M/s. Anirudh Security Service

2.09.2002 to 15.09.2004

7.

M/s. Keshav Security Service

1.08.2003 to 31.07.2004

8.

M/s. Keshav Security Service

23.03.2005 to 31.08.2008

9.

M/s. Kishan Singh and Associates 1.11.2007 to 31.10.2008

10. M/s. Kishan Singh and Associates 1.02.2009 to 31.01.2010

11. M/s. Keshav Security Service

1.08.2010 to 31.07.2011

12. M/s. Mgarock Security Service

11.09.2006 to 10.09.2007

2.

That the workman has no locus standie to file the

instant claim before this Hon’ble Tribunal.

3.

That the claim of the workman is not maintainable as

it is false, bogus and vexatious and has been filed by the

workman with malafide intention and oblique motive.

4.

That the workman /claimant has not come before

this Hon’ble Tribunal with clean hands and he has filed

the false and fabricated claim before this Hon’bl Tribunal.

REPLY PARAWISE

1.

That the contents of para No.1 of the claim statement

are absolutely wrong, incorrect and hence vehemently

denied. It is wrong and denied that the workman joined

the management on 05.01.2004 as Cable Joinder at the

monthly salary of Rs. 1,650/- and it was increased time to

546

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

time and lastly drawn salary by workman was Rs. 3,500/-

per month. It is submitted that the workman had never

been taken into employment by the management and there

exists/existed no relationship of employer and employee

between the workman and the management. Since the

workman never joined the management , therefore, there

is no question of paying any salary to workman as alleged.

The respondent has sufficient staff of Group ‘C’ and ‘D’

and, therefore, the respondent department does not engage

daily wagers for any work. If any petty work is to be done

then that work is done through the contractor engaged by

the respondent and a list of contractor engaged by the

respondent/BSNL is as under:-

Name of Contractor

Period

1.

M/s. Keshav Security Service

31.08.1998 to 30.08.1999

2.

M/s. Laxman Security Service

31.08.1998 to 30.08.1999

3.

M/s. Om Prakash Bhulania

1.02.2001 to 31.01.2002

4.

M/s. Keshav Security Service

2.02.2001 to 1.02.2002

5.

M/s. Keshav Security Service

21.10.2002 to 20.10.2003

6.

M/s. Anirudh Security Service

2.09.2002 to 15.09.2004

7.

M/s. Keshav Security Service

1.08.2003 to 31.07.2004

8.

M/s. Keshav Security Service

23.03.2005 to 31.08.2008

9.

M/s. Kishan Singh and Associates 1.11.2007 to 31.10.2008

10. M/s. Kishan Singh and Associates 1.02.2009 to 31.01.2010

11. M/s. Keshav Security Service

1.08.2010 to 31.07.2011

12. M/s. Mgarock Security Service

11.09.2006 to 10.09.2007

2.

That the contents of para No.2 of the claim statement

are absolutely wrong, incorrect and hence vehemently

denied. Since the workman never worked under the

employment of the management , therefore, the allegation

of the workman as to his work and conduct is wrong and

denied.

3.

That the contents of para No.3 of the claim statement

are absolutely wrong, incorrect and hence vehemently

denied. Since the workman never joined the management ,

therefore, the allegation of the workman as to his work

and conduct is wrong and denied.

4.

That the contents of para No.4 of the claim statement,

it is submitted that since the workman never worked under

the employment of management therefore, there is no

question of providing any facility of P.F. ESI, Holiday

Leave, bonus, overtime etc. to the workman as alleged

and there was no requirement to the management to shunt

out the workman from its office/establishment as alleged.

The workman may be put to strict proof in support of

pleadings made by him in this para.

5.

That the contents of para No.5 of the claim statement

are absolutely wrong, incorrect and hence vehemently

denied. It is wrong and denied that on 23.08.2010 when

the workman was on duty, the management not only

misbehaved but turned out him from the job, without

assigning any reason or without any notice, illegally which

is clear violation of Section 25-F of Industial Disputes

Act, 1947. It is submitted that the management has not

violated any provision of Section 25-F of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 as alleged. Since the workman never

worked at any point of time under the employment of

management , therefore, there is no question of any duty

by the workman and further there is no question of turning

out the workman from job as alleged. All the allegations

leveled in this para by the workman are nothing allegations

leveled in this para by the workman are nothing but a false

and concocted story made out by the workman. Therefore,

the workman may be put to strict proof in support of

allegations made in this para.

6.

That the contents of para No.6 of the claim statement

are absolutely wrong, incorrect and hence vehemently

denied. Since the workman never under the employment

of the management at any point of time, therefore, there is

no question of giving any hearing or notice/show cause

by the management as alleged.

7.

That the contents of para No.7 of the claim statement

are absolutely wrong, incorrect and hence vehemently

denied. Since the workman never worked under the

employment of the management , therefore, there is no

question of paying any salary to the workman as alleged.

8.

That the contents of para No.8 of the claim statement

are absolutely wrong, incorrect and hence vehemently

denied. As submitted above, the workman is not entitled

for any salary and other benefits as alleged.

9.

That the contents of para No.9 of the claim statement

are absolutely wrong, incorrect and hence vehemently

denied. The reply of foregoing paras may be read in reply

to this para. The workman never approached to the

management as alleged.

10.

That the contents of para No. 10 of the claim

statement are not disputed to the extent of sending a

demand notice to the management by the workman , being

a matter of record. But the contents of said demand notice

are absolutely false, incorrect and hence vehemently

denied. Since the workman never worked under the

employment of management, therefore there was no

question of complying with the notice.

11.

That the contents of para No.11 of the claim statement

are absolutely wrong, incorrect and hence vehemently

denied. Since the workman had never taken into

employment by the management and there exists/existed

no relationship of employer and employee between the

workman and the management, therefore, the workman is

not entitled to reinstatement in service with continuity of

service, full back wages alongwith consequential relief as

alleged in this para.

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

547

12.

That the contents of para No.12 of the claim statement

are absolutely wrong, incorrect and hence vehemently

denied. It is submitted that reply of foregoing paras may

be read in reply to this para. It is, however, submitted that

the workman is gainfully employed.

REPLY TO PRAYER

The contents of this para of the claim statement are

absolutely wrong, incorrect and hence vehemently denied.

The claim of the workman is false, vexatious and bogus

and same has been filed by the workman with malafide

intention and oblique motive.

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that in view of

preliminary objections taken above and in view of reply

parawise, the claim of the workman may be dismissed with

costs.

On the basis of non-interestedness of workman. The

proceeding of this case is not liable to be proceeded further.

Hence proceedings of the case are liable to be dropped

and no dispute award is liable to be passed.

No Dispute Award is accordingly passed.

Dated:-28.1.2015

HARBANSH KUMAR SAXENA, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 4 iQjojh] 2015

dk-vk- 223-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ vEcqtk

lhesaV~l fyfeVsM 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; ua- 2] paMhx< ds iapkV (lanHkZ

la[;k 19@2014) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks

23@01@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&29011@9@2014&vkbZvkj (,e)º

tksgu rksiuks] voj lfpo

New Delhi, the 4th February, 2015

S.O.

223.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 19/2014)

of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour

Court-2, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the

Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to

the management of M/s. Ambuja Cements Limited, and

their workman, which was received by the Central

Government on 23/01/2015.

[No. L-29011/9/2014-IR(M)]

JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,

CHANDIGARH.

Present : Sri KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer.

Case No. I.D. 19/2014

Registered on 23.7.2005

Ambuja Cement Workers Union,

Daburji, Ropar.

...Petitioner

Versus

1. Jt. President,

Ambuja Cement Ltd.,

Duburji,

Ropar.

2. Managing Director,

Ambuja Cement Ltd.,

Elegant Business Park,

MIDC Cross Road B,

Off Andheri K Road,

Andheri East City-Mumbai

State-Maharashtra-400059.

...Respondents

APPEARANCES :

For the workman

Ex parte

For the Management

Sh. Pawan Mutneja Adv.

AWARD

Passed on-24.12.2014

Central Government vide Notification No. L-29011/

9/2014-IR(M) Dated 9.7.2014, by exercising its powers

under Section 10 sub-section (1) Clause (d) and sub-

section (2-A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

(hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’) has referred the following

Industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:-

“Whether the action of the management of Ambuja

Cement Ltd.,Ropar in not considering any of the

demands raised vide letter dated 11.6.2013 (copy

enclosed) is just, valid and legal? If not what

benefits the union/workman is entitled for and what

directions are necessary in the matter?”

On receipt of the reference, notice was issued to the

workers-Union through registered cover but none

appeared and workers-Union was proceeded against ex

parte vide order dated 14.11.2014.

Since the workers-Union was proceeded against ex

parte, no statement of claim was filed.

In the circumstances, the reference is answered

against the workers-Union. Let hard and soft copy of the

award be sent to Central Government for further necessary

action.

KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer

548

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ubZ fnYyh] 4 iQjojh] 2015

dk-vk- 224-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj bafM;u vk;y

dkjiksjs'ku fyfeVsM 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; ua- 2] ubZ fnYyh ds

iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 93@2011) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh;

ljdkj dks 23@01@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&30011@43@2010&vkbZvkj (,e)º

tksgu rksiuks] voj lfpo

New Delhi, the 4th February, 2015

S.O.

224.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 93/2011)

of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court-II, New Delhi now as shown in the Annexure

in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation

to the management of Indian Oil Corporation Limited, and

their workmen, which was received by the Central

Government on 23/01/2015.

[No. L-30011/43/2010-IR(M)]

JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT - II,

DELHI

Present : Shri HARBANSH KUMAR SAXENA

ID No. 93/11

The General Secy.,

Petroleum Employees Union (Regd.),

H. No. 1166, R Block,

Mangolpuri , New Delhi -110083.

Versus

The Chief Terminal Manager,

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.,

Terminal Bijwasan, New Delhi-110061.

NO DISPUTE AWARD

The Central Government in the Ministry of Labour

vide notification No. L- 30011/43/2010-IR(M) dated

18.10.2011 referred the following industrial Dispute to this

tribunal for adjudication :-

“Whether the demand of the workmen (As per list

attached) for reinstatement with full back wages is

just and fair? To what relief the workmen are entitled

and from which date?”

On 11.11.2011 reference was received in this tribunal.

Which was register as I.D No. 93/11 and claimants were

called upon to file claim statement with in fifteen days

from date of service of notice.Which was required to be

accompanied with relevant documents and list of

witnesses.

Several opportunities given to workmen as well as

management but neither workmen nor management filed

claim statement/Response to the reference.

In this background there is no option to this tribunal

except to pass No Dispute Award because parties are not

interested in further progress of the case.

No Dispute Award is accordingly passed.

Dated:-27/11/2014

HARBANSH KUMAR SAXENA, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 4 iQjojh] 2015

dk-vk- 225-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947

dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSlwj feujYl

fyfeVsM 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;] cSaxyksj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

70@2007 ,oa vU;) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks

23@01@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&29012@35] 46] 54] 57] 59@2006&vkbZvkj (,e)]

la- ,y&29012@6&18] 28] 31] 33] 34] 38] 43] 52&55]

77&82@2007&vkbZvkj (,e)]

la- ,y&29012@33&36] 39&41] 43@2008&vkbZvkj (,e)º

tksgu rksiuks] voj lfpo

New Delhi, the 4th February, 2015

S.O. 225.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. Common

Award C.R. No. 70/2007 & Others) of the Central

Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Bangalore

now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute

between the employers in relation to the management of

Mysore Minerals Limited, and their workmen, which was

received by the Central Government on 23/01/2015.

[No. L- 29012/35, 46, 54, 57, 59/2006-IR (M),

No. L- 29012/6-18, 28, 31, 33, 34, 38,

43, 52-55, 77-82/2007-IR (M),

No. L- 29012/33-36, 39-41, 43/2008-IR (M)]

JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

549

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIUBNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

BANGALORE

Dated : 3rd December, 2014

Present : Shri S. N. NAVALGUND, Presiding Officer

C R No. 70/2007

I Party

Smt. Lakkamma, W/o Javaraiah,

Jamboor Post, Nuggehalli Hobli,

C R Patna, Tq: Hassan Dist.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road, Bangalore-560 001

C R No. 71/2007

I Party

Smt. T Lakshmamma,

W/o Late M H Thimmegowda,

Muddanahalli Village,

Jamboor Post, Nuggehalli Hobli,

C R Patna

Tq: Hassan Dist.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore-560 001

C R No. 72/2007

I Party

Smt. J Rangamma, W/o Javare Gowda,

K B Byrapura Village, Kembalu Post,

Bagur Hobli, C R Patna Taluk,

Hassan Dist.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001

C R No. 74/2007

I Party

Sir Chowdegowda,

S/o Late Kampini Gowda,

MML Worker, Hebalu Village,

Bathikere Post, Nuggehalli Hobli,

C R Patna Taluk, Hassan.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 73/2007

I Party

Sri K Mahadeva Shetty,

S/o Late Madashetty, MML Worker,

Kelamballi Village and Post,

Kasaba Hobli,

Chamrajanagara Taluk And District

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001

C R No. 75/2007

I Party

Smt. K Parvathamma, W/o Late Vishnushetty,

Kallakere Village, Hattihalli Post,

Nuggehalli Hobli,

C R Patna Taluk, Hassan District

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001

C R No. 76/2007

I Party

Sri Sannappa, S/o Late Thammaiah Chari,

Hullikere Village, Athihalli Post,

Nuggehalli Hobli,

C R Patna Taluk, Hassan District

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001

C R No. 77/2007

I Party

Sri Thimmashetty, S/o Late Kuri Dasappa,

MML Worker, Kenkere Village And Post,

Gandasi Hobli, Arasikere Taluk,

Hassan District

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001

550

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

C R No. 78/2007

I Party

Sri D Nanjegowda, S/o Late Dasegowda,

MML Worker, Hullenahalli, Kembalu Post,

Bagur Hobli, C R Patna Taluk,

Hassan District

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001

C R No. 80/2007

I Party

Sri J Thirumalegowda, S/o Late Jade Rangegowda,

MML Worker, Hullikere Post,

Nuggehalli Hobli,

C R Patna, Hassan District

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001

C R No. 105/2007

I Party

Smt. Thimmamma, W/o Mari Gowda,

Kembal Village and Post,

Bagur Hobli,

C R Patna Taluk, Hassan District

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001

C R No. 107/2007

I Party

Smt. S Thimmamma, W/o Amase Gowda,

Kembal Village and Post,

Bagur Hobli, C R Patna Taluk,

Hassan District

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001

C R No. 109/2007

I Party

Sri Mariyappa, S/o Late Ningegowda,

N Thimalapura Village,

Nagarnavile Post, Bagur Hobli,

C R Patna Taluk, Hassan District

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001

C R No. 110/2007

I Party

Smt. Nanjamma,

W/o Late Bore Gowda,

MML Worker, Karekere Village,

Hattihalli Post,

Nuggehalli Hobli,

C R Patna, Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 111/2007

I Party

Smt. B Nanjamma, W/o Late Boregowda,

Hullikere Village, Hattihalli Post,

Nuggehalli Hobli,

C R Patna, Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 112/2007

I Party

Sri Huvappa, S/O Late Shivananjegowda,

MML Worker, K Byrapur Village,

Kembal Village and Post, Bagur Hobli,

C R Patna Tq, Hassan

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

551

C R No. 113/2007

I Party

Sri Doddegowda, S/o Late Nanjegowda,

N Thimalapura Village, Nagarnavile Post,

Bagur Hobli, C R Patna Taluk,

Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 114/2007

I Party

Smt. Giriyamma,

W/o Late Thimmegowda,

MML Worker, Chavenahalli Village,

Nagarnavile Post, Bagur Hobli,

C R Patna Taluk,

Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 115/2007

I Party

Smt. Narasamma,

W/o Late Mudalagirigowda,

Chavenahalli Village,

Nagarnavile Post, Bagur Hobli,

C R Patna Taluk,

Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 118/2007

I Party

Sri C Rangappa, S/o Late Hanumegowda,

Chavenahalli Village, Nagarnavile Post,

Bagur Hobli, C R Patna Taluk,

Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 119/2007

I Party

Sri Beeregowda, S/o Late Ninge Gowda,

Chattna Halli, Anathi Post,

Bagur Hobli, C R Patna Taluk,

Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 120/2007

I Party

Sri Puttegowda, S/o Late Sh. Kalase Gowda,

MML Worker, Bidare Village,

Kembalu Post, Bagur Hobli,

C R Patna Taluk, Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 155/2007

I Party

Sri Shankaregowda, S/o Laate Siddappa,

Holegerehalli Village And Post,

Bagur Hobli, C R Patna Taluk,

Hassan Dist.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001

C R No. 161/2007

I Party

Sri H Thimmaiah, S/o Late Hanumaiah,

Nandihalli Village, Bageshpura Post,

Gandasi Hobli, Arasikere Taluk,

Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

552

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

C R No. 162/2007

I Party

Sri A Siddaiah, S/o Late Arasaiah,

Nandihalli Village, Bageshpura Post,

Gandasi Hobli, Arasikere Taluk,

Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 163/2007

I Party

Sri D Shivalingaiah,

S/o Late Dasappa,

Kanakatte Village Post And Taluk,

Arasikere Taluk,

Hassan Dist.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 164/2007

I Party

Smt. Jayalakshmamma,

W/o Late Venkategowda MML Worker,

Chavenahalli Village, Nagarnavile Post,

Bagur Hobli, C R Patna Taluk,

Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 04/2008

I Party

Sh. C S Nanjundegowda,

S/o Late Shivegowda, MML Worker,

Aladahalli Village,

Bageval Post Gandasi Hobli,

Arasikere Taluk, Hassan Dt.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 05/2008

I Party

Sh. V Rangegowda, S/o Late Venkate Gowda,

Mavinahalli Village, Buvanahalli Pt,

Nuggehalli Hobli,

C R Patna, Tq Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 06/2008

I Party

Smt. L Huchamma, W/o Lakke Gowda,

MML Worker, Chevenahalli Village,

Nagar Navile Post, Bagur Hobli,

C R Patna Taluk, Hassan Dist.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 07/2008

I Party

Smt. R Mayamma, W/o C Range Gowda,

MML Worker, Chevenahalli Village,

Nagar Navile Post, Bagur Hobli,

C R Patna Taluk, Hassan Dist.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 08/2008

I Party

Smt. Narasamma, W/o Late Hanumaiah,

MML Worker, Chevenahalli Village,

Nagar Navile Post, Bagur Hobli,

C R Patna Taluk, Hassan Dist.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

553

C R No. 09/2008

I Party

Smt. Shankaramma,

W/o Late Kattebasappa,

MML Worker, Rajapur Village,

Post And Taluk,

Bellary District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 33/2008

I Party

Sri Sannaiah, S/o Late Sh. Rangappa,

Hullenahalli, Kembalu Post,

Bagur Hobli,

C R Patna Taluk,

Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 34/2008

I Party

Smt. M Savitramma,

W/o Late Masthi Gowda,

Honnamaranahalli Village,

Jamboor Village and Post,

Nuggehalli Hobli,

Channarayapatna Taluk,

Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 35/2008

I Party

Smt. Puttalakshamamma,

S/o Sh. H D Ningegowda,

Honnamaranahalli Village,

Jamboor Village and Post,

Nuggehalli Hobli,

Channarayapatna Taluk,

Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 36/2008

I Party

Smt. M Subamma,

W/o Late Masthi Gowda,

Honnamaranahalli Village,

Jamboor Village And Post,

Nuggehalli Hobli,

Channarayapatna Taluyk,

Hassan District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 37/2008

I Party

Smt. Tippamma, W/o Late Gaviappa,

21 A, Taranagar, Village & Presenting Officer,

Ward No. 4, Sandur Taluk,

Bellary District 583 119

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 38/2008

I Party

Smt. Siddamma, W/o Katte Gowda,

Ubbalgani Village, Rajapur,

Presenting Officer Sandur Taluk,

Bellary District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 39/2008

I Party

Smt. Nagamma, W/o late Jakkan Gowda,

Village Rajapur Presenting Officer,

Sandur Taluk,

Bellary District.

554

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

C R No. 41/2008

I Party

Smt. Dodda Honuramma

W/o late Shri Krishnappa,

Tara Nagar Village and Presenting Officer,

Dandur Taluk,

Bellary District.

II Party

The Managing Director,

Mysore Minerals Limited,

No. 39, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.

Appearances :

I Party

:

ShriK T Govinde Gowda Advocate

II Party

:

Shri T K Vedamurthy Advocate

COMMON AWARD

1.

The Central Government vide order Nos. L-29012/

35/2006-IR(M) dated 23.08.2007; L-29012/31, 38, 43, 52, 53,

54, 55, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81/2007-IR(M) dated 16.05.2007,

22.08.2007, 21.08.2007, 03.12.2007, 17.12.2007, 06.02.2008;

L-29012/33, 34, 35, 36/2008-IR(M) dated 02.04.2008 in

exercise of the power conferred by clause (d) of sub-section

(1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) made these references for

adjudication with similar schedule which reads as under:

“Whether the management of Mysore Minerals

Limited is justified in terminating the services of

(naming I Party and date of termination in each case)?

If not, to what relief is the said workman entitled

to?”

and under Order no. L-29012/6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15,

17, 18, 28, 33, 34/2007-IR(M) dated 16.05.2007, 21.08.2007,

22.08.2007 with a similar schedule which reads as under:

“Whether the management of Mysore Minerals

Limited is justified in terminating the services/

premature superannuating of the services of (naming

I Party and date of termination in each case)? If not,

to what relief is the said workman entitled to?”

and under Order no. L-29012/82/2007-IR(M) dated

06.02.2008; L-29012/39, 40, 41, 43/2008-IR(M) dated

02.04.2008 with a similar schedule which reads as under:

“Whether the management of Mysore Minerals

Limited, Bangalore in removal from service of

(naming I Party and date of termination in each case)?

If not, to what relief is the said workman entitled

to?”

and under Order no. L-29012/9/2007-IR(M) dated

16.05.2007 with a similar schedule which reads as under:

“Whether the action of the management of M/s.

Mysore Minerals Limited in imposing the

punishment of forceful retirement from the services

by way of order of discharge dated 1/6/1998 on Shri

K Mahadeva Shetty, Ex-Mining Worker, Kare Mines

(Nanjangoodu Taluk, Mysore District) of M/s.

Mysore Minerals Ltd. is legal and justified? If not,

to what relief the workmen are entitled and from

which date?”

and under Order no. L-29012/46, 54, 57, 59/2006-IR(M)

dated 23.08.2007, 24.08.2007, 23.02.2007 with a similar

schedule which reads as under:

“Whether the action of the management of

M/s. Mysore Minerals Ltd., in terminating the

services/superannuating the services of (naming I

Party and date of termination in each case) of M/s.

Mysore Minerals Ltd. is legal and justified? If not,

to what relief the workmen are entitled and from

which date?”

2.

Since the II Party/Management is common and the

workmen in all the cases and II Party management in all

the cases though filed separate claim statements and

counter statements all of them are being prototype and

the cross-examination of the workmen and management

witness are also similar in all the cases and even common

arguments were addressed by the learned advocates

appearing for both the sides, I have taken up all these

references for passing award through common award.

3.

While registering the above references in C R Nos.

70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 80, 105, 107, 109, 110, 111,

112, 113, 114, 115, 118, 119, 120, 155, 161, 162, 163, 164/

2007, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 and 41/2008

respectively, when notices were issued the I Party and II

Party entered their appearances through their respective

common advocates in all the 41 references and filed their

claim statement and counter statement which are practically

prototype.

4.

Though the Ministry in relation to C R 114/2007,

73/2007, 09/2008, 37/2008, 38/2008, 39/2008 and 41/2008

mentioned the impugned punishment as Removal/forceful

retirement/discharge from service and as the contention

of the I Party as well as the II Party is that the punishment

is that of Termination and even copy of orders produced

states the punishment imposed being termination.

5.

The I Parties in all the 41 references in their claim

statement claim that they were all appointed by the II Party

Management in its different Mining Units at

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

555

Channarayapatna Taluk, Hassan District, Karnataka under

different designations like Mining Worker, Watchman,

Foreman and that they had furnished their date of birth as

per the Horoscope maintained by their parents as per the

family tradition and custom and same was accepted by

the II Party Management by entering the same in their

respective EPF, B Register and Service Records. They

further claim that in the year 1998 the II Party management

abruptly conducted an eye wash illegal medical examination

through an MBBS Doctor and not by any Assistant Civil

Surgeon as defined under Rule 29-C of the Mines Rules

1955 and on the basis of the reports obtained from that

Doctor illegally terminated or prematurely superannuated

or forcefully made them to take VRS from the services

without complying the provisions of Section 2(OO) and

Section 25F, G, H & N of Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 and

also failed to issue three months prior notice or tender

payment of three months salary before terminating or

prematurely superannuating or forcefully making them to

retire from the services. With these assertions the I Party

workman in each reference have prayed to direct the

management to reinstate them into service with continuity

of service, full backwages and other consequential

benefits. INTERALIA, in the counter statements filed for

the II Party which are all prototype it is contended that the

dispute raised by the I party are time barred and belated

and that as per Mines Rules, 1955 it has conducted Medical

Examination of all the employees and workers working at

Mines Unit during the year 1997-98 which is mandatory as

per law under the advise of Director of Mines Safety

through a team of qualified and Senior Medical Officers

from Hutti Gold Mines Company Limited and as per the

report of the experts the I Party workmen were

incapacitated to work in a mine in view of the fact that that

they were aged more than 58 years as on the date of the

medical examination. Though the I party were given an

opportunity to prefer an appeal before Appellate Medical

Board within 30 days the same was not availed and on the

other hand they received the monetary benefits arising

out of termination i.e., EPF, Gratuity, Leave Pension and all

other benefits without any protest and thereby there

existed no Employer and Employee relationship between

the II Party Management and the I Party workmen. It is

further contended all the I Party workmen who did not

avail the opportunity extended to them to prefer an appeal

and received the benefits, after their co-workers succeeded

in getting relief in Writ Petition No. 5615/2001 and 5616/

2001 on the file of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka after

lapse of 8 years to their respective termination of services

having raised these disputes the exercise of power by the

Central Government under Section 10 (1) of the ID Act is

not reasonable, rationale and it ought to have refused to

make these references. With these contentions the II Party

has prayed for rejection of the references.

6.

After close of the pleadings when the matters were

posted for evidence, counsel for II Party while filing the

similar affidavits of Sh. Somanna, Assistant Manager in

all the 41 matters examining him on oath as MW 1(M) got

exhibited in few cases copy of B Register and Service

Records as narrated in the annexure. INTERALIA, the

learned advocate appearing for the I Party who had got

exhibited some documents in each case while cross-

examining MW 1 (M) in the respective case as narrated in

the annexure to the Award while filing the affidavit of the

respective workman in each case examining them on oath

as WW 1 (M) closed his side.

7.

With the above pleadings and evidence brought on

record by both the sides, counsel for both sides filed their

written arguments.

8.

On appreciation of the pleadings, oral and

documentary evidence brought on record by both the

sides, in the light of the arguments put forward by their

learned advocates, I have arrived at conclusion of allowing

the references for the following

REASON S

9.

There is no dispute as to the joining of service by

the I Party workman as well as entry of their date of birth

as furnished by them in their service records by the II

Party and it is stated in the evidence of MW 1 (M) that in

view of the request made by the Employees Union (without

specifying which Union) it conducted their Medical

Examination through qualified Senior Medical Officers and

as per their report they were found to be incapacitated to

work in mine in view of the fact that they were aged more

than 58 years as on the date of their medical examination

and based on that reports it took the decision to terminate

their services and terminated on different dates giving an

opportunity to prefer an appeal before the Appellate

Medical Board and the same was not availed and they

received the terminal benefits and after the result in W P

No. 5615/2001 and 5616/2001 preferred by their co-workers

having raised these disputes they are not maintainable.

In view of the admission of the II Party that the I Party

workmen had joined its services on different dates as

claimed by them and the date of birth were recorded in

their respective service records as furnished by them while

joining the service as per the Horoscope maintained by

their parents, the claim of the workmen in their respective

references about their joining of their service and recording

of their date of birth in their service record as furnished by

them based on the Horoscope maintained by their

respective parents being not in dispute it was for the II

Party to establish that the Employees Union of which these

workmen were members had made request for conducting

their medical examination through qualified Senior Medical

Officers and accordingly they got conducted their medical

examination through qualified Senior Medical Officers and

556

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

were found to be incapacitated to work in mine being aged

more than 58 years of age on the date of their respective

examination but the II Party failed to place on record any

evidence to substantiate this contention put forward by

them. MW 1 (M) the only witness examined for the II

Party/Management having categorically stated in the very

beginning of the affidavit evidence that he who is working

as Assistant Manager being conversant with the facts

from records. He has no personal knowledge about the

each workman being subjected to the medical examination

and their medical reports being as claimed in the counter

statements. Under the circumstances in support of the

contention taken in the counter statements which is

reiterated in the affidavit evidence he ought to have

produced the documentary evidence to substantiate that

there was a request made by the Employees Union of which

these workmen were members for conducting their medical

examination to ascertain their fitness to work and age and

accordingly they were subjected to medical examination

through qualified Senior Medical Officers and were found

to be incapacitated to work in Mine being aged about

more than 58 years as on the date of their respective

Medical Examinations. In the absence of production of

medical records/documents in that regard his/MW 1(M)

testimony in the affidavit which is reiteration of the

contention in the counter statement is baseless and of no

value. Further since it has come in the evidence of MW 1

(M) by way of admission in the cross-examination that

during the year 1998 there were around 4000 mining workers

in all the 40 mining units in MML in Karnataka State and

out of them around 2000 were working in the Mines of

Hassan District namely, Byrapura, Tagadur, Jamboor,

Aladahalli, Baktharahalli, Bageshwara, Kaolin Chromite

Mines and Dumgere Granite Mines and that it suffered

loss of about Rs. 21 crores in Shimoga and Hassan Districts

and due to the said loss it thought of reducing the number

of workers and at this juncture it ordered for medical

examination of all mining workers. In view of this admission

in the cross-examination of MW 1 (M) the claim of the II

party that the medical examination of workmen were got

done on the request of the Employees Union in the absence

of any record in that regard has to be said to be far from

truth. The II Party which had accepted the date of birth of

the workman as furnished by them based on the Horoscope

maintained by their respective parents without any reason/

doubt being entertained in respect of their date of birth

there was no occasion for them to subject those workmen

for medical examination to ascertain their correct age.

Moreover, there being no evidence for the II Party that

they had called upon the workmen to undergo a medical

check up to find out their correct age without there being

any enquiry in that regard changing their date of birth is

unsustainable, because once the age is entered into service

record it cannot be changed unless the procedure

prescribed for changing the date of birth is followed. Under

these circumstances viewed from any angle the action of

II Party terminating the services of the I party workmen

covered in these references do amount to premature

superannuation or imposing the punishment of forceful

retirement from services by way of order of discharge and

are unsustainable.

10.

In the upshot of the above, the workmen covered in

these references are entitle for their reinstatement into

service and to continue in service till they attain the age of

superannuation which was 58 years till 16.07.2008 and came

to be raised to 60 years w.e.f. 17.07.2008 by virtue of the

Office Order dated 22.08.2008 copy of which have been

got exhibited in the cross-examination of MW 1 (M). But

having regard to the nature of the work for which they

were engaged and raising these disputes after around 8

years of their termination from the services looking to the

judgements rendered in W P No. 5615/2001 and 5616/2001

preferred by their co-workers, I feel it just and appropriate

to direct the II Party to pay them 30 % of the salary/wages

payable to the respective workmen from the date of their

respective references made by the Ministry with other

consequential benefits that they would have received in

the absence of their impugned termination orders. In the

result, I pass the following

ORDER

11.

All the 41 references are allowed holding that the

management of Mysore Minerals Limited is not justified

in terminating the services / premature superannuating /

Removal / Discharge of the services of Smt. Lakkamma,

Smt. Lakshmamma, Smt. Rangamma, Sh. Mahadeva Shetty,

Sh. Chowdegowda, Smt. Parvathamma, Sh. Sannappa,

Sh. Thimmashetty, Sh. Nanjegowda, Sh. Thirumalegowda,

Smt. Thimamma, Smt. S Thimamma, Sh. Mariyappa,

Smt. Nanjamma, Smt. B Nanjamma, Sh. Huvappa,

Sh. Doddegowda, Smt. Giriyamma, Smt. Narasamma,

Sh. Rangappa, Sh. Beere Gowda, Sh. Puttegowda,

Sh. Shankaregowda, Sh. Thimmaiah, Sh. Siddaiah,

Sh. Shivalingaiah, Smt. Jayalakshmamma, Sh. Nanjude

Gowda, Sh. Rangegowda, Smt. Huchamma, Smt. Mayamma,

Smt. Narsamma, Smt. Shankaramma, Sh. Sannaiah,

Smt. Savitramma, Smt. Puttalakshmamma, Smt. Subbamma,

Smt. Tippamma, Smt. Siddamma, Smt. Nagamma and

Smt. Dodda Honuramma w.e.f. the respective dates

mentioned in their references and II Party is liable to

reinstate them into the service/designation that they were

holding at the time of impugned termination/discharge from

Service and to continue their services till they attain the

age of superannuation and pay them 30% of the salary/

wages payable to them from the date of their respective

references for adjudication with all other consequential

benefits that they would have received in the absence of

their impugned termination/discharge from service

deducting the benefits already given to them. It is made

clear that in cases of workmen who attain the age of

58 years prior to 16.07.2008 are entitled for being continued

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

557

in service till they attain the age of 58 years and who still

do not complete the age of 58 years as on 17.07.2008 are

entitled to be continued in service till they attain the age

of 60 years as per its Office Order dated 22.08.2008.

(Typed to my dictation by UDC,corrected and signed by

me on 3rd December 2014)

S. N. NAVALGUND, Presiding Officer

ANNEXURE - I

Documents exhibited on behalf of management:

C R 70/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 71/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 73/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 74/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 75/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 76/2007

Ex M-1

:

Original Individual Worker History

Sheet

C R 77/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 78/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 80/2007

Ex M-1

:

Original Individual Worker History

Sheet

C R 105/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 107/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 109/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 110/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 111/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 112/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 113/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 114/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 115/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 118/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 119/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 120/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 155/2007

Ex M-1

:

Original Individual workers History

Sheet

C R 161/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 162/2007

Ex M-1

:

Original Individual workers History

Sheet

C R 163/2007

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 04/2008

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 05/2008

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 07/2008

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 08/2008

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 34/2008

Ex M-1

:

Form 'O" dated 29.08.1992

Ex M-2

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 35/2008

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

C R 36/2008

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

558

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

C R 37/2008

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

Ex M-2

:

Copy of Form B of I Party

C R 38/2008

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

Ex M-2

:

Copy of Form B of I Party

C R 39/2008

Ex M-1

:

Copy of B Register of I Party

Ex M-2

:

Copy of Form B of I Party

Documents exhibited on behalf of workman:

C R 70/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Medical Examination Report

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 71/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Medical Examination Report

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination order dated

22.05.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 72/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Membership application form

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 73/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of EPF Scheme date 14.06.2002

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

10.06.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 74/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

22.05.1998

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

Ex W-5

:

Office Order No. PIR:7:GEN:2008-

09:1891 dated 22.08.2008 enhancing the

age from 58 years to 60 years

C R 75/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Medical Examination Report

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

22.05.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 76/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Medical Examination Report

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 77/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Medical Examination Report

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

06.06.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 78/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Membership Application Form

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

29.06.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

559

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 80/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Membership Application Form

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

29.06.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 105/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

29.06.1998

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 107/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

29.06.1998

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 109/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Membership application form

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 110/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

22.05.1998

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 111/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Medical Examination Report

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

22.05.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 112/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Medical Examination Report

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 113/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Medical Certificate issued by

Government Surgeon, Hassan

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Hospital Certificate issued to

HOSMAT dated 24.06.98

Ex W-3

:

Copy of Form 'O' issued by Medical

Officer

Ex W-4

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

13.10.1998

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-6

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-7

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 114/2007

Ex W-1

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 115/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Membership application form

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

560

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

C R 118/2007

Ex W-1

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 119/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Medical Examination Certificate

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

Ex W-5

:

Office Order No. PIR:7:GEN:2008-

09:1891 dated 22.08.2008 enhancing the

age from 58 years to 60 years

C R 120/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Medical Examination Report

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

22.05.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 155/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Medical Examination Report

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

22.05.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

Ex W-6

:

Office Order No. PIR:7:GEN:2008-

09:1891 dated 22.08.2008 enhancing the

age from 58 years to 60 years

C R 161/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Membership application form

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 162/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

01.09.1998

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 163/2007

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Office Note of II Party

Ex W-2

:

Copy of I Party's Representation dated

29.05.1998

Ex W-3

:

Copy of the workmen compensation

Order dated 27.07.2001

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-6

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 164/2007

Ex W-1

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

Ex W-4

:

Office Order No. PIR:7:GEN:2008-

09:1891 dated 22.08.2008 enhancing the

age from 58 years to 60 years

C R 04/2008

Ex W-1

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 05/2008

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Membership Application Form

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

22.05.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

¹Hkkx IIó[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % iQjojh 7] 2015@ek?k 18] 1936

561

C R 06/2008

Ex W-1

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

Ex W-4

:

GPA executed by I Party towards her

Husband

Ex W-5

:

Office Order No. PIR:7:GEN:2008-

09:1891 dated 22.08.2008 enhancing the

age from 58 years to 60 years

C R 07/2008

Ex W-1

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 08/2008

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Membership Application Form

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

06.06.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 09/2008

Ex W-1

:

Copy of B Register

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

30.07.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 33/2008

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Form O issued by II Party

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

22.06.2001

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 34/2008

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Membership Application Form

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

06.06.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 35/2008

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Membership Application Form

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

06.06.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 36/2008

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Membership Application Form

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

06.06.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

Ex W-6

:

Office Order No. PIR:7:GEN:2008-

09:1891 dated 22.08.2008 enhancing the

age from 58 years to 60 years

C R 37/2008

Ex W-1

:

Copy of EPF Scheme mentioning the

date of birth

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

562

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 7, 2015/MAGHA 18, 1936

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

C R 38/2008

Ex W-1

:

Copy of EPF Scheme mentioning the

date of birth

Ex W-2

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

Ex W-5

:

Office Order No. PIR:7:GEN:2008-

09:1891 dated 22.08.2008 enhancing the

age from 58 years to 60 years

C R 39/2008

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Pension Payment Order

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

30.07.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others

C R 41/2008

Ex W-1

:

Copy of Pension Payment Order

Ex W-2

:

Copy of Termination Order dated

30.07.1998

Ex W-3

:

Order passed in W P No. 5615/2001(SS)

Ex W-4

:

Order passed in W A No. 3460/2001 c/w

6459/2001 (SS)

Ex W-5

:

Order passed in W A No. 26101/01 and

others.

Printed by the Manager, Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi.110064

and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi.110054.