रजिस्ट्री सं. डी. एल. ;एनद्ध 04/0007/2003—05 REGD. NO. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05 प्राध्किार से प्रकाशित
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
साप्ताहिक
WEEKLY
सं. 24] नई दिल्ली, जून 7—जून 13, 2015, शनिवार/ज्येष्ठ 17—ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937
No. 24] NEW DELHI, JUNE 7—JUNE 13, 2015, SATURDAY/JYAISTHA 17—JYAISTHA 23, 1937
इस भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह पृथक संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके
Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation
भाग II—खण्ड 3—उप-खण्ड ;iiद्ध
PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)
भारत सरकार के मंत्राालयों ;रक्षा मंत्राालय को छोड़करद्ध द्वारा जारी किए गए सांविध्कि आदेश और अध्सिूचनाएं
Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India
(Other than the Ministry of Defence)
कार्मिक, लोक शिकायत तथा पेंशन मंत्राालय
MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES
AND PENSIONS
;कार्मिक और प्रशिक्षण विभागद्ध
(Department of Personnel and Training)
नई दिल्ली, 5 जून, 2015
New Delhi, the 5th June, 2015
का.आ. 1178.—केन्द्र सरकार, दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापन अधिनियम, 1946, (1946 की अधिनियम सं॰ 25) की धारा 6 के साथ पठित धारा 5 की उप धारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए गुजरात राज्य सरकार, गृह विभाग, सचिवालय, गांधीनगर की सहमति से दिनांक 3 जून, 2015 की अधिसूचना जीजी/36/2015/ एसबी-1, आईएनक्यू/102015/जीओआई-279 माध्यम से साबरमती रेलवे पुलिस थाना, गुजरात में भारतीय दंड संहिता की धारा 435, लोक संपत्ति नुकसान निवारण अधिनियम की धारा 3(2) एवं 4 एवं रेल अधिनियम, 1951 की धारा 151 के अधीन पंजीकृत आईसीआर सं॰ 49/2004 तथा उपर्युक्त अपराधों के संबंध में किए गए प्रयासों, दुष्प्रेरणाओं और षडयंत्रों की जांच करने के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापन के सदस्यों की शक्तियों एवं क्षेत्राधिकार का विस्तार समस्त गुजरात राज्य में करती है।
S.O. 1178.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 5 read with section 6 of Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946), the Central Government with the consent of the State Government of Gujarat, Home Department, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar vide Notification GG/36/2015/SB-1, INQ/ 102015/GOI-279 dated 3rd June, 2015, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State of Gujarat for investigation of ICR No. 49/2004 U/s 435 IPC, U/sections 3(2) and 4 of Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act and U/s 151 of Railway Act, 1951 registered at Sabarmati Railway Police Station, Gujarat and attempts, abetments and conspiracies in relation to above mentioned offences.
[No. 245/35/2015-AVD-II]
AJIT KUMAR, Under Secy.
[सं॰ 245/35/2015-एवीडी-II] अजीत कुमार, अवर सचिव
2406 GI/2015
(2517)2518 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2015
वित्त मंत्रालय
का.आ. 1179.—केन्द्र सरकार एतद्द्वारा दंड प्रक्रिया संहिता, 1973 (1974 का अधिनियम सं॰ 2) की धारा 24 की उपधारा (8) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए महाराष्ट्र राज्य स्थित मुम्बई में दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना (के॰अ॰ ब्यूरो) द्वारा संस्थापित तथा केन्द्रीय अन्वेषण ब्यूरो द्वारा सौंपे गए मामलों का परीक्षण-न्यायालयों में तथा उन मामलों से उत्पन्न अन्य मामलों में पुनरीक्षण अथवा अपीलीय न्यायालयों में अभियोजन करने के लिए श्री किरण एन॰ माकासारे, अधिवक्ता को विशेष लोक अभियोजक नियुक्त करती है।
[फा॰ सं॰ 225/18/2014-ए॰वी॰डी॰-II] अजीत कुमार, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 11th June, 2015
(वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग) नई दिल्ली, 20 मई, 2015
का.आ. 1180.—रुग्ण औद्योगिक कंपनी (विशेष उपबंध) अधिनियम, 1985 की धारा 6 की उप-धारा (5) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्द्वारा, श्री जे॰पी॰ दुआ, औद्योगिक एवं वित्तीय पुनर्निर्माण बोर्ड (बीआईएफआर) के सदस्य को अध्यक्ष का कार्य-भार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से नए अध्यक्ष के कार्य-भार ग्रहण करने तक अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, बीआईएफआर में अध्यक्ष के रूप में कार्य करने के लिए प्राधिकृत करती है।
[फा॰ सं॰ 20/2/2011-आईएफ-II (खंड-I)] एम॰एम॰ दौला, अवर सचिव
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Department of Financial Services)
S.O. 1179.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (8) of section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Kiran N. Makasare, Advocate as Special Public Prosecutor for conducting prosecution of cases instituted by Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI) in the state of Maharashtra at Mumbai as entrusted to him by the Central Bureau of Investigation in the trial courts and appeals/revisions or other matters arising out of these cases in revisional or appellate courts established by law.
[F. No. 225/18/2014-AVD-II] AJIT KUMAR, Under Secy.
New Delhi, the 20th May, 2015
S.O. 1180.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (5) of Section 6 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, the Central Government hereby authorizes Shri J.P. Dua, Member in the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) to act as Chairman, BIFR from the date of assumption of the charge till new Chairman, BIFR is in place or until further orders.
[F.No. 20/2/2011-IF-II (Vol. I)]
M.M. DAWLA, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 3 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1181.—सरकारी स्थान (अप्राधिकृत अधिभोगियों की बेदखली) अधिनियम 1971 (1971 का 40) की धारा 3 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, नीचे दी गई सारणी के कॉलम (2) में उल्लिखित अधिकारियों को सम्पदा अधिकारी के रूप में नियुक्त करती है जो उक्त अधिनियम के प्रयोजन के लिए सम्पदा अधिकारी होंगे और यह भी निदेश देती है कि उक्त अधिकारी अपने क्षेत्राधिकार की स्थानीय सीमाओं के भीतर उक्त सारणी के कॉलम (3) में उल्लिखित सरकारी स्थानों के संबंध में उक्त अधिनियम के अधीन कथित सम्पदा अधिकारियों को प्रदत्त शक्तियों का उपयोग और सौंपे गए कार्यों को पूरा करेंगेः—
सारणी
क्रम अधिकारी का पदनाम, प्रशासनिक प्रधान, सरकारी स्थानों की श्रेणियां और अधिकारिता की सं॰ अथवा उसका जो भी पदनाम हो
1 2
स्थानीय सीमाएं
3
1. उप महाप्रबंधक, आईएफसीआई लि॰, चंडीगढ़ फ्लैट नं॰ 1474, 1475-ए, 1475-बी, 1477, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय, आईएफसीआई भवन, 1-सी, 1476-बी एवं 1478-सी, आईएफसीआई स्टाफ सेक्टर 27-ए, मध्य मार्ग, चंडीगढ़-160019. कालोनी, सेक्टर-37-बी, चंडीगढ़-160036.
2. महाप्रबंधक, आईएफसीआई लि॰, मुम्बई क्षेत्रीय फ्लैट नं॰ 204, ब्लू डायमंड अपार्टमेंट, जुहू तारा
कार्यालय, अर्नेस्ट हाउस, 9वां तल, एनसीपीए रोड, सांताक्रुज (वैस्ट), मुम्बई-400049. रोड, 194, नरीमन प्वाइंट, मुम्बई-400021.
नेहरु प्लेस, नई दिल्ली-110019
3. महाप्रबंधक (सम्पदा), आईएफसीआई लि॰, 61, औराफिन कार्पोरेशन लि॰, 12वां तल 'बी' विंग (1650 वर्ग फीट), आईएफसीआई टावर, 61, नेहरु प्लेस, नई दिल्ली-110019
[फा॰ सं॰ 2/5/2013-आईएफ-I] जे॰ एस॰ फौगाट, अवर सचिव[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2519
New Delhi, the 3rd June, 2015
S.O. 1181.—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971), the Central Government thereby appoints the Officers mentioned in column No. 2 of the table below to be Estate Officers for the purpose of the said Act and further direct that the said officers shall exercise the powers conferred and the duties imposed on a Estate Officer by or under the said Act within the local limits of their jurisdiction in respect of the public premises falling under area as specified in column No. 3 of the table below:—
S.No. Designation of the Officer, Administrative Categories of public premises and Head, whatsoever designation called
local limits of control of jurisdiction
1
2
3
FLAT Nos. 1474, 1475-A, 1475-B, 1477, 1476-B
IFCI Staff Colony, Sector-37 B, Chandigarh-160036
1 Deputy General Manager, IFCI Limited, Chandigarh Regional Office, & 1478-C IFCI Bhavan, 1-C, Sector 27-A, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh-160 019
2 General Manager
Flat No. 204 Blue Diamond Apartment, Juhu Tara Road, Santacruz (W),
IFCI Limited Mumbai Regional Office, Earnest House, 9th Floor, NCPA Road, Mumbai-400 049 194, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021
3 General Manager (Estates) Aurafin Corp. Ltd.
IFCI Limited 61, Nehru Place New Delhi-110019
12th Floor, 'B' Wing (1650 sq. ft.), IFCI Tower, 61, Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019
[F.No. 2/5/2013-IF-I] J.S. PHAUGAT, Under Secy.
उपभोक्ता मामले, खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय
(उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग)
(भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो)
नई दिल्ली, 6 मई, 2015
का.आ. 1182.—भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो (प्रमाणन) विनियम 1988 के नियम 4 के उपनियम (5) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो
एतद्द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन लाइसेंसों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं, वे स्वीकृत कर दिए गए हैंः—
अनुसूची
क्रम लाइसेंस स्वीकृत करने की लाइसेंसधारी का नाम भारतीय मानक का शीर्षक भा मा भाग अनु वर्ष संख्या संख्या तिथि वर्ष/माह व पता
संख्या
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9
1. 720000298 02/01/2015 हर्ष इरीगेशन प्रा. लिमिटेड फर्टिलाइजर तथा कैमिकल 14483 1 - 1997 बी 11, पुष्पम सोसाइटी, खारावाला कम्पाउंड इनजैक्टर सिस्टम इसनपुर, अहमदाबाद-382443
2. 720000327 02/01/2015 अंजली बिवरेजिस पैकेजबंद पेयजल 14543 - - 2004 सर्वे नंबर 46, प्लाट नंबर 64, (अदर दैन पैकेजड नेचुरल भारतनगर को-ओप॰ हाउसिंग सोसाइटी, मिनरल वाटर) घनश्याम नगर के पीछे, वराछा रोड, सूरत-3950062520 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9
3. 720000177 05/01/2015 प्रभुदास ज्वैलर्स
स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के आभूषणों 1417 - - 1999 43, श्याम काम्पलैक्स, नोबल नगर, शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन नरोडा, अहमदाबाद-382330
4. 720000207 05/01/2015 आस्था मैन्यूफैक्चरिंग पैकेजबंद पेयजल 14543 - - 2004 वाडिलाल फैक्टरी के सामने, पुनधारा, (अदर दैन पैकेजड नेचुरल ता मानसा, गांधीनगर-382855 मिनरल वाटर)
5. 720000217 05/01/2015 ओम बिवरेजिस पैकेजबंद पेयजल (अदर दैन 14543 - - 2004 रैवेन्यू सर्वे नंबर, 1203 पैकेजड नेचुरल मिनरल वाटर) तावाडिया रोड, मेहसाना-384001
6. 720000227 07/01/2015 रिमझिम एकवा पैकेजबंद पेयजल 14543 - - 2004 ए-108, मारुति इंडस्ट्रियल एस्टेट, (अदर दैन पैकेजड नेचुरल विभाग-1, नरोडा फायर स्टेशन के सामने मिनरल वाटर) नरोडा रोड, अहमदाबाद-382345
7. 720000237 07/01/2015 मारूति बिवरेजिस पैकेजबंद पेयजल 14543 - - 2004 प्लाट नंबर, 169/170, मान सरोवर सोसाइटी, (अदर दैन पैकेजड नेचुरल डिनडोली टलाव के पास, एट डिनडोली मिनरल वाटर) सूरत-395040
8. 720000247 08/01/2015 आर फ्रे श बिवरेजिस पैकेजबंद पेयजल (अदर दैन 14543 - - 2004 अरबुदानगर शॉपिंग सेंटर, छगनभाई की पैकेजड नेचुरल मिनरल वाटर) वाडी के पास, अरबुदानगर, ओढव, अहमदाबाद-382415
9. 720000198 08/01/2015 ए-1 फेंस प्रोडक्टस कंपनी प्रा. लिमिटेड इनडैक्स ट्रू स्टील डैस्गिनेशन 16014 - - 2012 सोनीवाडी के पीछे, वानकस सब स्टेशन रोड गांव टयूंब, ता अंबरगांव, वलसाद-396150
10. 720000278 12/01/2015 उमिया ज्वैलर्स
स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के आभूषणों 1417 - - 1999 बी/1 18 मारुति काम्पलैक्स, एस जी रोड, शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन सिद्धपुर, पाटन-384151
11. 720000288 12/01/2015 क्वीक मैटल इंडस्ट्रीज डोमैस्टिक प्रेशर कुकर्स 2347 - - 2006 प्लाट नंबर 525/26, शैड नंबर 2, रुद्राक्ष काम्पलैक्स के पीछे, ग्रीड स्टेशन के पास ओढव रोड, अहमदाबाद-382415
12. 720000317 12/01/2015 हरविश ज्वैलर्स
स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 एस/एफ 231 त्रीवा काम्पलैक्स, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं अभिषेक कालोनी, नट्टूभाई सर्कल, मुहरांकन वडोदरा-390007
13. 720000448 12/01/2015 श्रीधर इरीगेशन प्रा. लिमिटेड ईरीगेशन इक्यूपमेंट 12786 - - 1989 ब्लाक नंबर, 93, विंझूवाडा दालोड रोड पालीथलीन पाईप्स फार एट पोस्ट विंझूवाडा, ता मंडल, इरीगेशन लेटरलस अहमदाबाद-382130
14. 720000257 12/01/2015 सोनी विनोदकुमार ज्वैलर्स स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के आभूषणों 1417 - - 1999 61713 मोटा बाजार, नवसारी-396445 शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
15. 720000268 13/01/2015 द्वारकेश ज्वैलर्स
स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के आभूषणों 1417 - - 1999 शिल्कारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
शॉप नंबर 3, रघुकुल अपार्टमेंट, वार्ड नंबर 10/494/4, लिम्डाचौक, जलालपुर रोड, नवसारी-396445
16. 720000307 16/01/2015 डी डी स्टील कार्बन स्टील कास्ट बिलैट इनगोटस, 2830 - - 2012 आर एस नंबर 79, गाँव : वनकपुर बिलैटस बलूमस तथा सलैबस फार ता गोधरा, पंचमहल-389001 रि-रोलिंग इंटू स्टील फार जनरल
स्टकचर्रल परपस[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2521 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9
17. 720000337 19/01/2015 विनायक पोलिपाईप्स प्रा॰ लिमिटेड अनप्लास्टिसाईजड पी वी सी 12818 - - 2010 सर्वे नंबर 589, 590/2, अहमदाबाद स्क्रीन तथा केसिंग पाईप्स फॉर हरसोल हाइवे, पेट्रोल पम्प के पास, बोर/ट्यूबवैल ता तालोड, साबरकांटाख्, हरसोल-383305
18. 720000348 19/01/2015 अदित्य एक्वाटैक पैकेजबंद पेयजल 14543 - - 2004 सी के तथा कंपनी कम्पाउंड (अदर दैन पैकेजड नेचुरल मिनरल सुपर ऑटो गैराज के पीछे, बहुचराजी रोड, वाटर) कारेलीबाग, वडोदरा-390018
19. 72000417 21/01/2015 नीयोसील एडहैसिव प्रा॰ लिमिटेड सोलवैंट सिमेंट फॉर यूस 14182 - - 1994
विद अनप्लास्टिसाईड
ए-323 राजलक्ष्मी काम्पलैक्स, बर्ड सर्कल के पास, ओ पी रोड, पालीविनाइलकलोराइड प्लास्टिक वडोदरा-390007 पाईप तथा फिटिंगस
20. 720000378 23/01/2015 धोंडे ज्वैलर्स
स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के आभूषणों 1417 - - 1999 शॉप नंबर 1/ए,, 1304, श्री राम को- शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन ओप हाउसिंग सोसाइटी, नेहरू स्ट्रीट, वापी, वलसाद-396191
21. 720000358 27/01/2015 आर के ज्वैलर्स
स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के आभूषणों 1417 - - 1999 3 ओमकार अपार्टमेंट, हाउस नंबर 3055 शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन अनाविल वाडी के सामने, जोशी स्ट्रीट, नवसारी-396445
22. 720000368 27/01/2015 श्री जलाराम सुवर्णमहल ओरनामैंट प्रा॰ लिमिटेड स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के आभूषणों 1417 - - 1999 पौटरी फार्म रोड, भोलानगर स्कूल के पास, शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन अतुल वलसाद-396020
23. 720000388 28/01/2015 दर्शन केबल इंडस्ट्रीस क्रास लिंकड पालीथलीन 7098 1 - 1988 प्लाट नंबर सी/1/135, जीआईडीसी इंडस्ट्रियल इंसूलेटिड पीवीसी शीथड केबलस एस्टेट, फेस 1, पुष्पक इंडस्ट्रियल एस्टेट के पास, वटवा, अहमदाबाद-382445
24. 720000398 28/01/2015 राज पम्प कॉर्पोरेशन सबमर्सिबल पम्पसैट 8034 - - 2002 ए-14, मंगलम एस्टेट, अमित प्रोसैस कंपाउंड, ओमनगर क्रासिंग के पास, नरोडा रोड, अहमदाबाद-380025
[सं॰ सीएमडी/13ः11] डॉ॰ एस॰ एल॰ पालकर, वैज्ञानिक 'एफ' एवं प्रमुख
MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION
(Department of Consumer Affairs)
(BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS)
New Delhi, the 6th May, 2015
S.O. 1182.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (5) of the regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification) Regulations, 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are given in the following schedule:
SCHEDULE
Sl. Licences Grant Date Name & Address Title of the Standard IS No. Part Sec. Year No. No. of the party
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9
1. 720000298 02/01/2015 Harsh Irrigation Pvt. Ltd. Fertilizer and chemical 14483 1 - 1997 B 11, Pushpam Society, injector system Kharawala Compound, Isanpur, Ahmedabad-382443
2. 720000327 02/01/2015 Anjani Beverages Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 Survey No. 46, Plot No. 64, (other than packaged Bharatnagar Co-op. Housing natural mineral water) Society, Behind Ghanshyam Nagar, Varachha Road Surat-3950062522 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9
3. 720000177 05/01/2015 Prabhudas Jewellers Gold and gold alloys 1417 - - 1999 43, Shyam Complex, Nobalnagar, jewellery/artefacts- Naroda, Ahmedabad-382330 fineness and marking
4. 720000207 05/01/2015 Aastha Manufacturing Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 Opp Vadilal Factory, Pundhara, (other than packaged Tal Mansa, Gandhinagar-382855 natural mineral water)
5. 720000217 05/01/2015 Aum Beverages Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 Revenue Survey No. 1203 (other than packaged Tavadiya Road, Mehsana-384001 natural mineral water)
6. 720000227 07/01/2015 Rimzim Aqua Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 A-108, Maruti Industrial Estate (other than packaged Vibhag-1, Opp. Naroda Ire Station, natural mineral water) Naroda Road, Ahmedabad-382345
7. 720000237 07/01/2015 Maruti Beverages Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 Plot No. 169/170, Man Sarovar Soc. (other than packaged Near Dindoli Talav, AT: Dindoli natural mineral water) Surat-395040
8. 720000247 08/01/2015 R Fresh Beverages Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 Arbudanagar Shopping Centre (other than packaged NR Chhaganbha Ni Wadi natural mineral water) Arbudanagar, Odhav, Ahmedabad-382415
9. 720000198 08/01/2015 A-1 Fence Products Company Index to steel designations 16014 - - 2012 Pvt. Ltd, Behind Soniwadi, Vankas Sub-station Road, Village: Tumb, TA: Umbergaon, Valsad-396150
10. 720000278 12/01/2015 Umiya Jewellers Gold and gold alloys, 1417 - - 1999 B/1 18 Maruti Complex jeweller/artefacts- S J Road Siddhpur, Patan-384151 fineness and marking
11. 720000288 12/01/2015 Kwik Metal Industries Domestic pressure cookers 2347 - - 2006 Plot No. 525/526, Shed No. 2 Behind Rudraksh Complex, Near Grid Station, Odhav Road, Ahmedabad-382415
12. 720000317 12/01/2015 Harvish Jewels Gold and gold alloys 1417 - - 1999 S/F 231 Trivia Complex jewellery/artefacts- Abhishek Colony, Natubhai fineness and marking. Circle, Vadodara-390007
13. 720000448 12/01/2015 Shreedhar Irrigation Pvt. Ltd. Irrigation equipment 12786 - - 1989 Block No. 93, Vinzuvada- polyethylene pipes for Dalod Road, AT Post: Vinzuvada, irrigation laterals. Tal: Mandal Ahmedabad-382130
14. 720000257 12/01/2015 Soni Vinodkumar Jewellers Gold and gold alloys 1417 - - 1999
jewellery/artefacts/
61713, Mota Bazar, Navsari-396445 fineness and marking.
15. 720000268 13/01/2015 Dwarkesh Jewellers Gold and gold alloys 1417 - - 1999 Shop No. 3, Raghukul Appartment, jewellery/artefacts/ Ward No. 10/494/4, Limdachok, fineness and marking. Jalalpore Road, Navasari-396445
16. 720000307 16/01/2015 D.D. Steel Carbon steel cast billet 2830 - - 2012
ingots, billets, blooms and
R S No. 79, Village: Vanakpur Taluka: Godhra, slabs for re-rolling into Panchamahal-389001 steel for general structural
purposes.
17. 720000337 19/01/2015 Vinayak Polypipes Pvt. Ltd. Unplasticized pvc screen 12818 - - 2010 Survey No. 589, 590/2, and casing pipes for bore/ Ahmedabad-Harsol Highway, tubewell Near Petrol Pump, Tal: Talod, Sabarkantha, Harsol-383305[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2523 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9
18. 720000348 19/01/2015 Aditya Aquatech Package drinking water 14543 - - 2004 C K & Company Compound (other than packaged BH. Super Auto Garage natural mineral water) Bahucharaji Road, Karelibaug Vadodara-390018
19. 720000417 21/01/2015 Neoseal Adhesive Pvt. Ltd., Solvent cement for use 14182 - - 1994 A-323, Rajlaxmi Complex with unplasticized Near Bird Circle, O P Road, polyvinylchloride plastic Vadodara-390007 pipe and fittings
20. 720000378 23/01/2015 Dhonde Jewellers Gold and gold alloys 1417 - - 1999
jewellery/artefacts/
Shop No. 1/A, 1304, Shree Ram Co-op Hou. Soc., fineness and marking. Nehru Street, Vapi, Valsad-396191
21. 720000358 27/01/2015 R K Jewellers Gold and gold alloys 1417 - - 1999 3 Omkar Appartment, House No. jewellery/artefacts/ 3055, Opp Anavil Wadi, fineness and marking Joshi Street, Navsari-396445
22. 720000368 27/01/2015 Shree Jalaram Suvarnamahal, Gold and gold alloys 1417 - - 1999
jewellery/artefacts/
Ornaments Pvt. Ltd., Paultry Farm Road, Near fineness and marking Bholanagar School, Atul, Valsad-396020
23. 720000388 28/01/2015 Darshan Cable Industries Crosslinked polyethylene 7098 1 - 1988 Plot No. C-1/135, GIDC insulated pvc sheathed Industrial Estate Phase 1, cables Near Pushpak Ind. Estate Vatva, Ahmedabad-382445
24. 720000398 28/01/2015 Raj Pump Corporation Submersible pumpsets 8034 - - 2002 A-14, Mangalam Estate, Amit Process Compound Near Omnagar Crossing, Naroda Road, Ahmedabad-380025
[No. CMD/13:11] Dr. S. L. PALKAR, Scientist 'F' & Head
नई दिल्ली, 6 मई, 2015
का.आ. 1183.—भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो (प्रमाणन) विनियम 1988 के विनियम (5) के उपविनियम (6) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो
एतद्द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि निम्न विवरण वाले लाइसेंसों को उनके आगे दर्शायी गई तारीख से रद्द/स्थगित कर दिया गया हैः—
अनुसूची
क्रम लाइसेंस लाइसेंसधारी का नाम व पता लाइसेंस के अंतर्गत वस्तु/प्रकम सम्बद्ध रद्द करने की तिथि संख्या संख्या
भारतीय मानक का शीर्षक
सीएम/एल-
1. 3614151 मैसर्स गुरूकृपा मार्केटिंग
पैकेजबंद पेयजल 07/01/2015 617, आर के इंडस्ट्रियल एस्टेट-1 सिद्धकुटीर के सामने, (अदर दैन पैकेज्ड नेचुरल मिनरल वाटर) वारछा रोड, सूरत, 395006 आई एस 14543ः2004
2. 7819694 मैसर्स ज्योति पावर ट्रांसमिशन प्रा॰ लिमिटेड एलूमिनियम कंडक्टर फार ओवरहैड 15/01/2015 प्लाट नंबर ए-9/17/19 स्टील टाउन, नोवा पेट्रोलियम, ट्रांसमशिन परपस गांव मोरैया ता सानंद, डिस्ट्रिकट अहमदाबाद IS 398 : पार्ट 2 : 1996
3. 2929676 मैसर्स पैरी इंजिनियरिंग एंटरप्राईसिस इंडिया लिमिटेड आई एस आई हैंडबुक ऑफ 21/01/2015 (टयूफलैक्स इंडिया डिविजन) 702-704, मैथमैटिकल, फिसीकल, कैमिकल तथा जी आई डी सी, पालेज, डिस्ट्रिक्ट भारूच, 392220 इंजिनियरिंग टेबलस
आई एस 16008 : 2012
[सं॰ सी एम डी/13ः13] डॉ. एस. एल. पालकर, वैज्ञानिक 'एफ' एवं प्रमुख2524 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 6th May, 2015
S.O. 1183.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (6) of the regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification) Regulations 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies that the licences particulars of which are given below have been cancelled with effect from the date indicated against each:
SCHEDULE
Sl. Licences No. Name & Address of the Licensee Article/Process with relevant Date of Cancellation No. CM/L-
Indian Standards covered by the licence cancelled
1. 3614151 M/s. Gurukrupa Marketing packaged drinking water 07/01/2015 617, R.K. Industrial Estate-1, Opp. Siddkutir, (other than packaged natural Varachha Road, Surat, mineral water) Distt : Surat 395006
IS 14543 : 2004
2. 7819694 M/s. Jyoti Power Transmission Pvt. Ltd. aluminium conductors for 15/01/2015 Plot No. A-9/17/19 Steel Town, Opp. Nova overhead transmission Petrolium, Village: Moraiya, purposes: Tal : Sanand, Distt. Ahmedabad IS 398 : Part 2: 1996
3. 2929676 M/s. Parry Enterprises India Ltd. ISI handbook of mathematical, 21/01/2015
IS 16008 : 2012
(Tuflex Indian Division) 702-704, GIDC Palej, chemical and engineering tables Palej Distt : Bharuch-392220
[No. CMD/13:13] Dr. S.L. PALKAR, Scientist 'F' & Head
नई दिल्ली, 6 मई, 2015
का.आ. 1184.—भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो (प्रमाणन) विनियम 1988 के नियम 4 के उपनियम (5) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो
एतद्द्वारा अध्सिूचित करता है कि जिन लाइसेंसों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं, वे स्वीकृत कर दिए गए हैंः—
अनुसूची
क्रम लाइसेंस स्वीकृत करने लाइसेंसधारी का नाम व पता भारतीय मानक का शीर्षक भा मा भाग अनु वर्ष संख्या संख्या की तिथि
संख्या
वर्ष/माह
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9
1. 720000407 02/02/2015 हिरल एंटरप्राईस पैकेजबंद पेयजल 14543 - - 2004 142/2, काडी छतराल हाइवे, (अदर दैन पैकेजड नेचुरल तुलसी पेट्रोलपम्प के सामने, करणनगर, मेहसाना, मिनरल वाटर) कडी-382715
2. 720000428 02/02/2015 तारा ट्रेडलिंक प्रा॰ लिमिटेड टैक्स्टाईल टारपोलिनस मेड 7903 - - 2011 प्लाट नंबर 25, सोहम इंटीग्रटिड टैक्सटाईल पार्क, फ्र ाम हाई डैंसिटी पोलथिलीन महीजाडा तथा टिंबा, दसक्राई, अहमदाबाद-382425 वोवन फैबरिक
3. 720000608 02/02/2015 श्री साई ए क बिवरेजिस पैकेजबंद पेयजल 14543 - - 2004 प्लाट नंबर 40, एट तथा पोस्ट : अटाली (अदर दैन पैकेजड नेचुरल प्राइमरी स्कूल के पास, ता वागरा, भारूच-392130 मिनरल वाटर)
4. 720000438 06/02/2015 प्रति गोल्ड डायमंड तथा गोल्ड जवैलरी स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 बी-44, रामकृष्णा सोसाइटी, रामकृष्णा स्कूल के पास, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं एल एच रोड, वारछा, सूरत-395006 मुहरांकन
5. 720000458 09/02/2015 रोयल बिवरेजिस पैकेजबंद पेयजल 14543 - - 2004 एस आर नंबर 622/पी 1, एट तथा पी ओ : आकरूंड (अदर दैन पैकेजड नेचुरल ताः धनसुरा, साबरकांठा-383260 मिनरल वाटर)
6. 720000468 09/02/2015 लक्ष्मी ज्वैलर्स
स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 जुना बाजार, हिम्मतनगर, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं साबरकांठा-383001 मुहरांकन[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2525 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9
7. 720000488 10/02/2015 भीमजीभाई जवैलर्स
स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 2, वसुंधरा काम्पलैक्स, हरनी वरासीया रिंग रोड, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं वडोदरा-390022 मुहरांकन
8. 720000478 12/02/2015 नियूर प्लास्टिक इंडस्ट्रीज कांडयूटस फार इलैक्ट्रिकल 9537 3 - 1983 806, कोठारी इंडस्ट्रियल एसटेट, कोठारी चार रस्ता, इंस्टालेशन गांधीनगर, सांतेज
9. 720000498 13/02/2015 श्री सामोर गोल्ड स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 8, विश्वा रैसिडेंसी, विश्रामनगर के पास, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं गुरूकुल रोड, अहमदाबाद-380052 मुहरांकन
10. 720000508 16/02/2015 विमको क्राप साईंस साइपरमैथरिन ई सी 12016 - - 1987 98/3, लिम्बाडिया गांव, एन एच नंबर 8, रानासन पावर हाउस के पास, गांधीनगर, गांव लिम्बाडिया-382330
11. 720000518 16/02/2015 अजंता जवैलर्स
स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 वार्ड नंबर 4, हाउस नंबर 916, नवसारी ट्रेड सैंटर, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं नवसारी-396445 मुहरांकन
12. 720000528 20/02/2015 प्रमुख जवैलर्स
स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 11, श्रीनाथगी, बैंक आफ बड़ोदा के पास, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं हिम्मतनगर, साबरकांठा-383001 मुहरांकन
13. 720000548 20/02/2015 शुभाग्या फुड तथा बिवरेजिस पैकेजबंद पेयजल (अदर दैन 14543 - - 2004 ब्लाक नंबर 207/629, पेटलाड-बोरसाड रोड पैकेजड नेचुरल मिनरल वाटर) एट : रूपियापारा, ता पेटलाड, आनंद-388450
14. 720000568 20/02/2015 टी एस के एंटरप्राईस पैकेजबंद पेयजल (अदर दैन 14543 - - 2004 प्लाट नंबर 122, फेस-2, जी आई डी सी एसटेट पैकेजड नेचुरल मिनरल वाटर) राजपीपला, गांव राजपीपला (रूरल) (कनवरपारा), नानडोड, नर्मदा राजपीपला-393145
15. 720000558 23/02/2015 कनायिया आर्ट जवैलर्स
स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 चोकसी बाजार, टावर बाजार के पास, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं आनंद-388001 मुहरांकन
16. 720000538 23/02/2015 गोपी जवैलर्स
स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 शॉप नंबर 5/11, शानकेश्वर काम्पलैक्स, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं धोबीवाड, वी पी रोड, वलसाद मुहरांकन
17. 720000578 26/02/2015 नंदकिशोर चंपकलाल सोनी
स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 जी/79, शिवम काम्पलैक्स, राजपुरी रोड, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं बलासीनोर-388255 खेडा मुहरांकन
18. 720000588 26/02/2015 सोनी हरजी तथा सन्स जवैलर्स स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 वार्ड नंबर 4/2633, शिवम काम्पलैक्स, सैंट्रल बैंक, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं सयाजी रोड, नवसारी मुहरांकन
19. 720000628 26/02/2015 अहमदाबाद म्यूनिसिपल कार्पोरेशन पैकेजबंद पेयजल 14543 - - 2004 सर्वे नंबर 1, ब्लाक नंबर 31 (अदर दैन पैकेजड नेचुरल एटः कोटारपुर, ताः अहमदाबाद-382475 मिनरल वाटर)
20. 720000638 27/02/2015 गौतम गोल्ड जवैलर्स
स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 जी-1 ओमकार प्लाजा भातार रोड, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं एलबी सिनेमा के सामने, सूरत मुहरांकन
21. 720000648 27/02/2015 एम जे बिवरेजिस पैकेजबंद पेयजल (अदर दैन 14543 - - 2004 52, निर्मल इंडस्ट्रियल पार्क, न्यू जी आई डी सी, पैकेजड नेचुरल मिनरल वाटर) गोजारिया, मेहसाना-3828252526 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
22. 720000658 27/02/2015 माउंटेन बिवरेजिस पैकेजबंद पेयजल (अदर दैन 14543 - - 2004
शुभलाभ एसटेट, राजेश इंडस्ट्रीज के पीछे, महेश्वरी पैकेजड नेचुरल मिनरल वाटर)
मिल रोड, तावडीपुरा, शाहीबाग, अहमदाबाद-380004
23. 720000668 27/02/2015 एक्यूरत बिवरेजिस पैकेजबंद पेयजल (अदर दैन 14543 - - 2004
भालेज, रेलवे क्रासिंग के पीछे, ता उमरेठ, पैकेजड नेचुरल मिनरल वाटर)
आनंद-388205
24. 720000618 27/02/2015 बिलटैक बिल्डिंग एलीमैंटस लिमिटेड कांक्रीट मैसनरी यूनिटस 2185 3 - 1984
ब्लाक नंबर 309, पाटको फुडस के सामने, एन एच
नंबर 8, एट पोस्ट धामडोड, ता मंगरोल, सूरत-394125
25. 720000598 27/02/2015 वराजराज एकवा पैकेजबंद पेयजल (अदर दैन 14543 - - 2004
आर एस नंबर 295, रतनपुर, दाबहोई रोड, पैकेजड नेचुरल मिनरल वाटर)
वडोदरा-390004
[सं॰ सी एम डी/13ः11] डॉ॰ एस॰ एल॰ पालकर, वैज्ञानिक 'एफ' एवं प्रमुख
New Delhi, the 6th May, 2015
S.O. 1184.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (5) of the regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification) Regulations 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are given in the following Schedule:
SCHEDULE
Sl. Licences Grant Date Name & Address of the Party Title of the Standard IS No. Part Sec Year No. No.
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9
1 . 720000407 02/02/2015 Hiral Enterprise Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 142/2, Kadi Chhatral Highway, (other than packaged
Opp Tulsi Petrol Pump, Karannagar natural mineral water)
Mahesana, Kadi-382715
2 . 720000428 02/02/2015 Tara Tradelink P Ltd. Textiles-tarpaulins made 7903 - - 2011 Plot No. 25, Soham Integrated Textile from high density
Park, Mahijada & Timba, Daskroi polyethylene woven fabric
Ahmedabad-382425
3 . 720000608 02/02/2015 Shree Sai A K Beverages Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 Plot No. 40, AT & Post : Atali (other than packaged
Near Primary School natural mineral water)
Tal : Vagra, Bharuch-392130
4 . 720000438 06/02/2015 Priti Diamond and Gold Jewellery Gold and gold alloyes, 1417 - - 1999 B-44, Ramkrishna Society,
jewellery/artefacts-
Near Ramkrishna School
fineness and marking-
L.H. Road Varachha, Surat-395006
5 . 720000458 09/02/2015 Royal Beverages Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 SR No. 622/P1, AT & PO: Akrund (other than packaged
TA: Dhansura, Sabarkantha-383260 natural mineral water)
6 . 720000468 09/02/2015 Laxmi Jewellers Gold and gold alloyes, 1417 - - 1999 Juna Bazar, Himatnagar
jewellery/artefacts-
Sabarkantha-383001 fineness and marking-
7 . 720000488 10/02/2015 Bhimjibhai Jewellers Gold and gold alloyes, 1417 - - 1999 2, Vasundhara Complex,
jewellery/artefacts-
Harni Varasia Ringh Road, fineness and marking-
Vadodara-390022[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2527 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9
8 . 720000478 12/02/2015 Niyur Plastic Industries Conduits for electrical 9537 3 - 1983 806, Kothari Industrial Estate installations
Kothari Char Rasta
Gandhinagar, Santej
9 . 720000498 13/02/2015 Shree Samor Gold Gold and gold alloyes, 1417 - - 1999 8, Vishwa Residency,
jewellery/artefacts-
Near Vishramnagar, Gurukal Road, fineness and marking-
Ahmadabad-380052
1 0 . 720000508 16/02/2015 Vimco Crop. Sciences Cypermethrin ec 12016 - - 1987 98/3, Limbadia Village
NH No. 08, Near Ranasan Power House,
Gandhinagar, Village Limbadia-382330
1 1 . 720000518 16/02/2015 Ajanta Jewellers Gold and gold alloyes, 1417 - - 1999 Ward No. 4, House No. 916 jewellery/artefacts-
Navsari Trade Centre,
fineness and marking-
Navsari-396445
1 2 . 720000528 20/02/2015 Pramukh Jewellers Gold and gold alloyes, 1417 - - 1999 11, Shrinathgi, near Bank of Baroda, jewellery/artefacts-
Himatnagar, Sabarkantha-383001 fineness and marking-
1 3 . 720000548 20/02/2015 Shubhagya Foods & Beverages Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 Block No. 207/629, Petlad-Borsad Road (other than packaged
AT : Rupiyapara, Tal: Petlad, natural mineral water)
Anand-388450
1 4 . 720000568 20/02/2015 TSK Enterprise Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 Plot No. 122, Phase-2, GIDC Estate (other than packaged
Rajpiple, Village: Rajpipla (Rulal) natural mineral water)
(Kunvarpara), Nandod, Narmada
Rajpipla-393145
1 5 . 720000558 23/02/2015 Kanaiya Art Jewellers Gold and gold alloyes, 1417 - - 1999 Choksi Bazar, Near Tower Bazar, jewellery/artefacts-
Anand-388001
fineness and marking-
1 6 . 720000538 23/02/2015 Gopi Jewellers Gold and gold alloyes, 1417 - - 1999 Shop No. 5/11, Shankheshwar Complex, jewellery/artefacts-
Dhobiwad, V.P. Road Valsad fineness and marking-
1 7 . 720000578 26/02/2015 Nandkishor Champaklal Soni Gold and gold alloyes, 1417 - - 1999 G/79, Shivam Complex, Rajpuri jewellery/artefacts-
Road, Balasinor-388255 Kheda-388255 fineness and marking-
18. 720000588 26/02/2015 Soni Harji and Sons Jewellers Gold and gold alloyes, 1417 - - 1999 Ward No. 4/2633, Shivam Complex, jewellery/artefacts-
Central Bank Sayaji Road Navsari fineness and marking-
1 9 . 720000628 26/02/2015 Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 Survey No. 1, Block No. 31 (other than packaged
AT : Kotarpur, Tal : Ahmedabad-382475 natural mineral water)
2 0 . 720000638 27/02/2015 Gautam Gold IS Jewellers Gold and gold alloyes, 1417 - - 1999 G-1, Omkar Plaza Bhatar Road, jewellery/artefacts-
Opp Elbiee Cinema, Surat
fineness and marking-
2 1 . 720000648 27/02/2015 M J Beverages Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 52, Nirmal Industrial Park, New GIDC, (other than packaged
Gozaria, Mahesana-382825 natural mineral water)2528 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9
2 2 . 720000658 27/02/2015 Mountain Beverages Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 Shubh Labh Estate, Behind Rajesh (other than packaged
Industries, Maheswari Mill Road, natural mineral water)
Tavdipura, Sahibaug, Ahmedabad-380004
2 3 . 720000668 27/02/2015 Aqurat Beverages, Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 Bhalej Behind Railway Crossing (other than packaged
Tal: Umreth, Anand-388205 natural mineral water)
2 4 . 720000618 27/02/2015 Bil Tech Building Elements Limited Concrete masonry units 2185 3 - 1984 Block No. 309, Opp. Patco Foods N.H.
No. 8, AT: Post Dhamdod Tal: Mangrol
Surat-394125
2 5 . 720000598 27/02/2015 Vraj Raj Aqua Packaged drinking water 14543 - - 2004 R S No. 295, Ratanpur, Dabhoi Road, (other than packaged
Vadodara-390004 natural mineral water)
[No. CMD/13:11] Dr. S.L. PALKAR, Scientist 'F' & Head
नई दिल्ली, 6 मई, 2015
का.आ. 1185.—भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो (प्रमाणन) विनियम 1988 के विनियम (5) के उपविनियम (6) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि निम्न विवरण वाले लाइसेंसों को उनके आगे दर्शायी गई तारीख से रदद्/स्थगित कर दिया गया हैः—
अनुसूची
सम्बद्ध भारतीय मानक का शीर्षक
क्रम लाइसेंस लाइसेंसधारी का नाम लाइसेंस के अंतर्गत वस्तु/प्रकम रदद् करने की तिथि संख्या संख्या व पता सीएम/एल-
1. 7857096 मैंसर्स ज्योति पावर ट्रांसमिशन प्रा लिमिटेड एलूमिनियम कंडक्टर फार ओवरहैड 04/02/2015 प्लाट नंबर ए-9,/17/19 स्टील टाउन, नोवा पेट्रोलियम, ट्रांसमशिन परपस गांव मोरैया ता सानंद, डिस्ट्रिक्ट अहमदाबाद आई एस 398ः पार्ट 4ः 1994
2. 7534173 मैसर्स जीलैक्स केबल इंडस्ट्रीज पी बी सी इंसूलेटिड केबल 04/02/2015 48/सी/2, अश्वामेध एसटेट, नूतन नागरिक बैक के पीछे, आई एस 694ः 1990 एम एन देसाई पेट्रोल पम्प के सामने, एट गांव चांगोदर, ता सानंद, डिस्ट्रिक्ट अहमदाबाद
3. 7867810 मैसर्स संगम इलैक्ट्रिकल्स स्टाटरस फार फलोरसैंट लैम्प 04/02/2015 ई/9, बिरजू अपार्टमैंट, आजाद सोसाइटी के सामने, आई एस 2215ः 2006 अंबावाडी, अहमदाबाद-380015
4. 7447582 मैसर्स एम डी एंटरप्राईस ओपनवैल सबमर्सिबल पम्पसैट 12/02/2015 महाशक्ति इंडस्ट्रियल एसटेट, पार्ट 2, अरविंद एसटेट आई एस 14220ः 1994 के पास, अनिल स्टार्च के पीछे, बापूनगर, अहमदाबाद
5. 2929373 मैसर्स चंद्रा इंडस्ट्रीज पी वी सी इंसूलेटिड केबल 28/02/2015 प्लाट नंबर, 342, बाक्सी फालिया कासानगर, आई एस 694ः 1990 दरगाह के सामने, कटरगाम तलाब के पास, सूरत-395004
[सं॰ सी एम डी/13ः13] डॉ. एस. एल. पालकर, वैज्ञानिक 'एफ' एवं प्रमुख[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2529
New Delhi, the 6th May, 2015
S.O. 1185.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (6) of the regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification) Regulations 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies that the licences particulars of which are given below have been cancelled with effect from the date indicated against each:
SCHEDULE
Sl. Licences No. Name & Address of the Licensee Article/Process with relevant Indian Date of No. CM/L-
Standards covered by the licence Cancellation cancelled
1. 7857096 M/s Jyoti Power Transmission Pvt Ltd Aluminium conductors for overhead 04/02/2015 Plot No. A-9/17/19 Steel Town Opp. NOVA Transmission purposes: Petrolium Village Moraiya TA Sanand, IS 398: Part 4: 1994 Moraiya Sanand, Distt: Ahmadabad
2. 7534173 M/s Jeelex Cable Industries PVC Insulated Cables 04/02/2015 48/C/2, Ashwamegh Estate, Behind Nutan IS 694 : 1990 Nagrik Bank, Opp M.N. Desai Petrol Pump, AT Village-Changodar Taluka-Sanand Dist-Ahmadabad
3. 7867810 M/s Sangam Electricals Starters for fluorescent 04/02/2015 E/9, Birju Apartments, Opp. Azad Society, lamps Ambawadi, Ahmedabad-380015 IS 2215: 2006
4. 7447582 M/s MD Enterprise Openwell Sumbersible Pumpsets 12/02/2015 Mahashakti Industrial Estate, Part 2, IS 14220: 1994 Near Arvind Estate, Behind Anil Starch, Bapunagar, Distt: Ahmadabad
5. 2929373 M/s Chandra Industries PVC Insulated Cables 28/02/2015 Plot No. 342, Baxi Falia Kasanagar IS 694: 1990
Opp. Dargha Near Katagram Talao, Distt: Surat-395004
[No. CMD/13:13] DR. S. L. PALKAR, Scientist 'F' & Head
नई दिल्ली, 6 मई, 2015
का.आ. 1186.—भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो (प्रमाणन) विनियम 1988 के नियम 4 के उपनियम (5) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन लाइसेंसों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं, वे स्वीकृत कर दिए गए हैंः—
अनुसूची
क्रम लाइसेंस स्वीकृत करने लाइसेंसधारी का नाम व पता भारतीय मानक का शीर्षक भा मा भाग अनु वर्ष संख्या संख्या की तिथि वर्ष/
संख्या
माह
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1. 720000678 02/03/2015 अवकार जवैलर्स स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 42 मनीष फ्लैट, सुंदर नगर चार आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता रस्ता, नारायणपुरा, एवं मुहरांकन अहमदाबाद-3800132530 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2. 720000728 03/03/2015 श्रेया एक्स टैक प्रा लिमिटेड एक्सप्लोसिव एटमासफियर्स 60079 1 - 2007 ब्लाक नंबर, 700, मंजूसर सावली पार्ट 1 इक्यूपमैंट प्रोटैक्शन रोड, मंजूसर टुंडव, ता सावली, बाय फ्लेमप्रुफ एनक्लोसर्स वडोदरा-391775 ''डी''
3. 720000718 04/03/2015 नारायणी पोलिमर कंपोनैंटस रबर सिलिंग रिंग फार गैस 5382 - - 1985 13, गजानन एस्टेट, जावेरी एस्टेट मेन वाटर मेन तथा सीवर के पास, काठवाडा, जी आई डी सी, अहमदाबाद-382430
4. 720000689 10/03/2015 शुकन ज्वैलर्स स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 ई, 18 मनहरनगर शॉपिंग सैंटर, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता पार्ट 1, खोडियारनगर क्रास रोड के एवं मुहरांकन सामने, बापूनगर, अहमदाबाद-380024
5. 720000699 10/03/2015 निलयकुमार तथा ब्रदर्स ज्वैलर्स स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 स्वामिनारायण मंदिर के पास, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता वानियावाड सर्कल, कालेज एवं मुहरांकन रोड, नडियाड, खेडा-387001
6. 720000708 11/03/2015 आर एस बिवरेजिस पैकेजबंद पेयजल (अदर दैन 14543 - - 2004 सर्वे नंबर 111, जालोड रोड, पैकेजड नेचुरल मिनरल वाटर उसारवान, पोस्ट खारोड, ता तथा डिस्ट्रिक्ट दाहोद-389151
7. 720000738 12/03/2015 एच एन बी फूइस तथा बिवरेजिस पैकेजबंद पेयजल (अदर दैन 14543 - - 1999 एन एच नंबर 8, ब्लाक नंबर 527, पैकेजड नेचुरल मिनरल वाटर) पैकी आर्क सिसोदरा पाटिया के पास, केनास मोजे वैसमा के पास, ता जालापोर, नवसारी-396475
8. 720000799 13/03/2015 ग्रीन पोलिमर्स कांडयूटस फार इलैक्ट्रिकल 9537 3 - 1983 95, सोपान केसर इंडसरल हब, इंस्टालेशन सर्वोदय होटल के पीछे, एन एच नंबर, 8 मोरैया गाम रोड, सरखेज बावला हाइवे, एट मोरैया, अहमदाबाद-382110
9. 720000789 16/03/2015 स्टीलहैक्स इंडस्ट्रीज सोलर फ्लैट प्लेट कलैक्टर 12933 1 - 2003 प्लाट नंबर 525,526 जी आई डी सी एस्टेट वल्लभ विद्यानगर, ता आनंद-388121
10. 720000758 17/03/2015 वैभव ज्वैलर्स स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 शॉप नंबर 1, वाडिलोनू घर, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता भारूच-392002 एवं मुहरांकन
11. 720000769 17/03/2015 प्रेम ज्वैलर्स स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 शॉप नंबर 4 श्रीजी देसाई मार्केट, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता ओल्ड बस स्टेंड के पास, वायरा, एवं मुहरांकन तापी-394650[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2531 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
12. 720000779 17/03/2015 सोनी नितिनकुमार भाईलालभाई स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 जी-47, श्यामसुंदर काम्पलैक्स, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एट तथा पी ओ मोडासा, डिस्ट्रिक्ट एवं मुहरांकन अरावली, साबरकांटा-383315
13. 720000808 17/03/2015 अपोला स्क्रीनस प्रा लिमिटेड वैल स्क्रीनस तथा सलोटिड 8110 - - 2000 बी-8 तथा बी-9, धरती अपोलो पाईपस इंडस्ट्रियल पार्क, छतराल, ता कलोल, गांधीनगर-382729
14. 720000748 19/03/2015 रेनसन पाईप इंडस्ट्रीज, हाई डैंसिटी पालथिलीन 4984 - - 1995 ए-20, एफ एफ/1, सरदार पटेल पाईप फार पोटेबल वाटर इंडस्ट्रियल एस्टेट, एन एच नंबर 8, सपलाईस नारोल, अहमदाबाद-382405
15. 720000879 20/03/2015 विनायक गोल्ड पैलेस स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 बी 34 निलम शॉपिंग सैंटर, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता स्याम पार्क सोसाइटी के सामने, मुहरांकन सरदाद चौक, कृष्णा नगर, अहमदाबाद-380046
16. 720000859 23/03/2015 श्री ब्रहम्णी गोल्ड पैलेस, स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 बी/37 बी/126, उदय टैनामैंट, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता शामकुंज के सामने, निकोल रोड, एंव मुहरांकन नवा नरोडा, अहमदाबाद-380046
17. 720000869 23/03/2015 परेशकुमार ज्यन्तीलाल पारेख जवैलर्स स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 ग्राउंड फलोर बाजार, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता स्ट्रीट 162, एट पोस्ट आटगाम, एंव मुहरांकन नवसारी-396403
18. 720000818 23/03/2015 निकी इंसूलेशन प्रा॰ लिमिटेड क्रासलिंकड पालथिलिन 7098 1 - 1988 प्लाट नंबर 843, रकनपुर गांव, इंसूलेटिड पी वी सी शीथड गांव लेख के सामने, ता कलोल, केबल गांधीनगर-382721
19. 720000828 23/03/2015 विजय इंडस्ट्रीज सबमर्सिबल पम्पसैट 8034 - - 2002 बी-37, खोडियार एसटेट, सत्यम इंडस्ट्रियल एस्टेट के सामने, नरोडा मैमको से बापूनगर रोड अहमदबाद-382345
20. 720000908 23/03/2015 द सुप्रीम इंडस्ट्रीज लिमिटेड मलटीलेयरड क्रास लेमिनेटिड 14611 - - 1998 सर्वे नंबर 123/1, पैकी 2 तथा शीटस तथा तारपोलिनस/कवर्स 123/2 पैकी-1, गांव गैट मुवाला, पंचमहल, हलोल
21. 720000889 24/03/2015 ब्रेडी तथा मोरिस इंजिनियरिंग कम्पनी हैंड ओपरेटिड चेन पुली 3832 - - 2005 लिमिटेड 505, जी आई डी सी ब्लाकस इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया फेस 4, वटवा, अहमदाबाद-3824452532 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
22. 720000899 25/03/2015 श्रीजी पाईप फैक्टरी प्रीकास्ट कांक्रीट पाईप 458 - - 2003 एट मोडासर, पी ओ बोडेली, (विद तथा विदाउट वडोदरा-391135 रेनिफोर्समैंट)
23. 720000838 25/03/2015 श्रेया गोल्ड स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 18 डी प्लाट नंबर 4 शॉप नंबर 4/5, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता अलीश पार्क, रामनगर को ऑप एवं मुहरांकन सोसाइटी ए के रोड, सूरत-395006
24. 720000849 25/03/2015 सुवर्णशिशखा जवैलर्स स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 एफ एफ 1, उमिया काम्पलैक्स, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता प्रतापगढ़ के पास, पेट्रोल पम्प, एवं मुहरांकन गांधी रोड, साबरकांठा, हिम्मतनगर
25. 720000918 30/03/2015 ध्रुव जैम्स प्रा॰ लिमिटेड स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 शॉप नंबर 319, 26, 27, 28, 29, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता 30, टर्निंग पवांइट काम्पलैक्स, एवं मुहरांकन फायर स्टेशन के पास, गोड डोड रोड़, सूरत-395007
26. 720000929 30/03/2015 वृंदावन ओरनामैंंटस प्रा॰ लिमिटेड स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 मेन बाजार थाराड, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता बनसकांठा-385565 एवं मुहरांकन
27. 720000939 30/03/2015 हार्दिक ज्वैलर्स स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण धातुओं के 1417 - - 1999 601, शिव दर्शन अपोर्टमैंटस, आभूषणों शिल्पकारी शुद्धता उमा भवन के पास, भातार रोड, एवं मुहरांकन सूरत-395007
28. 720000979 30/03/2015 गजानंद इरीगेशन इंडस्ट्रीज ईरीगेशन इक्यूपमैंट-स्टेनर 12785 - - 1994 प्लाट, नंबर 11, त्रिभुवन एसटेट, टाईप फिलटर्स जी आई डी सी, काठवाडा, रोड नंबर 8, काठवाड़ा, अहमदाबाद-382430
29. 720000969 30/03/2015 गजानंद इरीगेशन इंडस्ट्रीज फर्टिलाइजर तथा कैमिकल 14483 1 - 1997 प्लाट नंबर 11, त्रिभुवन एसटेट, इंजैक्टर सिस्टम जी आई डी सी, काठवाडा, रोड नंबर 8, काठवाडा, अहमदाबाद-382430
30. 720000949 31/03/2015 श्री जगदंबा पोलिमर्स लिमिटेड टैक्सटाईलस-हाई डैंसिटी 14887 - - 2014 प्लाट नंबर 101, 703 से 710, पॉलीथलीन (एच डी पी ई)/ जी आई डी सी एसटेट, ता ढोलका, पालीप्रापलिन (पी पी) वोवन अहमदाबाद-382225 सैक फार पैकिंग 50 किलोग्राम/
25 किलोग्राम फुडगे्रेन
31. 720001027 31/03/2015 सीमा मिनरल पैकेजबंद पेयजल (अदर दैन 14543 - - 1999 ब्लॉक नंबर 335 पैकी, ओ सैवल पैकेजड नेचुरल मिनरल वाटर) स्टार क्लब के सामने गांव शेला, ता सानंद, अहमदाबाद-380058
32. 720001037 31/03/2015 जे के वधवा तथा कम्पनी सलफयूरिक एसिंड 266 - - 1993 प्लाट नंबर 2920/ए, फेस 1 जी आई डी सी एसटेट, वापी, वलसाद-396195
[सं॰ सी एम डी/13ः11] डॉ॰ एस॰ एल॰ पालकर, वैज्ञानिक 'एफ' एवं प्रमुख[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2533
New Delhi, the 6th May, 2015
S.O. 1186.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (5) of the regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification) Regulations 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are given in the following schedule:
SCHEDULE
Sl. Licences Grant date Name & Address of the party Title of the Standard IS No. Part Sec Year No. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1. 720000678 02/03/2015 Avkar Jewellers Gold and gold alloys, 1417 — — 1999 42 Manish Flat, Sunder Nagar Jewellery/artefacts-
Char Rasta, Naranpura Fineness and marking
Ahmadabad 380013
2. 720000728 03/03/2015 Shreya Ex-Tech Pvt. Ltd. Explosive atmospheres 60079 1 — 2007 Block No. 700, Manjusar Savli part 1 equipment
Road, Manjusar Tundav, protection by flameproof
Taluka Savli Vododara, enclosures "d"
Manjusar 391775
3. 720000718 04/03/2015 Narayani Polymer Components Rubber sealing rings for 5382 — — 1985 13, Gajanan Estate, NR. Zaveri gas mains, water mains
Estate Kathwada, GIDC, and sewers
Ahmadabad 382430
4. 720000689 10/03/2015 Shukan Jewellers Gold and gold alloys, 1417 — — 1999 E, 18 Manharnagar Shopping jewellery/artefacts-
Centre Part 1, Opp fineness and marking
Khodiyarnagar Cross Road
Bapunagar,
Ahmedabad 380024
5. 720000699 10/03/2015 Nilaykumar & Bros Jewellers Gold and gold alloys, 1417 — — 1999 Near Swaminarayan Temple, jewellery/artefacts-
Vaniyavad Circle, College fineness and marking
Road, Nadiyad Kheda
387001
6. 720000708 11/03/2015 R S Beverages Packaged drinking water 14543 — — 2004 Survey No. 111, Zalod Road (other than packaged
Usarwan Post: Kharod, Tal & natural mineral water)
Dist. Dahod
Dahod 389151
7. 720000738 12/03/2015 HNB Foods & Beverages Packaged drinking water 14543 — — 1999 N H No. 8, Block No. 527, (other than packaged
Paiki Near Arak Sisodra natural mineral water)
Patia, Near Canal
Moje-Vesma, Tal: Jalapore
Navsari 3964752534 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 8. 720000799 13/03/2015 Green Polymers 95, Sopan Conduits for electrical 9537 3 — 1983
Kesar Indusral HUB Behind installations
Sarvoday Hotel NH No. 8,
Moreiya Gam Road
Sarkhej-Bavla Highway
AT: Moreiya, Ahmedabad
382110
9. 720000789 16/03/2015 Steelhacks Industries Solar flat plate collector 12933 1 — 2003 Plot No. 525, 526, Gidc Estate
Vallabh Vidyanagaar
Tal: Anand 388121
10. 720000758 17/03/2015 Vaibhav Jewellers Gold and gold alloys, 1417 — — 1999 Shop No. 1, Vadilonu Ghar, jewellery/artefacts
Bharuch 392002 fineness and marking
11. 720000769 17/03/2015 Prem Jewellers Gold and gold alloys, 1417 — — 1999 Shop No. 4 Shreeji Desai jewellery/artefacts
Market, Near Old Bus Stand fineness and marking
Vyara, Tapi 394650
12. 720000779 17/03/2015 Soni Nitinkumar Bhailalbhai Gold and gold alloys, 1417 — — 1999 G-47, Shyamsunder Complex, jewellery/artefacts
At PO Modasa, Dist Aravally fineness and marking
Sabarkantha 383315
13. 720000808 17/03/2015 Apollo Screens Private Limited Well screens and slotted, 8110 — — 2000 B-8 & B-9, Dharti Apollo pipes
Industrial Park Chhatral,
Tal: Kalol, Gandhinagar 382729
14. 720000748 19/03/2015 Rainson Pipe Industries High density polyethylene, 4985 — — 1995 A-20, FF/1, Sardar Patel Pipes for potable
Industrial Estate, N H No. 8, water supplies
Narol, Ahmedabad 382405
15. 720000879 20/03/2015 Vinayak Gold Palace Gold and gold alloys, 1417 — — 1999 B 34 Nilam Shopping Center, jewellery/artefacts
Opp Syam Park Society, fineness and Marking
Sardar Chock Krishnanagar
Ahmadabad 380046
16. 720000859 23/03/2015 Shree Brahamani Gold and gold alloys, 1417 — — 1999 Gold Palace, B/37 B/126, jewellery/artefacts
Uday Tenament, fineness and marking
Opp Shamkunj, Nikol Road
Nava Naroda Ahamadabad
380046
17. 720000869 23/03/2015 Pareshkumar Jayantilal Parekh Gold and gold alloys, 1417 — — 1999 Jewellers, Ground Floor Bazar, jewellery/artefacts
Street 162, At Post Aatgam, fineness and marking
Navsari 396403[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2535 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
18. 720000818 23/03/2015 NIKI Insulation Pvt. Ltd. Cross linked polyethylene, 7098 1 — 1988 Plot No. 843, Rakanpur Village insulated pvc Opp Village Lake, TA : Kalol sheathed cables Gandhinagari 382721
19. 720000828 23/03/2015 Vijay Industries, B-37, Submersible pumpsets, 8034 — — 2002 Khodiyar Estate, Opp. Satyam Indl Estate, Naroda-Memco to Bapunagar Road Ahmedabad 382345
20. 720000908 23/03/2015 The Supreme Industries Multilayered Cross 14611 — — 1998 Limited Survey No. 123/1, laminated sheets and Paiky 2 & 123/2 Paiky-1, tarpaulins/covers-
Village: Get Muvala, Panchamahal Halol
21. 720000889 24/03/2015 Brady And Morris Engineering Hand-operated chain, 3832 — — 2005 Company Ltd., 505, Gidc pulley blocks
Industrial Area, Phase IV, Vatva, Ahmedabad 382445
22. 720000899 25/03/2015 Shreeji Pipe Factory Precast concrete pipes, 458 — — 2003 At Modasar PO Bodeli (with and without
Vadodara 391135 reinforcement)
23. 720000838 25/03/2015 Shreya Gold, 18D Plot No. 4, Gold and gold alloys, 1417 — — 1999 Shop No. 4/5, Alish Park, jewellery/artefacts
Ramnagar Co op Society fineness and marking AK Road Surat 395006
24. 720000849 25/03/2015 Suvarnshikha Jewellers Gold and gold alloys, 1417 — — 1999 FF 1 Umiya Complex, jewellery/artefacts
Near Pratapgadh Petrol Pump, fineness and marking Gandhi Road, Sabarkantha,
Himatnagar
25. 720000918 30/03/2015 Dhruv Gems Pvt. Ltd. Gold and gold alloys, 1417 — — 1999 Shop No. 319, 26, 27, 28, 29, jewellery/artefacts
30 Turning Point Complex, fineness and marking Near Fire Station, Ghod Dod
` Road, Surat 395007
26. 720000929 30/03/2015 Vrundavan Ornaments Pvt.Ltd. Gold and gold alloys, 1417 — — 1999 Main Bazar Tharad Banas jewellery/artefacts Kantha 385565 fineness and marking
27. 720000939 30/03/2015 Hardik Jewels, 601, Shiv Gold and gold alloys, 1417 — — 1999 Darshan Appartments jewellery/artefacts
Near Uma Bhavan, Bhatar Road fineness and marking
Surat 395007
28. 720000979 30/03/2015 Gajanand Irrigation Industries Irrigation equipment, 12785 — — 1994 Plot No. 11, Tribhuban Estate strainer-type filters
Gidc-Kathwada, Road No. 8
Kathwada, Ahmedabad 3824302536 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
29. 720000969 30/03/2015 Gajanand Irrigation Industries Fertilizer and chemical, 14483 1 — 1997 Plot No. 11, Tribhuban Estate injector system Gidc-Kathwada, Road No. 8
Kathwada, Ahmedabad 382430
30. 720000949 31/03/2015 Shri Jagdamba Polymers Ltd. Textiles-high density, 14887 — — 2014 Plot No. 101, 703 to 710, Gidc polyethylene (hdpe)/ Estate Tal: Dholka, polypropylene (pp)
Ahmedabad 382225 woven sacks for packing
50 kg/25 kg foodgrains
31. 720001027 31/03/2015 Seema Minerals Packaged drinking water, 14543 — — 1999 Block No. 335 Paiki, Opp. 0- (other than packaged Seven Star Club, Village: Shela, natural mineral water) Tal: Sanand, Ahmedabad 380058
32. 720001037 31/03/2015 J K Wadhwa And Company Sulphuric acid, 266 — — 1993 Plot No. 2920/A, Phase 1 Gidc Estate, Vapi, Valsad 396195
[No. CMD/13:11] Dr. S.L. PALKAR, Scientist 'F' & Head
नई दिल्ली, 6 मई, 2015
का.आ. 1187.—भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो (प्रमाणन) विनियम 1988 के विनियम (5) के उपविनियम (6) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि निम्न विवरण लाइसेंसों को उनके आगे दर्शायी गई तारीख से रदद्/स्थगित कर दिया गया हैः-
अनुसूची
सम्बद्ध भारतीय मानक का शीर्षक
क्रम लाइसेंस लाइसेंसधारी का नाम लाइसेंस के अंतर्गत वस्तु/प्रकम रदद् करने की तिथि संख्या संख्या व पता सीएम/एल-
कोई नहीं
[सं ॰ सी एम डी/13ः13] डॉ. एस. एल. पालकर, वैज्ञानिक 'एफ' एवं प्रमुख
New Delhi, the 6th May, 2015
S.O. 1187.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (6) of the regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification) Regulations 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies that the licences particulars of which are given below have been cancelled with effect from the date indicated aghainst each:
SCHEDULE
Sl. Licences No. Name & Address of the Licensee Article/Process with relevant Indian Date of No. CM/L-
Standards covered by the licence Cancellation cancelled
Nil
[No. CMD/13:13] Dr. S.L. PALKAR, Scientist 'F' & Head[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2537
वाणिज्य और उद्योग मंत्रालय
(वाणिज्य विभाग)
नई दिल्ली, 8 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1188.—केन्द्रीय सरकार, निर्यात (क्वालिटी नियंत्रण और निरीक्षण) नियम, 1964 के नियम 12, के उपनियम (2) के साथ पठित निर्यात (क्वालिटी नियंत्रण और निरीक्षण) अधिनियम, 1963 (1963 का 22) की धारा 7 की उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स इन्सपेक्टोरेट ग्रिफिथ इंडिया प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, आवास संख्या 341 बी, डाक रेडी, तालुका वैंगरूला, जिला सिंधुदुर्ग, महाराष्ट्र-416517 भारत में स्थित हैं, को इस अधिसूचना, के राजपत्र में प्रकाशन की तारीख से एक वर्ष की अवधि के लिए भारत सरकार के वाणिज्य मंत्रालय, की अधिसूचना सं॰ का॰आ॰ 3975, तारीख 20 दिसम्बर, 1965 की अधसूचना में उपाबद्ध अनुसूचियों में विनिर्दिष्ट खनिज और अयस्क (समूह-I), अर्थात्, लौह अयस्क के रूप में क्रमशः को निर्यात से पूर्व निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन रेडी, में उक्त खनिज और अयस्क के निरीक्षण करने के लिए, एक अभिकरण के रूप में मान्यता देती है, अर्थात््ः
annexed to the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Commerce vide S.O. 3975 dated the 20 December 1965, prior to export of said Minerals and Ores at Redi, subject to the following conditions, namely:—
(i) M/s Inspectorate Griffith India Pvt. Ltd., House No. 341B, Post Redi, Taluka-Vengrula, District- Sindhudurg, Maharashtra-416517, shall give adequate facilities to the officers nominated by the Export Inspection Council in this behalf to examine the method of inspection followed by them in carrying out the inspection under rule 4 of the Export of Minerals and Ores-Group I (Inspection) Rules, 1965;
(ii) M/s Inspectorate Griffith India Pvt. Ltd., House No. 341B, Post Redi, Taluka-Vengrula, District- Sindhudurg, Maharashtra-416517, in the performance of their function under this notification shall be bound by such directions as the Director (Inspection and Quality Control), Export Inspection Council may give in writing from time to time.
[F. No. 4/1/2015-Export Inspection]
SANTOSH KUMAR SARANGI, Jt. Secy.
विद्युत मंत्रालय
(i) मैसर्स इन्सपेक्टोरेट ग्रिफिथ इंडिया प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, आवास संख्या 341 बी, डाक रेडी, तालुका वैंगरुला, जिला सिंध्ुदुर्ग, महाराष्ट्र-416517, खनिज और अयस्क समूह-I का निर्यात (निरीक्षण) नियम, 1965 के अधीन उनके द्वारा अपनाई गई निरीक्षण की पद्धति की जांच करने के लिए, इस निमित्त निर्यात निरीक्षण परिषद् द्वारा नामनिर्दिष्ट अधिकारियों को पर्याप्त सुविधाएं देगी;
(ii) मैसर्स इन्सपेक्टोरेट ग्रिफिथ इंडिया प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, आवास संख्या 341 बी, डाक रेडी, तालुका वैंगरूला, जिला सिंधुदुर्ग, महाराष्ट्र-416517, इस अधिसूचना के अधीन अपने कृत्यों के पालन में निदेशक (निरीक्षण और क्वालिटी नियंत्रण), निर्यात निरीक्षण परिषद् द्वारा समय-समय पर लिखित में दिए गए ऐसे निर्देशों से आबद्ध हाेंगे।
[फा॰ सं॰ 4/1/2015-निर्यात निरीक्षण]
संतोष कुमार सारंगी, संयुक्त सचिव नई दिल्ली, 4 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1189.—केंद्रीय सरकार राजभाषा (संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग), नियम, 1976 के नियम, 10 के उप नियम (4) के अनुसरण में विद्युत मंत्रालय के प्रशासनिक नियंत्रणाधीन पावर ग्रिड कारपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया लिमिटेड के पूर्वी क्षेत्र पारेषण प्रणाली-II, के अधीन ''400/220 केवी दुर्गापुर उपकेंद्र, ग्राम-पारूलिया, डाकघर-धवनी (दुर्गापुर), जिला-वर्दवान, पश्चिम बंगाल-713205'', जिसके 80 प्रतिशत कर्मचारीवृृंद ने हिंदी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, को एतद्द्वारा अधिसूचित करती है।
[सं॰ 11017/10/2013-हिन्दी]
डॉ॰ आर॰ सी॰ शर्मा, संयुक्त निदेशक (रा॰भा॰)
MINISTRY OF POWER
MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY
(Department of Commerce)
New Delhi, the 8th June, 2015
S.O. 1188.—In exercise of the powers conferred by the sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Export (Quality Control and Inspection) Act, 1963 (22 of 1963) read with sub-rule (2) of rule 12 of the Export (Quality Control and Inspection) Rules, 1964, the Central Government hereby recognises M/s Inspectorate Griffith India Pvt. Ltd., House No. 341B, Post Redi, Taluka-Vengrula, District- Sindhudurg, Maharashtra-416517, as an agency for a period of one year from the date of publication of this notification, for the inspection of Minerals and Ores (Group-I) namely, Iron Ore as specified in the Schedule New Delhi, the 4th June, 2015
S.O. 1189.—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 notify "400/220 Kv Durgapur Sub-station, Vill-Parulia, PO- Dhabani (Durgapur), Dist-Burdwan, West Bengal-713205" under the Eastern Region Transmission System-II, of the Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. under the administrative control of Ministry of Power, where 80% of the staff have acquired working knowledge of Hindi.
[No. 11017/10/2013-Hindi]
Dr. R.C. SHARMA, Jt. Director (O.L.)2538 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
कोयला मंत्रालय
नई दिल्ली, 8 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1190.—केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र (अर्जन और विकास) अधिनियम, 1957 (1957 का 20) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है) की धारा 4 की उप-धरा (1) के अधीन भारत सरकार में कोयला मंत्रालय के द्वारा जारी की गई अधिसूचना संख्या का॰आ॰ 2122, तारीख 25 सितम्बर, 2013 जो भारत के राजपत्र के भाग II, खंड 3, उप-खंड (ii) तारीख 5 अक्तूबर, 2013 में प्रकाशित की गई थी, उस अधिसूचना मे संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में जिसका माप 54.907 हेक्टर (लगभग) या 135. 68 एकड़ (लगभग) है, कोयले का पूर्वेक्षण करने के अपने आशय की सूचना दी थी;
और केन्द्रीय सरकार का यह समाधान हो गया है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट की गई उक्त भूमि के भाग में कोयला अभिप्राप्त है।
अतः, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 7 की उप-धारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित 52.431 हेक्टर (लगभग) या 129.56 एकड़ (लगभग) माप की उक्त भूमि का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की सूचना देती है;
टिप्पण 1ः इस अधिसूचना के अधीन आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक संख्या एसईसीएल/बीएसपी/जी॰एम॰ (पीएलजी)/भूमि/458, तारीख 9 दिसम्बर, 2014, का निरीक्षण कलक्टर, जिला-अनुपपुर (मध्य प्रदेश) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक, 1, काउंसिल हाउस, कोलकाता-700001 के कार्यालय में या साउथ ईस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड (राजस्व अनुभाग), सीपत रोड, बिलासपुर-495006 (छत्तीसगढ़) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है।
टिप्पण 2ः उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 8 के उपबंधों की ओर ध्यान
आकृष्ट किया जाता है जिसमें निम्नलिखित उपबंध है।
अर्जन के बाबत् आपत्तियांः
''8. (1) कोई व्यक्ति, जो किसी भूमि में, जिसकी बाबत् धारा 7 के अधीन अधिसूचना निकाली गई है, हितबद्ध है, अधिसूचना के निकाले जाने से तीस दिन के भीतर सम्पूर्ण भूमि या उसके किसी भाग या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के किन्हीं अध्किारों का अर्जन किए जाने के बारे में आपत्ति कर सकेगा।
स्पष्टीकरण-इस धारा के अन्तर्गत यह आपत्ति नहीं मानी जाएगी कि कोई व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में कोयला उत्पादन के लिए स्वयं खनन संक्रियाएं करना चाहता है और ऐसी संक्रियाएं केन्द्रीय सरकार या किसी अन्य व्यक्ति को नहीं करनी चाहिए।
(2) उप-धारा (1) के अधीन प्रत्येक सक्षम अधिकारी को लिखित रूप में की जाएगी और सक्षम अधिकारी, आपत्तिकर्ता को स्वयं सुने जाने, विधि व्यवसायी द्वारा सुनवाई का अवसर देगा और ऐसी सभी आपत्तियों को सुनने के पश्चात् और ऐसी अतिरिक्त जांच, यदि कोई हो, करने के पश्चात्, जो वह आवश्यक समझता है, वह या तो धारा 7 की उप-धारा (1) के अधीन अधिसूचित भूमि का या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में एक रिपोर्ट या ऐसी भूमि के विभिन्न टुकडे़ या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में आपत्तियों पर अपनी सिफारिशों और अपने द्वारा की गई कार्यवाही के अभिलेख सहित विभिन्न रिपोर्ट केन्द्रीय सरकार को उसके विनिश्चय के लिए देगा।
(3) इस धारा के प्रयोजनों के लिए वह व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में हितबद्ध समझा जाएगा जो प्रतिकर में हित का दावा करने का हकदार होगा, यदि भूमि या किसी ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकार इस अध्निियम के अधीन अर्जित कर लिए जाते है।''
टिप्पण 3ः केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला नियंत्रक, 1, काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता-700001 को उक्त अधिनियम के अधीन अधिसूचना संख्या का॰आ॰ 905, तारीख 20 मार्च, 1987 द्वारा सक्षम प्राधिकारी नियुक्त किया है।
अनुसूची
सोमना भूमिगत खान, हसदेव क्षेत्र
जिला-अनुपपुर (मध्य प्रदेश)
(रेखांक संख्यांक एसईसीएल/बी॰एस॰पी॰/जी॰एम॰ (पीएलजी)/भूमि/458, तारीख 9 दिसम्बर, 2014)
भू-सतह अधिकार
क्रम ग्राम का पटवारी बंदोबस्त तहसील जिला क्षेत्र टिप्पणियां
सं॰ नाम हल्का संख्या हेक्टर
संख्या में
1. लोहसरा 43 929 कोतमा अनुपपुर 14.063 भाग
2. भगता 43 769 कोतमा अनुपपुर 38.368 भाग
कुलः 52.431 हेक्टर (लगभग) या 129.56 एकड़ (लगभग)[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2539 1. ग्राम लोहसरा (भाग) में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्यांकोंः
155(भाग), 199(भाग), 200(भाग), 202(भाग), 203 से 205, 206(भाग), 207, 208 से 215, 216(भाग), 222(भाग), 227(भाग), 228(भाग), 229, 230(भाग), 231(भाग), 232(भाग), 233(भाग), 234, 235(भाग), 246(भाग), 247(भाग),
248(भाग), 249(भाग), 250, 251(भाग), 252(भाग), 253(भाग)।
2. ग्राम भगता (भाग) में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्यांकोंः
358(भाग), 359(भाग), 361(भाग), 365(भाग), 366(भाग), 370, 371(भाग), 374(भाग), 375 से 379, 380(भाग), 401(भाग), 407(भाग), 408, 409 से 415, 416(भाग), 417(भाग), 422(भाग), 424(भाग), 425 से 429, 430(भाग)।
सीमा वर्णनः
क-ख रेखा ग्राम भगता में बिन्दु ''क'' से आरंभ होती है और प्लाट संख्यांकों 365, 361, 359, 358 के उत्तरी सीमा से होती हुई ग्राम भगता-लोहसरा के सम्मिलित सीमा में बिन्दु ''ख'' पर मिलती है।
ख-ग रेखा बिन्दु ''ख'' से आरंभ होती है और ग्राम लोहसरा के प्लाट संख्यांकों 251, 253, 249, 248, 247, 246, 235, 233, 232,
231, 230, 228, 227, 222, 216, 199, 200, 202, 155 से गुजरती हुई ग्राम भगता-लोहसरा के भागतः सम्मिलित सीमा से होती हुई ग्राम भगता-लोहसरा के सम्मिलित सीमा में बिन्दु ''ग'' पर मिलती है।
ग-घ रेखा बिन्दु ''ग'' से आरंभ होती है और ग्राम लोहसरा के प्लाट संख्यांक 417 के दक्षिणी सीमा के प्लाट संख्यांकों 422, 424, 430 से होकर, 409 के दक्षिणी सीमा, 407, 401, 380 से होती हुई
बिन्दु ''घ'' पर मिलती है।
घ-क रेखा बिन्दु ''घ'' से आरंभ होती है और ग्राम भगता के प्लाट संख्यांकों 380, 378 के पश्चिमी सीमा के प्लाट संख्यांकों 374, 371 से होकर प्लाट संख्यांक 370 के पश्चिमी सीमा, प्लाट संख्यांकों 366, 365 से होती हुई आरंभिक बिन्दु ''क'' पर मिलती है।
[फा॰सं॰ 43015/03/2013-पीआरआईडब्ल्यू-I]
जगदीश कुमार, उप सचिव of the lands in the locality specified in the schedule annexed to that notification;
And whereas the Central Government is satisfied that coal is obtainable in a part of the said lands specified in the Schedule appended to this notification.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 7 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to acquire the land measuring 52.431 hectares (approximately) or 129.56 acres (approximately) as surface rights in or over the said land as specified in the Schedule appended hereto;
Note 1: The plan bearing number SECL/BSP/GM(PLG)/ LAND/458, dated the 9th December, 2014, of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the office of the Collector, District Anuppur (Madhya Pradesh) or in the office of the Coal Controller, 1, Council House Street, Kolkata-700001 or in the office of the South Eastern Coalfields Limited (Revenue Section), Seepat Road, Bilaspur-495006 (Chhattisgarh).
Note 2: Attention is hereby invited to the provisions of section 8 of the said Act which provides as follows:—
Objection to acquisition.
"8. (1) Any person interested in any land in respect of which a notification under section 7 has been issued, may, within thirty days of the issue of the notification, object to the acquisition of the whole or any part of the land or any rights in or over such land.
Explanation.—It shall not be an objection within the meaning of this section for any person to say that he himself desires to undertake mining operations in the land for the production of coal and that such operations should not be undertaken by the Central Government or by any other person.
MINISTRY OF COAL
New Delhi, the 8th June, 2015
S.O. 1190.—Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal, dated the 25th September, 2013 issued under sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and published in the Gazette of India, part II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii), vide number S.O. 2122, dated the 5th October, 2013, the Central Government gave notice of its intention to prospect for coal in 54.907 hectares (approximately) or 135.68 acres (approximately) (2) Every objection under sub-section (1) shall be made to the competent authority in writing, and the competent authority shall give the objector an opportunity of being heard either in person or by a legal practitioner and shall, after hearing all such objections and after making such further inquiry, if any, as he thinks necessary, either make a report in respect of the land which has been notified under sub-section (1) of section 7 or of rights in or over such land, or make different reports in respect of different parcels of such land or of rights in or over such land, to the Central Government, containing his recommendations on the objections, together with the record of the proceedings held by him, for the decision of the Government.
(3) For the purposes of this section, a person shall be deemed to be interested in land who would be entitled to2540 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] claim an interest in compensation if the land or any rights in or over such land were acquired under this Act."
Note 3: The Coal Controller, 1 Council House Street, Kolkata, 700001, has been appointed by the Central Government as the competent authority under section 3 of the said Act, vide notification number S.O. 905, dated the 20th March, 1987, published in the Gazette of India, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii), dated the 4th April, 1987.
SCHEDULE
Somna U/G Mine, Hasdeo Area
District Anuppur (Madhya Pradesh)
(Plan bearing number SECL/BSP/GM(PLG)/LAND/458, dated the 9th December, 2014)
Surface Rights:
Sr. Name of Patwari Settlement Tahsil District Area (in Remarks
No. Village Halka number hectares)
number
1. Lohsara 43 929 Kotma Anuppur 14.063 Part
2. Bhagta 43 769 Kotma Anuppur 38.368 Part
Total: 52.431 hectares (approximately) or 129.56 acres (approximately)
1. Plot numbers to be acquired in village Lohsara (Part):
युवा कार्यक्रम और खेल मंत्रालय
155(P), 199(P), 200(P), 202(P), 203 to 205, 206(P), 207, 208 to 215, 216(P), 222(P), 227(P), 228(P), 229, 230(P), 231(P), 232(P), 233(P), 234, 235(P), 246(P), 247(P), 248(P), 249(P), 250, 251(P), 252(P), 253(P).
2. Plot numbers to be acquired in village Bhagta (Part):
358(P), 359(P), 361(P), 365(P), 366(P), 370, 371(P), 374(P), 375 to 379, 380(P), 401(P), 407(P), 408, 409 to 415, 416(P), 417(P), 422(P), 424(P), 425 to 429, 430(P).
Boundary description:
A-B Line starts from points 'A' in village Bhagta and passes along northern boundary of plot number 365, 361, 359, 358 and meets at point 'B' on the common boundary of villages Bhagta-Lohsara.
नई दिल्ली, 10 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1191.—केंद्रीय सरकार एतदद्वारा राजभाषा (संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग), नियम, 1976 के नियम 10 के उप नियम (4) के अनुसरण में युवा कार्यक्रम और खेल मंत्रालय के स्वायत्त कार्यालय भारतीय खेल प्राधिकरण क्षेत्रीय केंद्र, हाकी स्टेडियम, सेक्टर-42, चण्डीगढ़, जिसके 80 प्रतिशत से अध्कि कर्मचारीवृृंद ने हिंदी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, को अधिसूचित करती है।
[मि॰ सं॰ ई-11011/2/2008-हि॰ए॰]
एस॰ एल॰ मीना, उप सचिव
MINISTRY OF YOUTH AFFAIRS AND SPORTS
B-C Line starts from point 'B' and passes in village Lohsara through plot numbers 251, 253, 249, 248, 247, 246, 235, 233, 232, 231, 230, 228, 227, 222, 216, 199, 200, 202, 155, along partly common boundary of villages Bhagta- Lohsara and meets at point 'C' on the common boundary of villages Bhagta-Lohsara.
C-D Line starts from point 'C' and passes in village Lohsara along southern boundary of plot number 417, through 422, 424, 430 along southern boundary of plot number 409, through 407, 401, 380 and meets at point 'D'.
D-A Line starts from point 'D' and passes in village Bhagta along western boundary of plot number 380, 378, through 374, 371, along western boundary of plot number 370, through 366, 365 and meets at starting point 'A'.
[F.No. 43015/03/2013-PRIW-I)]
JAGDISH KUMAR, Dy. Secy.
New Delhi, the 10th June, 2015
S.O. 1191.—In pursuance of Sub Rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Languages (use for official purpose of the Union) Rule, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies
Sports Authority of India Regional Centre, Hockey Stadium, Sector-42, Chandigarh an Autonomous office of Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports, whereof more than 80% staff have acquired working knowledge of Hindi.
[F. No. E-11011/2/2008-H.U.]
S. L. MEENA, Dy. Secy.
[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2541नई दिल्ली, 10 जून, 2015
Corporation of India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 05/06/2015.
[No. L-22011/3/2014-IR(CM-II)]
Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
का.आ. 1192.—केंद्रीय सरकार एतदद्वारा राजभाषा (संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग) नियम 1976 के नियम 10 के उप-नियम(4) के अनुसरण में युवा कार्यक्रम और खेल मंत्रालय के स्वायत्त कार्यालय भारतीय खेल प्राध्किरण उद्धवदास मेहता (भाई जी), केन्द्रीय क्षेत्रीय केंद्र, भोपाल (मध्य प्रदेश) जिसके 80 से अध्कि कर्मचारीवृंद ने हिंदी का कार्यसाध्क ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, को अध्सिूचित करती है।
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL- CUM-LABOUR COURT,
BHUBANESWAR
[फा॰ सं॰ ई-11011/2/2008-हि॰ए॰]
एस॰ एल॰ मीना, उप सचिव
New Delhi, the 10th June, 2015
S.O. 1192.—In pursuance of sub rule (4) of Rule 10 of Official Language (use for official purpose of the Present: Shri Pradeep Kumar, Presiding Officer, C.G.I.T.-cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO. 19/2014
L-22011/3/2014-IR(CM-II), dated 28.02.2014
Date of Passing Award -1st Day of January, 2015
Between:
Union) Rule 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies Sports Authority of India Udhavdas mehta (Bhai Ji), Central Regional Centre, Bhopal, an Autonomous office of Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports, whereof more than 80% staff have acquired working knowledge of Hindi.
[F.No. E-11011/2/2008-H.U.]
S. L. MEENA, Dy. Secy.
1. The Area Manager,
... 1st Party-Management Food Corporation of India, District Officer, Surya Vihar Link/Road, Cuttack-753012
2. The General Manager,
श्रम एवं रोजगार मंत्रालय
नई दिल्ली, 5 जून, 2015
Food Corporation of India, Regional Office, Satsang Vihar, Vani Vihar, Bhubaneswar-751007
(And)
The Vice-President, FCI Handling Workers Union, 8651, Araksshna Road, Paharganj, New Delhi-110055 ...2nd Party Union
Appearances:
का.आ. 1193.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ॰सी॰आई॰ के प्रबंध्तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायलय, भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 19/2014) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 05/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-22011/3/2014-आईआर(सीएम-II)]
मो॰ जाहिद शरीफ, अनुभाग अधिकारी 1. Shri R.C. Das ... For the 1st Party-
Manager (IR), FCI Management
2. Shri N.K. Nayak,
Manager (IR), FCI
3. Shri Srinibash Sasmal, ... For the 2nd Party-
Organising Secretary Union
MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT
AWARD
New Delhi, the 5th June, 2015
S.O. 1193.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 19/2014) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Food The Government of India in the Ministry of Labour & Employment has referred the present dispute existing between the employer in relation to the Management of the Food Corporation of India, Odisha and their workmen reprsented through the FCI (Handling) Workers Union, New Delhi in exercise of the powers conferred under2542 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act vide their Letter No. L-22011/3/2014-IR(CM-II) dated 28.02.2014 to this Tribunal for adjudication. The dispute as referred to has been mentioned under the schedule of the order of reference which is quoted below.
PRESENT: Sri Pramod Kumar Mishra,
Presiding Officer
REFERENCE No. 02 OF 2001
PARTIES:
"Whether the Claim of Food Corporation of India Handling Workers Union to get overtime wage alongwith extra wages for being booked to workmen of Gang No. 5 of FCI/FSD/Dhenkanal on 8.5.2011 and 14.4.2012 is legal and or justified? If not, to what relief the union is entitled to?"
The management of Perbelia Colliery of M/s ECL
Vs.
Sri A. Rahim and Sri A. Haque
REPRESENTATIVES:
2. After the receipt of the order of reference, the matter was registered and necessary judicial proceedings were held in the matter. In the mean time, the 1st party management. No. 1 and 2 appears to have resolved the dispute with the 2nd Party union amicably out of the court and filed their settlement in Form-H. Hence, there appears no necessity for further proceedings in the matter and accordingly the award is passed in terms of the settlement.
3. The reference is answered accordingly.
For the management: Sri P.K. Das, Ld. Adv. ECL
For the union (Workman): None
INDUSTRIAL: COAL STATE : WEST BENGAL
Dated 19.05.2015
AWARD
Dictated and corrected by me.
PRADEEP KUMAR, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 5 जून, 2015
In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- section (1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L-22012/ 109/2000-IR(CM-II) has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 1194.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार ई॰सी॰एल॰ के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायलय, आसनसोल के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 02/2001) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 05/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-22012/109/2000-आईआर(सीएम-II)]
मो॰ जाहिद शरीफ, अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 5th June, 2015
S.O. 1194.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 02/2001)
of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of Parbelia Colliery of
ECL and their workmen, received by the Central
Government on 05/06/2015.
[No. L-22012/109/2000-IR(CM-II)]
Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer "Whether the action of the management of Parbelia Colliery under ECL in denyaing the pay protection in respect of Sh. A Rahim and A. Haque at the time of conversion from P.R. to T.R. for Rs. 112.18 and Rs. 126.88 w.e.f. November, 1993 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"
Having received the Order No. L-22012/109/2000- IR(CM-II) of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a referfence case No. 02 of 2001 was registered on 12.02.2001/07.11.2001 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of withnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
Case called out Sri. P.K. Das, learned advocate of the management is present but none appears on behalf of the workmen/union.
[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2543PARTIES:
The management of Bejdih Colliery of M/s ECL
Vs.
Sri Moti Routh
REPRESENTATIVES:
On perusal of case record I find that one of the workmen named Sr. A. Rahim last appeared before the court on 01.06.2010. Thereafter none of the workmen or their representative appeared before the court. Registered notices were issued to the workmen on 12.01.2012 and 10.09.2014. So far 14 dates have been granted to the workmen after 01.06.2010 but to no effect. It seems to me that the workmen are not interested to proceed with the case further. The case is also too old- in the year of 2001. Hence the case is closed and a "No Dispute Award" may be passed accordingly .
For the management : Sri P.K. Goswami, Ld. Adv. ECL
For the union : Sri. R.K. Tripathi Chief Org. (Workman) Secy. (KMC)
INDUSTRY: COAL STATE : WEST BENGAL
ORDER
Dated 20.05.2015
AWARD
Let an "Award" be and same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
PRAMOD KUMAR MISHRA, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 5 जून, 2015
In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- section (1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L-22012/ 154/2000-IR(CM-II) dated 14/21.11.2000 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by the Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 1195.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार ई॰सी॰एल॰ के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायलय, आसनसोल के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 100/2000) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 05/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-22012/154/2000-आईआर(सीएम-II)]
मो॰ जाहिद शरीफ, अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 5th June, 2015
S.O. 1195.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 100/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Bejdih Colliery of ECL and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 05/06/2015.
[No. L-22012/154/2000-IR(CM-II)]
Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer "Whether the action of the management of Bejdhi Colliery under ECL by not accepting age of Sri Moti Routh, Ex-Driller as 57 and half years as on 08.04.1997 under the midpoint formula of the existing policy of the ECL is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"
Having received the Order No. L-22012/154/2000- IR(CM-II) dated 14/21.11.2000 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a referfence case No. 100 of 2000 was registered on 26.12.2000 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witness in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
Case called out both parties; management as well as
union/workman are absent.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
PRESENT: Sri Pramod Kumar Mishra,
Presiding Officer
On perusal of case record I find that the union is not taking any step since long. The case was fixed for filing documents by the workman on 18.04.2013. Since then 12 dates have been granted Mr. P.K. Tripathi, Chief Organizing Secretary of the union (Koyla Mazdoor Congress) appeared on 17.07.2013 and signed on order sheet after seefting the order but to no effect.
This is a case of correction of age and the workman REFERENCE No. 100 OF 2000
has already been retired from service.
2544 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]Since the workman has already been retired from service and not taking any interest even after service of notice, the case is closed and accordingly a "No Dispute Award" may be passed.
1. The Chairman, Bhakra Beas Management Board,
Madhya Marg, Sector-19, Chandigarh
...Respondent
APPEARANCE :
ORDER
Let an "Award" be and same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
For the workman: None.
For the management : Ms. Dimple alongwith
Sh. Mandeep Singh, XEN,
AWARD
PRAMOD KUMAR MISHRA, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 5 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1196.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार बी॰बी॰एम॰बी॰ के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायलय नं॰ 1, चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 21/2011) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 05/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-23012/3/2011-आईआर(सीएम-II)]
मो॰ जाहिद शरीफ, अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 5th June, 2015
S.O. 1196.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 21/2011) of the Central. Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, No. 1 Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Bhakra Beas Management Board, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 05/06/2015.
[No. L-23012/3/2011-IR(CM-II)]
Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer Passed on 19.05.2015
Government of India Ministry of Labour vide notification L.23012/3/2011-IR(CM-II) dated 02.12.2011 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:
"Whether the action of the Management of Chairman, Bhakra Beas Management Board, Madhya Marg, Sector-19, Chandigarh in adopting different policies for providing work to daily rated workers at Nangal and Talwara Township is just, valid and legal? To what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to?"
2. For the last serveal dates none is appearing for the wokrmen/Union. The case was earlier fixed for evidence of the workmen/union. Neither any evidence was filed on behalf of the union nor any one appeared for the last several dates for the union. The case was received in Trinbunal on 02.01.2012 and pending for the last more than three years. As none is appearing for the workmen/ union, no purpose would be served in keeping the case pending before this Trinunal. In view of the above, the present reference is returned to the Central Govt. for want of prosecution. Central Govt. be informed. Soft as well hard copy be sent to the Central Govt. for publication.
ANNEXURE
Chandigarh 19-5-2015
S.P. SINGH, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 5 जून, 2015
BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,
PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-1,
CHANDIGARH
Case No. ID 21 of 2011
Reference No. 23012/3/2011-IR(CM-II) dated 02.12.2011
The Presiding Struggle Committee of Daily Wages Employees, BBMB, Talwara Township, 1141-42/T/1, Sector-1, Talwara Township, Punjab-144216
...Workman का.आ. 1197.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ई॰सी॰एल॰ के प्रबंध्तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायलय, आसनसोल के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 20/2000) कोे प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 05/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-22012/372/1999-आईआर(सीएम-II)]
मो॰ जाहिद शरीफ, अनुभाग अधिकारी
Versus
[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2545New Delhi, the 5th June, 2015
S.O. 1197.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 20/2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Narsamunda Colliery of M/s. Eastern Coalfields Ltd., and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 05/06/2015.
[No. L-22012/372/1999-IR(CM-II)]
Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer 2000 was registered on 13.03.2000 and accordinlgy an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
Case called out both parties; management as well as
union/workman are absent.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM-LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
PRESENT: Sri Pramod Kumar Mishra,
Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO. 20 OF 2000
PARTIES:
The management of Narsarmunda Colliery of M/s ECL
Vs.
Sri Baidyanath Das
On perusal of case record I find that this is the reference of year 2000. Union's representative, Sri S.K. Pandey on behalf of the workman appeared on 12.11.2001. Since then 21 dates have been fixed. On 23.04.2009 again notices were issued to the parties due to their disappearance. Since 15.07.2009 the reference was fixed for evidence of the workman. After 15.07.2009, 26 dates, have been fixed but evidence was not tendered by the workman. On 11.09.2014 against order for notice was passed and accordingly notice was issued on 19.09.2014 fixing the date on 27.11.2014 for evidence but the workman did not appear. Even today the workman is absent. It seems that the workman is not at all interested to proceed with the case further. Under the circumstances explained above I think it just and proper to close this old case. As such the case is closed and accordingly a "No Dispute Award' may be passed.
ORDER
REPRESENTATIVES:
For the management: Sri P.K. Das, Ld. Adv. ECL
For the union (Workman): None
INDUSTRY : COAL STATE : WEST BENGAL
Dated 18.05.2015 Let an "Award" be and same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
PRAMOD KUMAR MISHRA, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 5 जून, 2015
AWARD
In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- section (1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L-22012/ 372/99-IR(CM-II) dated 29.02.2000 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
का.आ. 1198.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार डब्ल्यू सी एल के प्रबंध्तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय नागपुर के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 68/2002) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 05/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of Narsamunda Colliery under ECL in dismissing as denying reinstatement the services of Sh. Baidyanath Das is justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"
Having received the Order No. L-22012/372/99-IR(CM- II) dated 29.02.2000 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a referfence case No. 20 of [सं॰ एल-22012/253/2001-आईआर (सीएम-II)]
मो॰ जाहिद शरीफ, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 5th June, 2015
S.O. 1198.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 68/2002) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Nagpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute2546 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] between the management of Ballarpur Sub Area of Western Coalfields Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 05/06/2015.
[No. L-22012/253/2001-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/68/2002
Date: 19.01.2015
Party No.1 : The Sub Area Manager, Ballarpur Sub Are of Western Coalfields Limited, Post & Teh.-Ballarpur, Distt. Chandrapur (M.S.)
The case of the workmen 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 party No. 1 is a Government company controlled by the Central Government and is a "State" under Article 12 of the Constitution of India and the workmen are in the employment of the party No. 1 and they are permanent employees and they were initially appointed as piece rated loader in group V-A of National Coal Wage Agreement ("the NCWA" in short) and a memorandum of settlement dated 02.11.1992 was arrived at under section 12(1) of the Act, between the management of Party No. 1 and RKKMS union before the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Nagpur and under the said settlement, the party No. 1 agreed to fully protect the group wages including the SPRA where ever applicable, on conversion from piece rate to time rate/monthly rate and the terms of the said settlement have become the terms and conditions of service of the workmen.
Versus
Party No. 2 : Shri Lomesh Khartad, National Colliery Workers Congress, Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, Ballarpur, Post-Ballarpur, Distt.-Chandrapur (M.S.)
AWARD
(Dated: 19th January, 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 Ballarpur Sub Area of Western Coalfields Limited and their workmen, Shri Anand Madanaya and 14 others, for adjudication, as per letter No. L-22012/253/2001- IR (CM-II) dated 22.07.2002, with the following schedule:
"Whether the action of the management of Ballarpur colliery 3 & 4 pits of Western Coalfields Limited in not granting protection of basic pay upon conversion of Shri Anand Madanaya and 14 others as per list to time rate is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workmen are 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, "National Colliery Workers Congress, ("the union" in short) filed the statement of claim on behalf of Shri Anand Madanaya and 14 other workmen ("the workmen" in short) and the management of Ballarpur Sub Area of Western Coalfields Ltd., ("Party No. 1" in short) filed their written statement.
It is further pleaded by the union that the joint bipartite Committee for the coal industry ("the JBCCI" in short) consisting of all the employers and the five Central Trade Unions jointly deliberate over the wage structure and other conditions of service including fringe benefits of the employees of the coal industry and the JBCCI has several committees and sub committees for proper implementation, monitoring, clarification etc. of the agreements and the management of Coal Companies are not competent to resort to change the service conditions and wage structures etc. as laid down in the NCWAs unilaterally and so far six NCWAs have been signed by the parties and the same are known as NCWA-I to VI and in terms of NCWA V, all the workmen were given minimum benefit of Rs. 235/- per month inclusive of interim relief over and above the wages prescribed under NCWA-IV and the Loaders were placed in Group VA and revised basic pay and work load were fixed per day from 01.07.1991 as per chapter III of NCWA V and the wage for the work load of 100cft. And 118cft was fixed at Rs. 88.93/- and Rs. 114.93 respectively and the basic group VA wages was also fixed as Rs. 104.93/- per day and beside such wages, the loaders were also entitled to special piece rate allowance ("SPRA" in short) @ Rs. 2.12 per day and the loaders who had completed 10 years of service or more in the same group were provided with additional SPRA w.e.f. 01.07.1994 and thereafter w.e.f. 01.07.1995.
The further case of the workmen a projected by the union is that the workmen were transferred to other time rated works on the exigencies of work and though they were paid the basic wages, the SPRA was not paid to them w.e.f. November, 1995 and with effect from 01.07.1999, their basic wages were also not protected and their wages were reduced and were fixed at midpoint of their respective categories, in which they were working and the wages of the workmen, Shri Anand Madanaya, Shri Shriniwas Sakal[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2547 Eram, Shri Sanjay M. Boinowar, Shri Balkishan Atmaram and Shri Banshilal Lalli, who were working as Trammer category III were fixed at Rs. 80.94/-, basic wages of workmen, Shri Dharam Sailani, Shri Gurjalal Lingya, Shri Bhanuda Daria Ashallu, Shri Aegeswar Saukhau and Shri Prasna Kumar Narayan, who were working as H. Trammer category v were fixed at Rs. 85.14/-, basic wages of workmen, Shri Sunil Laxman, Shri Bhauji S. Caple and Shri Kirti Kumar Muralidhar, who were working as Electrical helper category II, Carpenter helper category II and Explosive helper category II respectively were fixed at Rs. 76.17/- and basic wages of the workmen, Shri Jugesh Kumar Swamidin and Shri Ramesh Ramila Yankti, who were working as general mazdoors were fixed at Rs. 72.96/- and though the workmen made several individual and so also joint representations, party No. 1 did not take any action and the union also took up the case of the workmen with the management, by submitting letters dated 27.06.1998, 05.07.1999, 14.09.1999, 04.10.1999 and 21.01.2002, but as there was no response from the management, the union took up the matter with the ALC(central), Chandrapur and the conciliation filed, the reference has been made by the Central Government to this Tribunal for adjudication.
The union has further pleaded that in the meeting held between the RKKMS union, Nandgaon Incline branch and the Sub Area Manager on 07.09.1998, it was decided that the basic and SPRA of loaders whether option given or not would be protected and the minutes of the meeting was circulated vide order No. 517 dated 10.09.1998 of the Personnel Manager, Hindustan Lalpeth underground Sub Area and vide office order 2676 dated 10.02.2000, the Deputy Chief Personnel Manager, WCL of Chandrapur Area instructed all the Sub Area that basic wages should be protected of all the employees of Chandrapur Area irrespective of degradation/reduction in post and category and the management of WCL, Chandrapur Area has been protecting group wages and SPRA in case of loaders similarly situated like the workmen including Shri Ramesh Yadav and Mr. Riyaz and Tub Munshi, Sheikh Nabi Sheikh Chand and there cannot be two type of system in the same company and the workmen have been discriminated and change of the service conditions cannot be done arbitrarily and contrary to the settlement dated 02.11.1992, Standing Order and provisions of JBCCI/ NCWA and section 9 of the Act and the workmen are entitled for protection of wages with SPRA.
3. The party No. 1 in the written statement, after denying all the adverse allegations made in the statement of claim, has pleaded inter-alia that the dispute has been raised Shri Lomesh Khartad, General Secretary of the union and to its best of knowledge, the said union does not exist at Ballarpur and it is learnt that the union is registered at Dhanbad in the State of Jharkhand and is operating mainly in the state and the union is not the union of the workman of Ballarpur colliery and therefore is not competent to raise the dispute on behalf of the workmen and the union does not have 25% of the workers as its members and the union has very little or no following at all and therefore, does not acquire a representative character and the spousal of the cause of the workman by the union is not valid and no industrial dispute exists.
It is further pleaded by party no. 1 that to its best knowledge, the workmen were/are not the members of the union and on this ground also, the union is not competent to raise the dispute on their behalf.
The further case of the party no. 1 is that it had made specific offer laying down the terms and conditions through a departmental notice dated 11.09.1995, inviting applications from the loaders of Ballarpur colliery for opting time rated jobs and it was specifically mentioned in the said notice that those who would opted for the time rated post would be given the initial basic of the time rated posts and in terms of the said notice, the workmen submitted written options for time rated posts, accepting the minimum basic pay of the time rated posts and their options were unconditional and when the notice was issued to the workers, no union protested against the notice or challenged its validity or legality and it was purely discretionary and optional on the part of the workmen to accept the offer or not and the workmen, while applying for the time rated job were fully aware of the terms and conditions and the wages they were to get and they also gave the options voluntarily and categorically state that they would not raise any grievance/industrial dispute with regard to their pay protection and therefore, it acting in good faith and on the specific assurances that they would not claim wage protections, put them on time rate and subsequently, in compliance of office order of the personnel Manager of Ballarpur Area, the wages of the workmen were fixed at the midpoint of time rate and when there was specific offer of terms and conditions and specific acceptance thereof by the workmen, the same became a contract between the management and the workmen and ever since their deployment in the time rated categories, they have been drawing wages in respective time rated without any protest and therefore, the principles of estoppels operates and the workmen are estopped from raising the instant dispute even through the union.
It is further pleaded by party no. 1 that from the respective dated that the deployment of the workmen in time rated jobs, they were placed at the starting basic of time rated jobs and the arrangement continued till July, 1999 and on receipt of the sanction and approval of the Headquarters, the workmen were placed at the mid-point of the time rated posts in which they had been working and even at this stage, the workmen did not represent to the management about their placement and the union, which had very little following at Ballarpur raised an industrial dispute concerning the workmen and on failure2548 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] of the conciliation, the reference has been made and there was an agreement between the RKKMS union and the management at company level modifying the settlement dated 02.11.1992, where by such piece rated employees who came to the time rates after exercising options were to be placed at the mid-point of the time rate and the agreement has been implemented throughout the company and the agreement dated 01.11.1995 was never challenged by any union/workmen and the workmen are not entitled to any relief.
4. In the rejoinder, the union has pleaded that the party no. 1 has raised frivolous preliminary objections only to delay the disposal of the reference and to defeat the outcome of the dispute by exhausting the workmen and there is no recognized union in WCL and as such, every union enjoys the same status of raising an industrial dispute and the doubt raised by party no.1 regarding its existence at Ballarpur is based on surmises and assumptions and the terms and conditions of the services of the employees of WCL are governed by the provisions of Standing Orders, NCWA and Settlement dated 02.11.1992 and party no. 1 arbitrarily and illegally violated the same and there was exigencies of job of the management and party no. 1 was in requirement of persons on transfer to other post and as such, the workmen are entitled for protection of group wages of loader and SPRA as per S.O. 21 of the Standing Order and there was no agreement between the RKKMS union and the management on 01.11.1995 and there was only record note of discussion between the said parties and subsequently by letter dated 04.10.2001, the union had asked to cancel the said record note of discussion and to give protection of wages on the basis of the settlement dated 02.11.1992 and the workmen are entitled for the reliefs as claimed in the statement of claim.
5. In support of its case, the union has examined three of the workmen, namely, Shri Dharampal Sailani, Shri Balkrishna Atmaram and Gurjala Lingaya and Shri Lomesh Maroti Khartad, alleged to be the General Secretary of the union, One, Shri Sambunath Sharma, the Manager Personnel in Ballarpur colliery, 3 & 4 Pit has been examined as the only witness by party no. 1.
Both the parties have relied on documentary evidence besides the oral evidence adduced by them. The respective examination-in-chief of the witnesses examined by the parties is on affidavits.
6. The evidence of the four witnesses examined on behalf of the union is more or less in the same line of the stands taken in the statement of claim. In their cross- examination, they have denied the suggestions that the workmen not members of the union.
Workman Shri Balkrishan Atmaram in his cross- examination has admitted that the union Koyla Shramik Sabha has raised the dispute on their behalf and award had been passed regarding the dispute raised by them in case no. CGIT/NGP/26/2003 and the same dispute have been referred by the Government in this reference.
The other three witnesses examined by the union have denied the suggestions that the dispute raised by the union had been raised by the union, "Koyla Shramik Sabha" and the same was adjudicated in case no. CGIT/ NFP/68/2003 and award was passed against the workmen.
7. The only witness examined by the party no. 1 in has examination-in-chief has reiterated the facts mentioned in the written statement.
In his cross-examination, this witness has admitted that as management was in need of time rated category workers, notice dated 11.09.1995 was given by the management and there was a settlement on 02.11.1992 between RKKMS union and the management and in the said settlement management had agreed to fill up 50% vacancies arising out of natural wastage in time/monthly rated category from amongst the piece rated workers, who have completed at least 15 years of service and in paragraph 1 of Ext. M-XXI, it has been mentioned that as per the settlement dated 02.11.1992, it was decided that management shall on conversion from PR to TR/MR will fully protect the group wages including SPRA wherever applicable and the application forms, Exts. M-III to M-XVII were supplied to the workmen by the management and the workmen have only signed the same and Ext. M-XIX shows that till 01.07.1999, the designation of the workmen was "Loader".
8. At the time of argument, it was submitted by the learned advocate for the workmen that the conditions of the workmen are governed by Certified Standing Orders of party No. 1 and provisions of NCWA and the workmen were working as loaders and as the party no. 1 was in need of time/monthly rate workers and due to exigencies of job, the workmen were transferred from piece rate to time rate and as per clause S.O. 21 of the Certified Standing Orders and the settlement dated 02.11.1992 and the provisions of NCWA, they are entitled for protection of their wages including SPRA.
In support of the contentions, the learned advocate for the workmen place reliance on the decisions reported in AIR 1973 SC-2650 (Western India Match Co. Ltd. Vs. Workmen), 2007 (115) FLR-427 (Mohan Mahato Vs. M/s. Central Coal Fields Ltd.). 2008 II CLR-147 (UP State Electricity Board Vs. Pooran Chandra Pandey), 1994 I CLR- 627 (Narendra Kumar Vs. State of Haryana) and 2000 (I) LLN-216 (Capt. Subir Bhattacharya Vs. State of West Bengal).
9. Per contra, it was submitted by the learned advocate for the party no. 1 that the dispute in regard to the[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2549 workmen involved in this reference had been raised in case no. CGIT/NGP/26/2003 by the Koyla Shramit Sabha and in the said reference award had been passed against the workmen and as such, the present reference is not maintainable by the principles of res-judicata.
It was further submitted by the learned advocate for the party no. 1 that otherwise also, the workmen are not entitled to any relief as the workmen submitted their option for their conversion from piece rated to time rated and they also gave the undertaking to work in time rated with the minimum basic pay of the time rated posts and there was specific offer of the terms and conditions by the party no. 1 and there was also specific acceptance thereof by the workmen and the same became a contract between the party no. 1 and the workmen and the workmen are estopped from raising the dispute, in view of the principles of estoppels, waivers and acquiescence and the workmen are not entitled to any relief.
10. First of all, I will take up the submission made by the learned advocate for the party no.1 that this reference is not maintainable, the same being principles of res- judicata; as the dispute raised on behalf of the workmen in this reference had already been adjudicated and decided in CGIT/NGP/26/2003 and the award was against the workmen.
In reply, it was submitted by the learned advocate for the workmen that case no. CGIT/NGP/26/2003 was adjudicated on merit and as such, this reference is maintainable and the same is to be adjudicated and decided.
From the materials on record, it is found that in case no. CGIT/NGP/26/2003 the dispute of the workmen involved in this reference and some other employees of WCL was raised by the union, Koyla Shramik Sabha and by award dated 21.06.2012, the same was answered in the negative and against the workmen. In case No. CGIT/NGP/ 26/2003, after filling of the statement of claim by the union and written statement by the management, the union was directed to adduce evidence in support of the claim, but no evidence was adduced by the union, the reference was answered against the workman. In view of the adjudication of the same dispute of the workmen in CGIT/NGP/26/2003, the present reference is hit by the principles of res-judicata and is not maintainable.
piece rate loader was due to their physical weakness or to fill up 50% vacancies arising out of natural wastage after completion of 15 years of service as mentioned in clauses 1.1 and 1.2 of the settlement dated 02.11.1992. So, the terms of the settlement dated 02.11.1992 have no application to the case of the workmen.
It is found from the documents on record that by notice dated 11.09.1995, Ext. M-II, the party no. 1 called for options from the loaders for their engagement in time rate jobs, with the conditions that the loaders who would be engaged in time rate would be paid minimum of the basic pay of the time rate jobs and the workmen accepting the conditions gave their options in writing, Exts. M-III to M- XVII, with the undertaking to accept the minimum basic pay of the time rate job given to them and that they would not claim any wage protection. The case of the workmen is not a case of transfer from piece rate loader to time rate due to exigencies of work. This is also not the case that the workmen were reduced in rank or category. It is found from the record that specific offers were given by the party no. 1 and the same were accepted by the workmen and such acceptance can be held to be an agreement, as per the provisions of section 18 of the Act and the same is binding on both the parties. In view of the acceptance of the conditions imposed by the party no. 1 by the workmen and giving their consent for their engagement in time rate jobs, they are precluded to raise the dispute, in view of the provisions of estoppels, waiver and acquiescence, which are applicable to industrial adjudication also. It is not a pre-agreement of service inconsistent with the provisions of Standing Order. The case of the workmen is also not a case of their conversion from piece rated loaders to time rate workers, due to any illness or injuries received by them during the course of their employment. So, the provisions of the Standing Order, NCWA and other provisions cited by learned advocate for the workmen are not applicable to their cases.
As the facts and circumstances of the case in hand are quite different from the facts and circumstances of the cases referred in the decisions cited by the learned advocates for the workmen, with respect, I am of the view that the said decisions have no clear application to this case.
From the facts and circumstances of the case mentioned above, it is found that the workmen are not entitled for protection of their wages. Hence, it is ordered:—
ORDER
11. Moreover, for the sake of argument, if it is held that this reference is maintainable, then it is to be considered as to whether the workmen are entitled for the protection of their wages of piece rate loader. Perused the materials on record including the evidence adduced by the parties and considered the submissions made by the learned advocate for the parties and found that it is not the case of the workmen that their conversion to time rate jobs from The action of the management of Ballarpur colliery 3 & 4 pits of Western Coalfields Limited in not granting protection of basic pay upon conversion of Shri Anand2550 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ANNEXURE
Madanaya and 14 others as per list to time rate is legal and justified. The workmen are not entitled to any relief.
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-
CUM-LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW
J.P. CHAND, Presiding Officer
PRESENT: Rakesh Kumar, Presiding Officer L-22012/253/2001-IR(C-II)
I.D. No. 168/2002
S. NAME PREVIOUS No. DESIGNATION
1. Sh. Anand Madanaya Loader
2. Sh. Sunil Laxman Induri Loader Ref. No. L-22012/272/2001-IR(CM-II)
Dated 28.11.2002
BETWEEN
3. Sh. Bhauji S. Chaple Loader
4. Sh. Dharampal Sailani Loader
5. Sh. Srinivas Sakal Iram Loader
6. Sh. Sanjay M. Boiniwar Loader
7. Sh. Gurjala Lingaya Loader
8. Sh. Bhanudas Darala Ashalu Loader
9. Sh. Balkisan Atmaram Loader
10. Sh. Kirtikumar Murlidhar Loader
11. Sh. Aageshwar Sukhaoo Loader
12. Sh. Bansilal Lalli Loader
13. Sh. Prasanna Kumar Narayan Loader The State Secretary Bhartiya Khadya Nigam Karamchari Sangh TC/3B, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow (U.P.)
AND
1. The Zonal Manager
Food Corporation of India Ansal Bhawan, K.G. Marg New Delhi-110001
2. The Sr. Regional Manager Food Corporation of India TC/3V, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow (U.P.)
AWARD
14. Sh. Jugeshkumar Swamidin Loader
15. Sh. Ramesh Ramilla Yenkati Loader
नई दिल्ली, 5 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1199.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ॰सी॰आई॰ के प्रबंध्तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायलय, लखनऊ के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 168/2002) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 05/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-22012/272/2001-आईआर(सीएम-II)]
मो॰ जाहिद शरीफ, अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 5th June, 2015
S.O. 1199.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 168/ 2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Lucknow as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of FCI and their workman, received by the Central Government on 05/06/2015.
[No. L-22012/272/2001-IR(CM-II)]
Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer 1. By order No. L-22012/272/2001-IR(CM-II) dated 28.11.2002 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, Bhartiya Khadya Nigam Karmchari Sangh, Lucknow (Espousing cause of Sri Vishesh Chand) and the Zonal Manager, Food Corporation of India, New Delhi and the Sr. Regional Manager, Food Corporation of India, Lucknow for adjudication.
2. The reference under adjudication is:
"Whether the action of the management of Food Corporation of India in imposing penalty upon Sri Visheh Chand vide order dated 30.09.1997 and rejecting appeal vide order dated 15/19.12.2000 and not granting selection grade from 1996 were legal and Justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to?"
3. As per the claim statement filed before this Tribunal the workman Sri Vishesh Chand completed 12 years of service in 1996 as AG-II (D), but the management illegally did not provide selection grade to him, while the selection grade was granted to other junior workmen, although there is rule in FCI to grant selection grade after completion of[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2551 12 years of service in the same grade. It has been pleaded that there was no reason for not granting selection grade to the workman. The workman through union has requested for direction to the Food Corporation of India to grant selection grade in the scale of AG-II (D) from 1996 to the workman.
4. The management has filed written statement wherein it has been asserted that the selection grade scheme in respect of category of 3 & 4 employee was started vide circular dated 30.12.1992 but effective from 1.12.1987 as per the conditions prescribed in circular no. 22/1992. The relevant provision of the said circular has been produced in the written statement. It has also been pleaded by the opposite party that the instructions in connection with reservation of SC & ST etc. issued by the Govt. of India from time to time have to be followed by the appointing authority while making selection in the grade. Provision for vigilance procedure has also been mentioned therein. The opposite party has stated that as per the charge sheet dated 16.09.1996 issued to Mr. Vishesh Chand, penalty was subsequently imposed for reversion from AG-II(D)/ PP to AG-III(D)/PP for a period of 5 years vide the order dated 30.09.1997 against appeal was preferred which was also rejected by the Zonal Manager; It reads as under:
''Accordingly the selection grade case of Sri Vishesh Chand AG-II(D)/PPDOB 15.7.48 ZS No. 3148 UP Region DOJ 31.12.84 as AG-II(D)PP was considered w.e.f. 01.12.1997 in the ZPC meeting held on 09.10/ 6-2000 as per instructions stated above and on the basis of availability of vacancies and declared UNFIT due to reservation from AG-II(D) to AG- III(D) due to vigilance/undergoing penalty."
5. The opposite party has emphasized that as per the instructions and relevant provisions the selection grade case of the workman was not required to be considered w.e.f. 01.12.1996 but to be considered w.e.f. 11.02.1997, for which action has already been taken.
6. Rejoinder A1-12 was filed on behalf of the workman wherein the facts mentioned in written statement were said to be false and baseless and contentions of the claim statement were reiterated.
7. Circular dated 30.12.1992 was filed by the opposite party vide application dated 17.03.2004. Amendment application A1-21 was moved by the applicant. Objection D-20 was filed by the opposite party. During the pendency of the case before this Tribunal the workman expired on 15.03.2006 his wife Smt. Madhu Saxena moved an amendment application to this effect. List C-33 dated 02.01.2007 alongwith documents mentioned therein was filed by the workman, containing therein the enquiry report and representation of the workman, and the penalty imposed etc.
8. Arguments of Learned AR of the opposite party have been heard at length. None appeared for the workman although notice through Registered post was issued and sufficient opportunity was also provided thereafter. Record has been perused thoroughly.
9. The learned AR for the workman has relied upon the
following rulings;
1. (2010) 1 SCC (L&S), 129, Union of India vs. Gyan
Chandra Chattar.
2. (2009) 1 SCC (L&S), 398 Roop Singh Negi vs. PNB.
3. 1998 SCC (L&S), 1783 PNB vs. Kunj Behari Misra.
4. 1986 SCC (L&S), 383 Ram Chandra vs. Union of India.
5. 1985 SCC (L&S), 672 Tulsi Ram Patil case.
6. FLR 1995 (70), 858 UPSRTC vs. Sarfaraz Hussain
Hon'ble Allahabad High Court.
7. AIR, 1972, SC, M/s Bareilly Electricity Supply Co. Ltd.
vs. The Workmen, page 330.
The learned authorized representative for opposite party emphasizes that above rulings to not apply in the present case.
10. Despite the fact that sufficient opportunity was provided by the court to the workman to adduce evidence in support of the claim statement, it was all in-vain. The workman did not adduce any oral evidence before the court, although written argument has been filed on behalf of the workman before my learned predecessor. Further several dates were given, but none turned up before the court on behalf of the workman.
11. Regarding imputation of alleged mis-conduct of the workman the enquiry officer has conducted comprehensive enquiry, after giving sufficient opportunity to the workman. The representation of workman was also disposed off by the competent authority. FCI (Staff) Regulations were followed by the management while conducting disciplinary proceeding against the workman. The matter of selection grade and its admissibility in the case of the workman was duly considered with reasoned findings, by the FCI.
12. After having gone through the entire record available before the court, and giving due consideration to the arguments advanced before me, it is inferred that the management was fully justified in not granting selection grade to workman Sri Vishesh Chand w.e.f. 1996. The workman concerned is not entitled to any other relief.
13. Award accordingly.
Lucknow
28.05.2015
RAKESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer2552 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
AWARD
नई दिल्ली, 5 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1200.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एम॰सी॰एल॰ के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 38/2011) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 05/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-22012/111/2011-आईआर(सीएम-II)]
मो॰ जाहिद शरीफ, अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 5th June, 2015
S.O. 1200.—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, Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Bharatpur Area of MCL and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 05/06/2015.
[No. L-22012/111/2011-IR(CM-II)]
Md. ZAHID SHARIF, Section Officer The Government of India in the Ministry of Labour & Employment has referred the present dispute existing between the employers in relation to the Management of Bharatpur Colliery of MCL and Hingula Area of MCL, Odisha, and their workmen represented through the General Secretary, Talcher Coal Mines Employees Union, Angul, Odisha in exercise of the powers conferred under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act vide their Letter No. L-22012/111/2011-IR(CM-II), dated 02.08.2011 to this Tribunal for adjudication. The dispute as referred to has been mentioned under the scheduled of the letter of reference which is quoted below.
ANNEXURE
"Whether the action of the management of Chief General Managers of both Bharatpur area and Hingula area of MCL in not sorting out the Anomaly arising out of fixation of basic pay on promotion in Clerk Grade-III Cadre to Clerk Grade-I and Sr. Clerk and existing as on date amongst the 1st set of workers Shri Dukhabandhu Biswal & 7 others, 2nd set of workers Shri Naresh Chandra Sahoo & 8 others and 3rd set of workers Shri Md. Sahoo & 4 others is appropriate and justified? To what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to"?
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-
CUM-LABOUR COURT, BHUBANESWAR
PRESENT:
SHRI PRADEEP KUMAR, Presiding Officer, C.G.I.T.-cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar
Industrial Dispute Case No. 38/2011
L-22012/111/2011-IR(CM-II), dated 02.08.2011 2. The 2nd party union (herein after referred to as "the 2nd party") has filed his Statement of Claim detailing therewith the anomaly arisen in the fixation of pay of the three sets of a total number of 22 (Twenty Two) workmen on their promotions to higher posts. The setwise list of workers is mentioned below.
1st set
Date of Passing Award-11th Day of December, 2014
BETWEEN:
1. The Chief General Manager, Bharatpur Area of MCL At-Mahendrapur, Bharatpur Colliery, Angul, Odisha
...1st Party-Management
2. The Chief General Manager, Hingula Area of MCL, At-Mahendrapur, Bharatpur Colliery, Angul, Odisha
(And)
1. Shri Dukhabandhu Biswal, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur
Colliery.
2. Shri P.N. Kar, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur Colliery.
3. Shri N.K. Pradhan, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur Colliery.
4. Shri N.C. Sahoo, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur Colliery.
5. Shri Pitabasa Pani, Sr. Clerk, CGM's Office.
6. Shri Golekha Bihari Behera, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur
Colliery.
7. Shri Sambhunath Dehury, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur Colliery.
8. Shri Bhaskar Chandra Bhutia, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur
Colliery.
2nd set
The General Secretary,
Talcher Coal Mines Employees Union,
At-Qr, No. IB-103, PO-South Balanda, 1. Shri Naresh Chandra Sahoo, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur
Angul, Odisha Colliery.
...2nd Party-Union 2. Shri Bhudhadev Naik, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur Colliery.
APPEARANCES :
3. Shri Bijaya Kumar Pradhan, Sr. Clerk, CGM's Office.
1. None ... For the 1st Party-Managements 4. Shri Jagatananda Sahoo, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur Colliery.
2. None ... For the 2nd Party-Union 5. Shri Gobardhan Barik, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur Colliery.
[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2553
6. Shri Balakrishna Pradhan, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur
Colliery.
7. Smt. Panchali Sahoo, Sr. Clerk, CGM's Office.
8. Shri Maheswar Behera, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur Colliery.
9. Shri Raj Kishore Sahoo, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur Colliery.
3rd set
1. Shri M.D. Sahoo, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur Colliery.
2. Shri Dhaneswar Prasad, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur Colliery.
3. Shri P.K. Nayak, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur Colliery.
4. Smt. Laxmirani Baral, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur Colliery.
5. Shri Prabina Gochhayat, Sr. Clerk, Bharatpur Colliery.
3. As pleaded by the 2nd party, the 1st set of workmen are the senior most employees than the 2nd & 3rd set of workers. The 2nd set of workmen are senior to the 3rd set of workers. But, while fixing the pay on promotion of the above employees, the senior employees are getting lesser pay as compared to their juniors. On noticing the anomaly, the affected workmen raised their grievances for several times before the 1st party managements (herein after referred to as the "1st party"). Due to non-redressal of their grievances by the 1st paty, the affected workmen took the shelter of the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Cental), Bhubaneswar [in short ALC (C)] for the redressal of their grievances on pay anomaly. Both the 2nd party and the 1st paty appeared before the ALC(C) on different dates and took part in the conciliation proceedings for an amicable settlement of the matter. But on failure of the same, the matter was referred to the appropriate government and hence this reference.
4. The 2nd party on last several occasions remained absent from the proceedings of this case inspite of a notice issued to him 14.08.2014 for submission of his exparte arguments. But, he did not appear and also no further steps were taken by him.
The 1st party is therefore, directed to rectify the pay anomaly of the disputant workers since the date of their entitlements and pay them their consequential benefits immediately. The 1st party is further directed to carry out this order within a period of three months from the date of publication of award in the Gazette of India failing which action as deemed fit will be taken against the 1st party and the 1st party shall pay interest @ 12 percent per annum simple interest on the consequential benefits to the disputant workers computed in terms of money. The reference is answered in light of the above terms.
8. Accordingly, this award is passed exparte against
the 1st party management No. 1 and 2.
Dictated and corrected by me.
PRADEEP KUMAR, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 8 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1201.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एम/एस स्पष्ट सुरक्षित सर्विस प्रा॰ लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय, चेन्नई के पंचाट (संदर्भ सं॰ 16/2015) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 08/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-12012/69/2014-आई आर (बी-II)]
रवि कुमार, डेस्क अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 8th June, 2015
S.O. 1201.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 16/2015) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/s Clear Secured Service (P) Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 08/06/2015.
[No. L-12012/69/2014-IR(B-II]
RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
5. The 1st Party Management No. 1 and 2 (herein after referred to as "the 1st party") though appeared before this Tribunals and took adjournments seeking time for filing of their written statements, yet they did not file any written statement. No step also taken by them on subsequent dates. Accordingly, the 1st party were set exparte on 08.08.2012. However, in order to give a further opportunity to the 1st party, a notice was isued to them. But, they did not turn up.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR
COURT, CHENNAI
6. On the above grounds the case was reserved for passing of award basing upon the documents available in the record.
Wednesday, the 15th April, 2015
Present: K.P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer
FINDINGS
Industrial Dispute No. 16/2015
7. Since, the 1st party did not file any counter/written statement against the statement of claim filed by the 2nd party to justify their action taken against the disputant workmen, it is held that the claim of the 2nd party is genuine and the action of the 1st party on fixation of pay of the disputant workmen is not appropriate and justified.
(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 Clear Secured Service India Pvt. Ltd. and their workman).
2554 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]9. The Chairman & Managing Director BETWEEN
Sri A. RAVI
Ist Party/Petitioner
Vijaya Bank 41/2, Trinity Circle, M.G. Road. Bangalore-560001
AND
2nd Party/9th Respondent 1. M/s. Clear Secured Service India Pvt. Ltd.
APPEARANCE:
Regd. Office, 501, Rajgir Sadan,
Laxmi Baugh, Opp. To Sion Station For the 1st party/Petitioner : Absent
(West) Mumbai-22 For the 2nd Party/1st and : Sri N. Shahul Hameed,
2nd Party/Ist Respondent 2nd Respondent Advocate
2. M/s. Clear Secured Service India Pvt. Ltd. For the 2nd Party/ : Sri N. Shahul Hameed,
Sri Ram Prasad, Manager, 3rd Respondent Advocate
Corporate
For the 2nd Party/ : M/s. Pais, Lobo,
Office-Tamil Nadu
4th Respondent Advocates
No. 133, S.M. Narayan Nagar
For the 2nd Party/ : M/s. T.S. Gopalan & Co.,
Anna Nagar West Extn., Mogappair,
Near MMM Hospital, 5th and 8th Respondent Advocates
Chennai-600101 For the 2nd Party/ : Absent
2nd Party/2nd Respondent 6th Respondent
3. Sri N. Shahul Hameed, MA., BL For the 2nd Party/ : Smt. S. Saranya,
36/42, New Bangaru Colony 7th Respondent Authorized
West KK Nagar, Chennai Representative
2nd Party/3rd Respondent For the 2nd Party/ : Absent
9th Respondent
4. The Chairman
AWARD
The Central Government, Ministry of Labour & Employment vide its Order No. L-12012/69/2014-IR (B.II) dated 05.01.2015 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication.
M/s. Bank of India, Star House, C-5 G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (East) Mumbai-400051
The schedule mentioned in that order is:
2nd Party/4th Respondent
5. The Chairman & Managing Director
"Whether the action of the management of M/s. Clear Secured Services (P) Ltd., Chennai regarding termination of the service of the petitioner, Sri A. Ravi is justifiable or not? What relief the petitioner is entitled to?"
Central Bank of India, Chandermukhi, Nariman Point Mumbai-400021
2nd Party/5th Respondent
6. The Chairman
HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013
2nd Party/6th Respondent
7. The Chief Managing Director
2. On receipt of the Industrial Dispute this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 16/2015 and issued notices to both sides. On receipt of notice First, Second, Fourth, Fifth and Eighth Respondents have appeared through their counsel and the Seventh Respondent through the Authorized Representative. No vakalat was filed for other Respondents.
IDBI Bank Ltd., IDBI Tower, WTC Complex, Cuffe Parade, Colaba Mumbai-400005
2nd Party/7th Respondent
3. Though the petitioner received notice he was absent continuously. He seems to be not interested in proceeding with the matter. In the absence of any material the adjudication of the matter on merits is not possible. The reference is answered against the petitioner.
8. The Chairman & Managing Director
Union Bank of India, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg Mumbai-400021
(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 15th April, 2015)
2nd Party/8th Respondent
K.P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2555
Witnesses Examined:
For the 1st Party/Petitioner : None For the 2nd Party/Managements : None
AND
1. The General Manager (Personnel)
Vijaya Bank, Head Office, M.G. Road
Bangalore
Documents Marked:
...2nd Party/1st Respondent On the petitioner's side
Ex.No. Date Description
N/A
2. The Dy. General Manager
On the Management's side
Ex.No. Date Description
N/A
Vijaya Bank, Regional Office No. 123, Marshalls Road, Egmore Chennai-600008
...2nd Party/2nd Respondent
APPEARANCE:
नई दिल्ली, 8 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1202.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार विजय बैंक के प्रबंध्तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय, चेन्नई के पंचाट (संदर्भ सं॰ 26/2015) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 08.06.2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
For the 1st Party/ : Sri S.D. Srinivasan, Petitioner Union Authorized
Representative
For the 2nd Party/ : Nil 1st Respondent
For the 2nd Party/ : Absent 2nd Respondent
AWARD
[सं॰ एल-12011/92/2014-आई आर (बी-II)]
रवि कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 8th June, 2015
S.O. 1202.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 26/2015) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Vijay Bank and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 08/06/2015.
[No. L-12011/92/2014-IR(B-II)]
RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer The Central Government, Ministry of Labour & Employment vide its Order No. L-12011/92/2014-IR (B-II) dated 17.02.2015 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication.
The schedule mentioned in that order is:
"Whether the action of the Management of Vijaya Bank, Chennai regarding engagement of contract labourers in its establishment which are perennial and permanent nature is justified or not? What relief the representative of the petitioner union is entitled for?"
2. On receipt of notice the petitioner has appeared
through the Authorized Representative.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR
3. The petitioner has filed a memo stating that it is not pressing the dispute. Therefore the reference is answered against the petitioner.
COURT, CHENNAI
Thursday, the 28th May, 2015
Present: K.P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer An award is passing accordingly,
(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 28th May, 2015)
Industrial Dispute No. 26/2015
K.P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presding Officer
Witnesses Examined:
(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)
For the 1st Party/Petitioner Union : None
For the 2nd Party/1st Management : None
For the 2nd Party/2nd Management : None BETWEEN
Documents Marked:
On the petitioner's side
The President Vijaya Bank Workers Organization 60/2, Big Street, Triplicane Chennai-600005
...Ist Party/Petitioner Union Ex.No. Date Description
N/A2556 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
On the Management's side
Appearance:
Ex.No. Date Description
N/A
नई दिल्ली, 8 जून, 2015
For the 1st Party/Petitioner Absent
For the 2nd Party/Respondent M/s. Aiyar & Dolia,
Advocates
AWARD
का.आ. 1203.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार इंडियन बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, चेन्नई के पंचाट (34/2015) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 08/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-12012/02/2015-आई आर (बी-II)]
रवि कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 8th June, 2015
S.O. 1203.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 34/2015) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. 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 08/06/2015.
[No. L-12012/02/2015-IR(B-II)]
RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer The Central Government, Ministry of Labour & Employment vide its Order No. L-12012/2/2015-IR (B-II) dated 09.03.2015 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, Reddiarpalayam Branch, Puducherry in terminating the services of Sri M. Sivaprakasam as Jewel Appraiser and removing his name from panel is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled?"
ANNEXURE
2. On receipt of notice the Respondent has appeared through counsel. The petitioner has been present on the first hearing date and the matter has been posted for filling Claim Statement by the petitioner. But the petitioner has absented himself thereafter. In spite of that the case has been reposted for Claim Statement of the petitioner. He was absent on this reposted date also. He seems to be not interested in pursuing the case. In the absence of the Claim Statement or any other material the reference is answered against the petitioner. An award is passed accordingly.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
CHENNAI
Thesday, the 26th May, 2015
Present: K.P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer (Dictated to the P.A., transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 26th May, 2015)
K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer
Witnesses Examined:
Industrial Dispute No. 34/2015
For the 1st Party/Petitioner Union : None
For the 2nd Party/Management : None
Documents Marked:
On the petitioner's side
(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)
Ex.No. Date Description
BETWEEN
Sri M. Sivaprakasam
N/A
On the Management's side
...1st Party/Petitioner
AND
The Branch Manager Indian Bank, Reddiarpalayam Branch, 43GF, Pondi-Villiyanur Main Road, Reddiarpalayam, Puducherry-605010
...2nd Party/1st Respondent Ex.No. Date Description
N/A
नई दिल्ली, 8 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1204.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार इंडियन बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2557
AWARD
निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय, चेन्नई के पंचाट (संदर्भ सं॰ 53/2014) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 08.06.2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-12011/40/2014-आई आर (बी-II)]
रवि कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 8th June, 2015
S.O. 1204.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 53/2014) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. 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 08/06/2015.
[No. L-12011/40/2014-IR(B-II)]
RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer The Central Government, Ministry of Labour & Employment vide its Order No. L-12011/40/2014-IR (B.II) dated 30.06.2014 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication.
The schedule mentioned in that order is:
"Whether the action of the Management of Indian Bank in denying permanent benefits to Sri M. Jayabalan, Clerk/Shroff of Vennaiyur Branch, Vellore Zone is legal and justified? What relief the concerned employee is entitled to?"
2. On receipt of the Industrial Dispute this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 53/2014 and issued notices to both sides. The petitioner has entered appearance through Authorized Representative and the Respondent through counsel and have filed their claim and counter statement respectively. The petitioner has filed a rejoinder and the Respondent an additional Counter Statement.
3. The averments in the Claim Statement filed by the
ANNEXURE
petitioner in brief are these:
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
CHENNAI
Friday, the 15th May, 2015
Present: K.P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer
Industrial Dispute No. 53/2014
(In the matter of the dispute the 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 Indian Bank Employees Union No. 6 Moore Street, Mannady Corner Chennai-600001
1st Party/Petitioner Union
AND
The General Manager (HRM) Indian Bank, Avvai Shanmugam Salai Chennai-6000014
2nd Party/Respondent
APPEARANCE:
For the 1st Party/ M/s. J. Thomas Jeyaprabharan, Petitioner Union Authorized Representative
For the 2nd Party/ M/s T.S. Gopalan & Co., Respondent Advocates
The Petitioner Union has raised the dispute against termination of service of Jayabalan as "Separated" instead of relieving him on superannuation on 30.04.2012 on attaining the age of 60 years and refusing to pay terminal benefits except Provdent Fund. Jayabalan was appointed in the Respondent Bank in the year 1983 under Scheduled Tribe category based on the Community Certificate issued by the competent authority. He was confirmed in the service of the Bank on completion of the period of probation. A Show Cause Notice dated 19.12.1990 was issued to jayabalan to explain why discipliniary action should not be initiated against him for securing employment in the Bank declaring that he belongs to Kattunayakan Community. It was stated that on investigation by the Bank Jayabalan was found to belong to Hindu Vadagan Caste which is not a Scheduled Tribe. The High Court of Madras had passed an order of injuction restraining the Respondent from conducting any enquiry regarding the status of the community of Jayabalan pending disposal of the Second Appeal preferred by him. The genuiness of the certificate is yet to be considered by the State Level Scrutinizing Committee. The certificate has not been cancelled by any competent authority. It is only on concellation of the certificate the employer gets right to initiate disciplinary action on the ground theat the certificate is not valid. As per the service conditions governing the Award Staff employees working in the Banks are to be relieved from service on attaining the age of superannuation. The act of the Respondent in dispensing with the service of the Jayabalan by means of an non- existing provision i.e. "Separation" in denying terminal benefits to him is illegal and unjustified. An order may be passed to this effect.
2558 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]4. The Respondent has filed Counter Statement
contending as below:
M. Jayabalan on whose behalf the dispute has been raised was appointed as Clerk/Shroff w.e.f. 23.06.1983 under Scheduled Tribe category subject to the verification of the Community Certificate. On such verification it was found that the employee did not belong to Kattunayakan Community. A Show Cause Notice was issued to him seeking explanation from him as to why disciplinary action should not be initiated against him. The employee filed Writ Petition before the High Court of Madras and obtained an order of injunction. After this the matter was referred to a three member committee. The matter is not pending with State Level Scrutiny Committee for enquiry as per the revised order of State Government of Tamil Nadu. In the meantime the employee reached the age of superannuation. In view of the fact that final report on verification of the Community Certificate by the State Level Scrutiny Committee is awaited the employee was not allowed to retire on superannuation but was separated from the service of the Bank as on the date of attaining the age of 60 years i.e. 30.04.2012 withholding his terminal benefits of Gratuity and pension. The petitioner is not entitled to any relief.
5. The petitioner has filed rejoinder denying the case in the counter statement and reiterating his case in the Claim Statement.
6. The Respondent has filed additional Counter
Statement after this.
7. The evidence in the case consists of exhibits marked as Exts. W1 to Exts. W8 and Exts. M1 to Exts. M7. No oral evidence was adduced by the parties.
8. The points for consideration are:
(i) Whether the action of the management in denying terminal benefits to Sri M. Jayabalan, Clerk/Shroff is legal and justified?
(ii) What if any is the relief to which the he is
entitled?
genuineness of the certificate on the basis of which Jayabalan had obtained job is now pending for consideration before the State Level Scrutiny Committee. Jayabalan had attained the age of Superannuation on 30.04.2012. Since the genuineness of the Community Certificate by which he obtained job was still to be scrutinized by the State Level Scrutiny Committee the Respondent, rather than relieving Jayabalan as retired on superannuation, passed an order stating that he is separated from the service. Though he was paid the PF amount due to him, other terminal benefits due to him were with held by the Respondent. The dispute is raised on account of this.
10. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that the Respondent has no authority to relieve the concerned employee under a name which is not known to law rather than allowing him to retire on superannuation. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that when there is no provision for such "separation" the Respondent is not justified in making such an order and denying terminal benefits to the employee. It is pointed out by the Authorized Representative that gratuity can be forfeited only under Section-6A of the Gratuity Acts and so far as there is no case for the Respondent that the gratuity is forfeited under this Section there is no justification for such forfeiture. The Authorized Representative has also referred to Caluses-42 to 46 of Pension Regulations of the bank and pointed out that the method adopted by the Rspondent is not legal and proper.
The Points
9. The workman on whose behalf the dispute is raised had joined the service of the Respondent Bank in the year 1983 under Scheduled Tribe category on the basis of the community certificate that was submitted by him. He was confirmed in the service of the Bank on completion of the period of probation. It seems, a show Cause Notice dated 09.12.1990 was issued to Jayabalan asking him to show cause why disciplinary action shall not be initiated against him as it was revealed on enquiry by the Bank that he is not a member of Kattunayakan Community and thereby not a member of Scheduled Tribe at all but is a member of Hindu Vadagan Caste which is not a Scheduled Tribe. A 11. The Authorized Representative has referred to the decision in State of Jharkhand and others Vs. Jitendra Kumar Srivastava and others (Civil Appeal No. 6770/2013 decided on 14.08.2013) in support of his argument that the order of separation is only an executive instruction which is not having statutory character and this cannot be implemented. In the above case the question considered was whether the State Government is entitled to withhold a part of pension or gratuity during the pendency of departmental/criminal proceedings in the absence of any provision in the Pension Rules. The Apex Court has held that a person cannot be deprived of his pension without authority of law which is the constitutional mandate enshrined in Article-300A of the Constitution. It was further held that executive instructions are not having statutory character and therefore cannot be termed as law. It was found that the State Government cannot withhold even a part of pension or gratuity on the basis of a circular. The Authorized Representative has referred to the decision of the Apex Court in Kandasamy Vs. Chief Engineer, Madras Port Trust decided on 22.08.1997 also in this respect. Here it was observed that Community Certificate issued to Scheduled Tribe candidate prior to 11.11.1989 is good and valid if not cancelled.
[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 255912. It has been pointed out on behalf of the Respondent that the genuineness of the certificate on the basis of which the concerned employee obtained employment was under consideration. It has also been pointed out that it was on account of delaying tactics on the part of employee only that the matter is still pending with the State Level Securitining Committee. It is also pointed out that the Respondent has not forfeited the claim of the employee but has only withheld the claim pending decision regarding the genuineness of the certificate.
13. It could be seen that the Bank had been trying to verify the genuineness of the Community Certificate in question long ago. When the certificate was sent for verification, the community certificate had filed a suit before Sub-Court Pudukkottai as OS 82/1988 seeking a declaration that the Respondent has no authority to enquire about the genuineness of the Certificate and to restrain them for making any such enquiry. By Ext. M1 judgement the suit was dismissed. The appeal filed against the said judgement also was dismissed. The concerned employee filed SA 1097/96 before the High Court of Madras as seen from the grounds of appeal marked as Ext. M2. It is seen from the Claim Statement itself that the employee had filed WP before the High Court for an injunction restraining the Respondent from conducting any enquiry regarding the status of the community of the employee pending disposal of the second appeal preferred by him.
13. The documents produced by the Respondent would show that there was no latches on the part of the Respondent Ext. M3 is a letter by the Respondent Bank to the District Collector requesting to send files relating to verification of community certificates of employees including the concerned employee to the State Level Scrutinizing Committee. Ext. M4 is a letter written by the Respondent to the secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu to furnish the position of the pending cases. Ext. M7 is another letter by the Respondent to the Principal Secretary to Govt., Adi Dravidan Tribal Welfare Department of the Government of Tamil Nadu to give direction to the authorities concerned to dispose off the long pending cases. In Ext. M7 it is also stated that payment of terminal benefits to the employees against whom verification of community certificate is withheld for want of verification report from the authorities.
14. The counsel for the Respondent has pointed out that if a person gets appointment on the basis of a fraudulent certificate his appointment is no appointment at all in the eye of law. The counsel for the Respondent has referred to the decision in Vishwanath Pillai Vs. State of Kerala reported in AIR 2004 SC 1469(1) in this respect. The Apex Court has held in this that a person who has obtained appointment based on a false certificate cannot claim a right to the post as he had usured a post meant for a reserved candidate by playing fraud and producing false certificate. Unless the person can lay a claim to the post on the basis of his appointment he cannot claim the constitutional guarantee given under Article-311 of the constitution. As he had obtained appointment on the basis of a false caste certificate he cannot be considered to be a person who holds a post within the meaning of Article-311 of Constitution of India, it was further held. The counsel has also referred to the decision of the Apex Court in Bank of India and another Vs. Avinash and others reported in 2005 7 SCC 690. Here it was held that the caste certificate having been obtained fraudulently the very foundation of the appointment collapses and the same is no appointment in the eye of law. Of course in the above two cases referred to by the Respondent the Scrutinizing Committee has already found that the certificates in question were fraudulently obtained. In the present case the scrutiny of the certificate is yet to be done. However, the observation of the Apex Court would show that obtaining appointment on the basis of a false certificate is no appointment at all and the concerned person cannot claim any right of benefits from the appointment.
15. The counsel for the Respondent has referred to the decisions of the Madras High Court where the Hon'ble Court has refused to order payment of terminal benefits pending decision by the State Level Scrutiny Committee on the genuineness of the Community Certificates. In the decision in Balasubramanian Vs. Asstt. General Manager and others in WP No. 17184/2011 the Madras High Court has relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in Vishwanath Pillai's case referred to earlier. In the above case the High Court has only given a direction that payment of terminal benefits to the concerned employee would depend upon the order that may be passed by the State Level Scrutiny Committee. In other cases regarding employees of Indian Bank also the Madras High Court has taken the same view. In the case of A.G Rose in WP 11286/12 decided on 02.07.2014 also the High Court has directed that the Bank need disburse the retirement benefits to the Writ petitioner based on the findings of the State Level Scrutiny Committee. This is the direction given in the case of Sundar in WP 19006/2013 and Ayyappan in WP 21396/2013 decided on 04.07.2004 also.
16. It is not a case where the Bank had forfeited the retirement benefits to the concerned workman. The Bank has only withheld the benefits pending the report of the Scrutiny Committee regarding the certificate of the concerned employee. The delay in taking a decision regarding the genuineness of the certificate seems to be mainly on account of the various litigations entered into by the concerned employee. Disbursement of the amount should depend upon the decision taken by the Scrutiny Committee on the genuineness of the Certificate. I find the concerned employee is not entitled to any relief at this stage.
2560 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]The reference is answered against the petitioner. An
award is passed accrodingly.
(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 15th May, 2015)
K.P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 8 जून, 2015
Witnesses Examined:
For the 1st Party/Petitioner Union : None
For the 2nd Party/Management : None का.आ. 1205.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14)की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार चेन्नई पतन न्यास के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, चेन्नई के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 12/2015) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 08/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-33011/05/2014-आईआर (बी-II)]
Documents Marked:
रवि कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी
On the petitioner's side
New Delhi, the 8th June, 2015
Ex.No. Date Description
Ex.W1 25.10.2012 Letter reference IBEU/261/2012 to the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Chennai by the Union
Ex.W2 19.03.2012 Counter submitted by the administration
to the Asstt. Labour Commissioner
Ex.W3 19.07.2013 Rejoinder submitted by the Union to the
Assisstant Labour Commissioner
Ex.W4 19.12.1990 Show Cause Notice issued by the Zonal Manager/Disciplinary Authority, Zonal Officer, Trichy
S.O. 1205.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 12/2015) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of the Chennai Port Trust and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 08/06/2015.
[No. L-33011/05/2014-IR(B-II)]
RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
Ex.W5 26.04.2012 Letter from the administration to M.
Jayabalan intimating "separation" from
the services.
Ex.W6 30.04.2012 Letter from the Indian Bank, Vennaiyur
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
CHENNAI
Branch to M. Jayabalan
Ex.W7 08.09.2012 Representation from M. Jayabalan to the General Manager (HRM) requesting sanction of termination Benefits Thursday, the 23rd April, 2015
Present: K.P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer
Industrial Dispute No. 12/2015
Ex.W8 14.09.2012 Lettter from CO:HRM to M. Jayabalan
on with holding terminal benefits
On the Managements's side
Ex.No. Date Description
Ex.W1 29.10.1983 Judgement of Sub-Court, Pudukottai in Os No. 82/88
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 Chennai Port Trust and their workman.
BETWEEN
Ex.W2 06.08.1996 Grounds of Appeal in S.A. No. 1097 of
1996 before High Court, Madras
Ex.M3 25.04.2008 Letter from Respondent of District
Collector, Pudukottai
Ex.M4 28.07.2011 Letter from Respondent to the Secretary, Adi Dravidar & Tribal Welfare Department, Govt. of Tamil Nadu
Ex.M5 13.09.2011 Letter from the Dy. Secretary to the
District Collector, Pudukottai
Ex.M6 09.12.2011 Letter from Respondent to District
Collector, Pudukottai
Ex.M7 04.01.2013 Letter from Respondent to the Principal
Secretary to Govt. of Tamil Nadu.
The General Secretary Transport and Dock Workers Union No. 32 Perumal Mudali Street Kondithope Channai-600079
...1st Party/Petitioner Union
AND
The Chairman Channai Port Trust Rajaji Salai Chennai-600001
...2nd Party/Respondent[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2561
APPEARANCE:
For the 1st Party/ : M/s. R. Prathapan & D. Petitioner Union Venkatesan, Advocate For the 2nd Party/ : M/s. M.R. Dharanichander, Respondent Advocate
नई दिल्ली, 8 जून, 2015
AWARD
The Central Government, Ministry of Labour & Employment vide its Order No. L-33011/05/2014-IR (B.II) dated 07.01.2015 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication.
The Schedule mentioned in that order is:
"Whether the action of the management of Chennai Port Trust regarding non-extension of revision of other allowances in Clause-23 as per the Wage Settlement dated 19.01.2010. is justifiable or not? What relief the workman is entitled to?"
2. On receipt of the Industrial Dispute this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 12/2015 and notice was issued to both sides. Both sides have entered appearance through their counsel.
का.आ. 1206.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एम/एस स्पष्ट सुरक्षित सर्विस (प्र॰) लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय, चैन्नई के पंचाट (संदर्भ सं॰ 17/2015) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 08/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-12012/68/2014-आईआर (बी-II)]
रवि कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 8th June, 2015
S.O. 1206.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 17/2015) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/s. Clear Secured Service (P) Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 08.06.2015.
[No. L-12012/68/2014-IR(B-II)]
RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
CHENNAI
3. Though the petitioner has entered appearance through a counsel he was consistently negligent in proceeding with the case. He was absent on the first hearing date even though he has received notice. It was only after issuing notice again he appeared through Counsel. Thereafter, also the matter was posted for filing Claim Statement by the petitioner. But in spite of repeated postings, the petitioner and his counsel were absent. The petitioner seems to be not interested in proceeding with the matter. There is no material available to support the issue under reference.
In the above circumstance, the reference is answered
against the petitioner.
Wednesday, the 15th April, 2015
Present: K.P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer
Industrial Dispute No. 17/2015
An award is passed accordingly.
(Dictated to the P.A., Transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 23rd April, 2015)
K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), between the Management of Clear Secured Service India Pvt. Ltd. and their workman.
Witnesses Examined:
BETWEEN
For the 1st Party/Petitioner : None
For the 2nd Party/Management : None Sri N.M. Yuvaraj
..1st Party/Petitioner
Deocument Marked:
AND
On the petitioner's side
Ex. No. Date Description
Nil
1. M/s. Clear Secured Service India Pvt. Ltd.
Regd. Office, 501, Rajgir Sadan, Laxmi Baugh, Opp. To Sion Station (West), Mumbai-22
...2nd Party/1st Respondent On the management's side
Ex. No. Date Description
Nil
2. M/s. Clear Secured Service India Pvt. Ltd.
Sri Ram Prasad, Manager, Corporate Office-Tamil Nadu2562 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] No. 133, S.M. Narayan Nagar Anna Nagar West Extn., Mogappair, Near MMM Hospital Chennai-600 101
...2nd Party/2nd Respondent
3. Sri N. Shahul Hameed, MA., BL 36/42, New Bangaru Colony West K.K. Nagar, Chennai
...2nd Party/3rd Respondent For the 2nd Party/ : M/s. T.S. Gopalan & Co., 5th and 8th Respondent Advocates
For the 2nd Party/ : Absent 6th Respondent
For the 2nd Party/ : Smt. S. Saranya, 7th Respondent Authorized Representative
For the 2nd Party/ : Absent 9th Respondent
AWARD
4. The Chairman
M/s. Bank of India, Star House, C-5 G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051
...2nd Party/4th Respondent
5. The Chairman & Managing Director
Central Bank of India, Chandermukhi Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021
...2nd Party/5th Respondent
6. The Chairman
HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 013
...2nd Party/6th Respondent
7. The Chief Managing Director
IDBI Bank Ltd., IDBI Tower, WTC Complex, Cuffe Parade, Colaba Mumbai-400 005
...2nd Party/7th Respondent
8. The Chairman & Managing Director
Union Bank of India 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg Mumbai-400 021
...2nd Party/8th Respondent
9. The Chairman & Managing Director
The Central Government, Ministry of Labour & Employment vide its Order No. L-12012/68/2014-IR(B.II) dated 05.01.2015 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication.
The Schedule mentioned in that order is:
"Whether the action of the management of M/s. Clear Secured Services (P) Ltd., Chennai regarding termination of the service of the petitioner, Sri N.M. Yuvaraj is justifiable or not? What relief the petitioner is entitled to?"
2. On receipt of the Industial Dispute this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 17/2015 and issued notices to both sides. On receipt of notice First, Second, Fourth, Fifth and Eighth Respondents have appeared through their counsel and the Seventh Respondent through the Authorized Representative. No Vakalat was filed for other Respondents.
3. Though the petitioner received notice he was absent continuously. He seems to be not interested in proceeding with the matter. In the absence of any material the adjudication of the matter on merits is not possible. The reference is answered against the petitioner.
(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 15th April, 2015)
K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer
Witnesses Examined:
Vijaya Bank 41/2, Trinity Circule, M.G. Road Bangalore-560 001
...2nd Party/9th Respondent For the 1st Party/Petitioner : None For the 2nd Party/Management : None
APPEARANCE:
Documents Marked:
For the 1st Party/ : Absent
On the petitioner's side
Pettioner
Ex. No. Date Description
For the 2nd Party/ : Sri N. Shahul Hameed, 1st and 2nd Respondent Advocate
N/A
On the Management's side
For the 2nd Party/ : Sri N. Shahul Hameed, 3rd Respondent Advocate
Ex. No. Date Description
For the 2nd Party/ : M/s. Pais, Lobo, Advocates 4th Respondent
N/A[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2563 नई दिल्ली, 9 जून, 2015
On behalf of the workman/Union : Mr. D. Mukherjee
Ld. Advocate
On behalf of the Management : Mr. Zaki Azam
Ld. Advocate
State : Bihar Industy : Deptt. of Education
Dated, Dhanbad, the 11th May, 2015
AWARD
का.आ. 1207.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार इंदिरा गांधी नेशनल ओपन यूनिवर्सिटी, रीजनल सेंटर, पटना के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय-2, धनबाद के पंचाट (संदर्भ सं॰ 44/2013) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 08/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-42012/134/2012-आईआर (डी यू)] पी॰ के॰ वेणुगोपाल, डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 9th June, 2015
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-42012/134/2012-IR (DU) dt. 20.02.2013.
SCHEDULE
S.O. 1207.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (I.D. Reference No. 44 of 2013) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No. 2, Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of the Indira Gandhi National Open University, Regional Centre, Patna and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 08.06.2015.
[No. L-42012/134/2012-IR(DU)] P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer "Whether the action of the Management by illegal termination of services of Smt. Bindiya Devi w.e.f. 04.05.2012 is justified or not? If not, what relief she is entitled to?"
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2), AT DHANBAD
On receipt of the Order No. L-42012/134/2012-IR(DU), dt. 20.02.2013 of the above mentioned reference from the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment, New Delhi, for adjudication of the dispute, the Reference Case No. 44 of 2013 was registered on 11.03.2013 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the Registered Posts to the parties concerned, directing them to appear in the Court on the date fixed, and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents. In pursuance of the said order, notices by the Registered Posts were sent to the parties concerned.
PRESENT :
Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer
In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section
10(1) (d) of the I.D. Act., 1947.
Both the parties made their apperances and filed their pleadings and photocopies of their documents. The Workman and the O.P./Management through their Ld. Advocates appeared respectively, and contested the case.
REFERENCE No. 44 OF 2013
PARTIES :
Smt. Bindiya Devi, C/o Sri Upendra Ram, Moh-Ambedkar Bhawan, Flat No. 203-B, Nala Road, Kadam Kuan, Patna
Vs.
The Regional Director, Indira Gandhi National Open University, Regional Centre, Patna, IInd Floor, Biscoman Tower, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna 01.
Order No. L-42012/134/2012-IR (DU) dt. 20.02.2013
2. The case of Smt. Bindiya Devi as stated in her wirtten statement is that she had been working as a permanent Sweeper against the job of permanent nature since Sept., 2005 continuously within the premises of the Establishmet under the direct control and supervision of the Management of Indira Gandhi National Open University. Though he had been working till then Management calling her Part-Time employee and paying her the wages of a Part-time employee in the name of alleged intermediaries. She also represented before the Management several times for the payment of wages of a permanent workman but the Management got annoyed and terminated her service by stopping her from duty since 04.05.2012, though she had reported for her duty on that day. The Management disallowed her to resume her duty without any reason even on her representation several times for it, Finding no alterative, the petitioner raised this Industrial Dispute for the ALC (C), Patna.
2564 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]Despite the direction of the Conciliation Officer to produce the statutory documents such as registered of attendance, payment of bonus etc. the anti-labour Management failed to produce it. The conciliation proceedings lastly failed and resulted in the reference for adjudication, so the action of the Management in terminating the service of petitioner w.e.f. 04.05.2012 is illegal, unjustified as well as void for non-compliance of provision u/s 25 F of the I.D. Act in view of his continuous service for more than 240 days in attendances in a calendar year.
Security Agency. The Agency alternatively arranges for getting the office premises cleaned properly on time. The aforesaid popular Sainik Security Agency raises bills time to time for different dates and the same after scrutiny is paid by the Management. As such the allegation of the petitioner for her termination by the Management is absolutely false, as she is the employee of the aforesaid Security Agency, so the question of termination does not arise. Hence the Industrial Dispute is not maintainable on that score.
The OP/Management in their simultaneous rejoinder has categorically denied all the allegations of the petitioner as totally vague and wrong and baseless. Under such circumstances, there is no violation of Sec 25 of the I.D. Act. Further alleged on behalf of the OP/Management is that the engagement of the petitioner by Indira Gandhi National Open University in Sept., 2005 was a Part-Time Sweeper on daily wages only in exigencies for two hours only. Hence the petitioner is not entitled and remuneration from IGNOU.
FINDING WITH THE REASONS
Further she alleged that she was appointed by the Management in the year 2005, she had been working six days in a week from 7 a.m. to 12 p.m. and getting Rs. 1500/- per month on voucher. She got monthly payment by cheque from 03.05.2012 to March, 2012. Her monthly salary was reduced by the Management from Rs. 1500 to 750 arbitrarily and illegally. The Management began to pay her Rs. 1000/- per month from Nov. 2007 to Dec., 2009 Dr. A.N. Tripthy the Management Official, increased her monthly wages from Rs. 1,000/- to Rs. 4,650/- from Jan., 2010 by changing the working hours from 08 a.m. to 05 p.m. She was working even on holidays and rest days, getting her wages for the holidays as well. Dr. Haider, Management Official began to pay Rs. 205/- daily. As such the Management had exploited the poor downtrodden petitioner in an illegal manner. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement with her full back wages and full benefits.
3. The petitioner in her rejoinder had denied all the allegation of the OP/Management as false, misleading and vague further stating that the OP/Management changed her status from direct employee to alleged intermediary employee without her consent and contrary to the mandatory provision of Sec. 9 A of the I.D. Act.
4. Whereas the case of the OP/Management is that the Management have already represented before the ALC (C), Maurya Lok Complex, Patna that the no relationship of the employer and employee exists between the OP/ Management and the Lady petitioner. The petitioner was engaged by the Management as a Part-Time Sweeper only for 2 hours 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. in Sept., 2005 till Dec. 2009 and accordingly she was paid her wages. Her duty of work was increased from Jan, to March, 2010 and her wages was accordingly paid. Further it is alleged that From April, 2010 onwards the petitioner joined M/s. Popular Sainik Security Agency, the Agency providing manpower to regional Centre, Indira Gandhi National Open University, 2nd Floor, Biscoman Tower, Patna. Thus she became the employee of M/s. Popular Sainik Security Agency, resulting in Stopping her engagement by the IGNOU. The aforesaid Security Agency assigned their employees including petitioner with their duties, instructing them to perform their duties under the Supervision of their staff at the specified places. When aforesaid Field worker does not attend her duty of the 5. In the instant reference Case WW1 Bindiya Devi, the petitioner herself for her sake, WW2 Upendra Ram, the husband of the petitioner, and MW1 Rajesh Kumar Sharma, the Asstt. Registrar for the OP/Management of Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) have been respectively examined.
Mr. D. Mukherjee, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the Lady petitioner had been continuously working at (IGNOU), Regional Centre, Patna, and being said since Sept., 2005 (Ext. W.1 with objection) as a Part- Time Sweeper, though lastly being engaged by the Management as permanent full time employee with full wages from 2010, yet suddenly without any mandatory notice of change under Sec. 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the OP/Management began to call her an employee of alleged contractor agency M/s. Popular Sainik Samity from April, 2010 by changing her service against which she had seriously protested. Further the plea of Mr. Mukherjee is that in similar issue of the F.C.I. Employees who were appointed by the F.C.I. but suddenly Management started to treat them as employee of Contractor without giving any notice u/s 9A of the I.D. Act, the Hon'ble Apex Court was pleased to hold in the case of workmen of the F.C.I. Vs. M/s. FCI of India reported in I.F.L.R. May, 1995 at page 442 that when employees working under the employer are told they have ceased to be the workmen of the employer, and have become workmen of another employer in legal parlance such an act of the first employer constitutes discharge, termination of service or retrenchment and fresh employment by another employer. No employer can dispense with the services of any workman contrary to Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and Certified (Standing Order) Act, 1946.
[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2565Any such termination contrary to the provisions of Industrial Dispute Act would be void (Paras 12 & 17). Lastly, Mr. Mukherjee, Ld. Counsel for the Lady petitioner has to submit that the petitioner as per her petition dt. 30.05.2014 has called for the document of Attendance Register for the period 2005 to 2012, but the Management filed Xerox copies of 10 documents as per the list dt. 26.03.2014 other than the Attendance Register, though the workman had filed the original Statement of her account in Xerox-6 sheets (Ext. W.2 series) apart from her original Certificate dt. May 24, 2006 issued by the I.G.N.O.U. about her working as per Part Time Sweeper since Sept., 2005 (Ext. W.1). As such her illegal termination by the Management is unjustified, so she is entitled to her reinstatement in her service with full back wages.
In the instant case, the OP/Management as per its petition dt. 07.07.2014 appears to have specified responded that calling for the Attendance Register for the period of 2005 to 2012 is quite irrelevant, as it is annually maintained for only the regular and permanent employees of the Management. Mr. Zaki Azam, Ld. Advocate for the OP/Management has contended that there is no issue under IV Schedule (in reference to Sec. 9A of the I.D. Act) which is related to wages including the period mode for payment etc. so the aforesaid ruling is inapplicable; moreover, the lady petitioner was a partly worker of the M/s Popular Agency, so there is no case of her termination, because of the fact that she was never an employee of the Management; thus, she is not entitled to any relief under the law.
In result, in view of the out and out purely temporary status of the lady petitioner as Part-Lime sweeper, she can neither have any status of a regular Sweeper nor claim her status accordingly. Under such circumstances there is no question of her termination by the OP/Management, as she was not the employee of the OP/Management. As such it is hereby, in the terms of the Reference, responded and accordingly awarded that in view of the palpably false case of the petitioner about her employment by the Management, no question for the action of the Management for her illegal termination of service of petitioner Bindiya Devi w.e.f. 04.05.2012 arises as justified or not? Hence she is not entitled to any relief whatsoever.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 9 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1208.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार चीफ एग्जीक्यूटिव अफसर, कैंटोनमेंट बोर्ड के प्रबंधतत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय-2, धनबाद के पंचाट (संदर्भ सं॰ 27/2011) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 08/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-13011/03/2011-आईआर (डीयू)] पी॰ के॰ वेणुगोपाल, डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 9th June, 2015
S.O. 1208.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. Reference No. 27/2011) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court No. 2, Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of the Chief Executive Officer, Cantonment Board and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 08.06.2015.
[No. L-13011/03/2011-IR(DU)] P. K. VENUGOPAL, 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. 27 OF 2011.
PARTIES :
6. On perusal and consideration of the materials available on the case record, it appears incontroversial that petitioner Bindiya Devi had undoubtedly not got any appointment letter either from the OP/Management even for post of Sweeper against permanent or temporary post, rather the Certificate dt. 24.05.2005 issued by K.V.D. Prakash Roy, the Asstt. Registrar of the OP/Management, Regional Centre, Patna in favour of lady petitioner Bindiya Devi appears to be totally a false and concocted document for her working as a Part Time Sweeper in the Regional Centre since Sept. 2005, as her Certificate was issued to her as a Part Time Sweeper on 24.05.2005 prior to her alleged working to be continued as a Part Time Sweeper. It is a clear indication hat she was never a regular Sweeper of the Management. Further it stands clear from the case of the petitioner that she had never been in continuous service for 240 days in any period of 12 calendar months preceding the date with the reference to which calculation is to be made as a pre-requisite under Sec. 25-B(2)(a)(ii) of the I.D. Act., 1947. The instant Reference which mainly related to her alleged illegal termination by the Management w.e.f. 04.05.2012 does not fall under any of the eleven items/conditions of the IV Schedule as required for a notice of change under Sec. 9A of the I.D. Act Hence, the aforesaid ruling of the Hon'ble Apex Court does not hold good with the factum of the case.
The President, Chawani Parishad Karamchari Sangh,2566 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] Chawani Parishad, Danapur Cantt., Patna (Bihar)
Vs.
The Chief Executive Officer, O/o the Cantonment Board Danapur Cantt., Patna (Bihar), Order No. L-13011/3/2011-IR (DU) dt. 03.10.2011
APPEARANCES:
On behalf of the workman/Union : Mr. D.K. Verma,
Ld. Advocate,
On behalf of the Management : Mr. R.R. Prasad,
Ld. Advocate
State : Bihar
Industry : Defence
Dated, Dhanbad, the 20th May, 2015
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-13011/3/2011-IR (DU) dt. 03.10.2011.
interview were found suitable by the OP/Management, so they were appointed as permanent employee of the OP/ Management. Since then, they had been rendering their services to the Management by completing more than 240 days attendance every year. The workmen were though entitled to their wages according to the 6th Pay Commission, yet being paid their wages lesser than that by the Management. When the Union Chawani Parishad Karmchari Sangh put a demand before the Management for payment of wages to the workmen concerned according to the 6th Pay Commission, the OP/ Management got angry and illegally terminated their services w.e.f. 23.02.2010 for their union activities in utter violation of mandatory provision u/s 25-F of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, and even without getting any prior permission from the Government under Sec. 25-N of the said Act. The Management appointed another persons in their places after their retrenchment, in violation of Sec. 25-H of the Act. Then the I.D, raised by the Union before the ALC(c) Patna turned out its failure in its conciliation due to non appearance and adament attitude of the OP/Management, resulting in the instant Reference for an adjudication. The retrenchment of the workmen is ab initio void, so the workmen are entitled to reinstatement with full back wages.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the Management of Danapur Chawani Parishad, Danapur Cantt., by terminating the service of Shri Brahmadeo Yadav and Shri Rajan Kumar without observing the local provisions u/s 25-F laid down is proper and justified? Whether the workers are entitled for reinstatement with full back wages? What relief they are entitled to?"
On receipt of the Order No. L-13011/3/2011-IR (DU) dt. 03.10.2011 of the above mentioned reference from the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, the Reference Case No. 27 of 2011 was registered on 18.10.2011 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the Registered Posts to the parties concerned, directing them to appear in the Court on the date fixed, and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents. In pursuance of the said order, notices by the Registered Posts were sent to the parties concerned.
Both the parties made their appearances and filed their pleadings and photocopies of their documennts. The Union and the O.P./Management through their Ld. Advocates respectively contested the case.
2. The case of workmen S/Shri Brahmdeo Yadav and Rajan Kumar in their written statement as represented by the Union Representative concerned is that on their applications for recruitment against vacancy as advertised by the Danapur Cantonment, the workmen after their due Both the workmen in their rejoinder have also specifically denied all the allegations of the OP/Management as incorrect, further stating their appointments in the year 2002 and their continuous working till their termination. They have also justified for the maintainability of the Industrial dispute in law.
3. Whereas the contra pleaded case of the OP/Management is that the Union concerned is neither a registered Trade Union nor afflicted to the All India Cantonment Boards Employees Federation under Sec. 36 of the I.D. Act 1947 to raise the I.D. for the workmen. Non- furnishing of an information by the Union regarding its registration etc. even after lapse of more than 26 months denotes its non-existence under the Rule 42(2) of the Industrial Dispute (Central) Rules 1947. The fact that the Management as per direction of the Directorate Defence Estates, Government of India, Ministry of Defence, has to hold JCM meeting regularly with the registered Union affiliated to the All India Cantonment Board Employees Federation only was also represented before the ALC (C), Patna. The Union concerned has not filed a statement of claim with complete relevant documents etc as required under the Rule 10B of the aforesaid I.D. Rules. Factual case of both the workmen Rajan Kumar and Brahmdeo Yadav is that they had been engaged on daily wages for 89 (eighty nine) days only as per the Danapur Chhawani Sankalp Sankhya 1 dt. 22.01.2010, but they accordingly served the cantonment Board only for 19 (nineteen) days from Feb. 1 to 22, 2010, but since thereafter, they remained absent without any information. So there is neither any[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2567 retrenchment of them under Sec. 2 (00) of the Act, nor any applicability of provisions u/s 25 F of the Act to their case.
The OP/Management in their simulteneous rejoinder have categorically denied all the allegations of the Union/ workmen concerned, further alleging non-application of the provisions u/s 25 N, 25 F and 25 H to the case of the causal workmen, as the Cantonment Board had taken the services of Labour Contractor in exigency. So both the workmen are not entitled to any relief.
appointment letter for the post as also admitted by the workmen Brahmdeo Yadav (Ext. WW 1). Such plea of the workmen for their appointment against the permanent post of clearner is untenable, because both the workmen have put their claim against the permanent post of clearners with the help of their alleged attendances as a Daily Wager for the period of March, 2008 to Jan, 2010 (Ext. W.3 series) (22 Sheets), but it does not show the names of these two workmen Brahmdeo Yadav and Ranjan Kumar.
FINDING WITH REASONS
4. In the instant case WW1 Brahmdeo Yadav, the workman and WW2 Devnandan Ram, the Secretary for INTUC for the Union concerned, And MW1 Md. Firoz, the Store Keeper cum In charge Sanitary Inspector as well as the Law Assistant for the OP/Management have been respectively examined.
Mr. D.K. Verma, Ld. Advocate for the Union/both workmen concerned has to submit that both workmen, namely Brahmdeo Yadav and Ranjan Kumar after their due interview as per their interview letters (Extt. W2 & 2/1 respectively) were appointed as Safaiwala against permanent vacancies as advertised by the Management of Danapur Cantt. in the daily Hindustan dt. 28.09.2004 (Ext. W.1). Since then they had been continuously rendering heir services to the Management having completed 240 days attendances each and every year. But on their demand from the Management for their wages according to VI Pay Commission, they were illegally terminated in violation of mandatory provision of Sec. 25-F, 25-H of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. Underlying the verdict of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Robert D' Souza Vs. Executive Engineer, Southern Railway and others reported in 1982 SSC (L & S), 24, Mr. Verma has submitted, as held therein, that even a Casual and Seasonal Worker who rendered continuous service for one year or more can not be retrenched on same ground without complying with the requisite of Sec. 25 F Mr. Verma has also cited the same view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as held in the Civil Appeal No. 2417-2418 (arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 29634-29635/2008 Hari Nandan Pd. & Anors Vs. E. Engineer (I/R) to the Management of FCI & another as held therein, that the termination of services without following the Sec. 25 F is illegal and unjustified; therefore, the workmen are entitled for reinstatement with 50% back wages. As such it has been urged for the reinstatement of workmen with full back wages.
4. Whereas the contention of Mr. R.R. Prasad, Ld. Advocate for the OP/Management is that in fact the advertisement was published on 23.09.2004 (Ext. W.1) and the interview letters (Ext. W. 2 & 2/1) were issued to the both the workmen for their interview on Feb. 25 & 26, 2005 respectively for the post of Safaiwala but they were not selected for the post; hence they were not given any Drawing my attention, Mr. Hari Prasad has further submitted that one sheet of Extt. W.3 series, the alleged Attendance Sheet, is alleged for Jan., 2010. It shows the name of Brahmdeo Yadav and one Rajan Ram (Not Rajan Kumar) along with Rajoo Ram. They put their own signatures of attendance against their "Dainik Betan Bhogi" before their names but without an official authentication. Whereas the statement of WW2 Devnandan Ram, the Union Representative corroborated the engagement of both the workmen as daily Wage Mazdoors in exigencies in Feb., 2010 with their authorization letters for 89 days but they worked only for 19 days up to 22.02.2010 and then they left the job. Acknowledged fact of the Union and the workmen is that the Danapur Cantt. Board is a Government Organization and its work is done as per the Rules and regulations of the Board. He has also faied to prove the registration of the Union and its affiliation with INTUC, so the Union has no locus standi to raise the Industrial Dispute despite a recognized Union is already in existence. It is also argues on behalf of the OP/Management that in absence of appointment letter, there can not be legitimate expectation of reinstatement as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of B. T. Krishna Murthy Vs. Basveswara Education Society and others reported in 2013 (137) FLR 689.
5. On perusal of the materials, I also find that the Pay & Acquaintance Rolls of Permanent/Temporary Entire Establishment of Danapur Cantt. Board for the month of March, June, Sept., Dec., 2007, March, June, Sept., Dec., 2008, Jan., Feb., 2009 (Extt. M-1-1/9 series), and those for Mar., June, Aug., Sept., Dec., 2010 prove that both the daily wagers Brahmdeo Yadav and Ranjan Kumar were never an employee of the OP/Management. The official letters and Notes (Extt. M.2 series) conclusively prove the fact that the instant Chawani Parishad Karamchari Sangh is not a recognized Union and nor affiliated to All India Cantonment Board Employees Federation (AICBEF). The two copies of the statement of Account of the Management for Oct. & Aug., 2011 (Ext. M.3 series) prove the payment of Rs. 1,900/- through their cheques each to both the instant workmen for their casual work. In view of the aforesaid facts & findings, it stands quite clear that both the workmen were out and out irregular Daily Wagers for a few days only and an unengagement of any of both the workers as a Daily Wagers by the Management does not mean in any way retrenchment or termination of2568 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] AND
Their workmen
Present : Justice Dipak Saha Ray, Presiding Officer
Appearance:
them by the Management under the provisions of I. D. Act., 1947. On the consideration of the factum and legum status of the instant case, I am of the view that the arguments of Mr. R. R. Prasad, Ld. Counsel for the OP/Management outweights that of Mr. D. D. Verma, Ld. Advocate, for the Union/workmen. Besides the instant Union being an unrecognized one has no locus standi to raise this reference.
On behalf of the : Mr. Uttam Kumar Mondal, Ld. Management Counsel for NTPC
None for M/s. Tekanika Engineering Enterprise
On behalf of the : None. Workmen
State: West Bengal Industry: Thermal Power.
Dated: 1st June, 2015
AWARD
In result, it is hereby, in the terms of the Reference responded and accordingly awarded that since both the alleged workmen Brahmdeo Yadav and Ranjan Kumar being irregular Daily Wagers for a few days had no service as the employees of the Management of Danapur Cantt. so no question arises about the action of the Management for terminating their services nor the compliance of the provisions u/s 25F of the I. D. Act, 1947 holds good with the instant Reference. Hence, the workers who were irregular Casual Daily Wagers for a few days are not entitled for reinstatement with full back wages, nor to any relief whatsoever.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 9 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1209.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार टेकनिका इंजीनियरिंग उद्यम के प्रबंधतत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों केबीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय, कोलकाता के पंचाट (संदर्भ सं॰ 65/2014) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 08/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-42011/75/2014-आईआर (डीयू)]
पी॰ के॰ वेणुगोपाल, डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 9th June, 2015
S.O. 1209.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. Reference No. 65/2014) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court, Kolkata as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of the M/s Tekanika Engineering Enterprise and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 08.06.2015.
[No. L-42011/75/2014-IR(DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer By Order No. L-42011/75/2014-IR(DU) dated 30.09.2014 the Government of India, Ministry of Labour in exercise of its powers under Section 10(1)(d) and (2A) of the industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:
"(1) Whether the action of the management is justified by not covering 21 no. of workmen under the agreement of 26.11.2009 and paying them less wages is legal and/or justified? If not, what relief the workmen are entitled to? (2) Whether the action of the management is justified by adopting two types of wages namely 'norms' and 'non-norms' for performing same type of nature of work? If not, whether they are eligible for differential wages with retrospective date is legal and/or justified? If not, what relief the workmen are entitled to?"
2. When the case is taken up today for hearing, none appears either on behalf of the President, NTPC Contractors Labour Union or on behalf of the Proprietor, M/s. Tekanika Engineering Enterprise inspite of service of notice, though NTPC is represented by its Ld. Counsel. It apears from the record that the union at whose instance the present reference has been initiated is absent for three consecutive dates.
3. Considering the above facts and circumstances, it may reasonably be presumed that the union is not interested to proceed with the case further. So, no fruitful purpose will be seved in keeping the matter pending.
ANNEXURE
4. In view of the above facts and circumstances, present reference is disposed of by passing a "No Dispute Award".
Justice DIPAK SAHA RAY, Presiding Officer CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2015
Reference No. 65 of 2014
Parties : Employers in relation to the management of
M/s. Tekanika Engineering Enterprise का.आ. 1210.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार उत्तर पूर्व रेलवे[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2569 के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम नयायालय, लखनऊ के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 62/2014) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11/06/2015 प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-41011/75/2014-आई आर (बी-1)] सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 11th June, 2015
S.O. 1210.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 62/2014) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Lucknow as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of North Eastern Railway and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 11/06/2015.
[No. L-41011/75/2014-IR(B-I)] SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer Tilak Nagar, Lucknow and Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer, North Eastern Railway, DRM Office, Ashok Marg, Lucknow & the Chief Medical Superintendent, North Eastern Railway, Gonda (UP) for adjudication.
2. The reference under adjudication is:
''क्या पूर्वोत्तर रेल प्रशासन, लखनऊ व गोंडा द्वारा श्री भाई लाल, सफाईवाला को पुरानी पेंशन न देकर नई पेंशन दिया जाना न्यायोचित एवं वैध है? यदि नहीं तो कामगार किस राहत को पाने का हकदार है?''
3. On receipt of the reference order the workman's union was issued registered notice to file his statement of claim complete with relevant documents, list of reliance and witnesses before Tribunal on 26.12.2014 with an advance copy to the opposite party. The Secretary of the workman's union appeared before this Tribunal and requested for a date for filing of statement of claim.
ANNEXURE
4. On successive dates the management also turned up. Since the case was related to grant of old pension scheme instead of new pension scheme, the parties were advised to settle the dispute amicably through Lok Adalat. Accordingly, the case was taken up at Lok Adalat on 08.05.2015.
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-
CUM-LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW
PRESENT :
RAKESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer
I.D. No. 62/2014 Ref. No. L-41011/75/2014-IR(B-I) dated: 09.10.2014 5. On 08.05.2015, Shri D.P. Awasthi, Secretary of the workman's union was present whereas the opposite parties were represented by Shri Upendra Kumar Sharma, Chief Welfare officer.
BETWEEN
Anchal Sangthan Secretary Rail Sevak Sangh C/o Shri D.P. Awasthi 49, Tilak Nagar Lucknow.
(Espousing cause of Sri Bhai Lal)
AND
1. Sr. Dvisional Personnel Officer
North Eastern Railway DRM Office, Ashok Marg, Lucknow.
2. The Chief Medical Superintendent
North Eastern Railway Gonda (UP)
6. The opposite party filed M-5, letter signed by Sri P.B. Prasad, Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, North Eastern Railway, Lucknow, enclosing circular No. 2012/ F(E)III/I(i)/2 dated 29.10.2014 of the Railway Board. The management in letter M-5, referring circular dated 29.10.2014 has stated that the Railway Board, New Delhi vide their circular dated 29.10.2014 has directed to cover the employees who got temporary status prior to 01.01.2004 may be covered under Old Pension Scheme.
7. A copy of the M-5 was furnished to the workman's union. Shri D.P. Awasthi after going through the contents of letter, M-5 and circular dated 29.10.2014 showed willingness to withdraw the present industrial dispute being claim settled; and made an endorsement thereupon as under:
AWARD
"Since the relief claimed by the Union is accepted
by the Rly. management. Proceeding of case may
kindly be dropped."
1. By Order No. L-41011/75/2014-IR(B-I) dated: 09.10.2014 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 Anchal Sangthan Secretary, Rail Sevak Sangh, C/o Shri D.P. Awasthi, 49, 8. In view of the submission/endorsement of the workman's union for dropping of the proceedings, there is no grievance left with the workman's union as the present industrial dispute pertains to non-grant of old pension to the workman by the railway management and the management of the railway has granted the same vide2570 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] circular 2012/F(E)III/I(I)/2 dated 29.10.2014 of the Railway Board. Resultantly, the industrial dispute stands settled; and no relief is required to be given to the workman concerned. The reference under adjudication is answered accordingly.
9. Award as above.
DRM Office, Ashok Marg, Lucknow.
2. The Chief Medical Superintendent
North Eastern Railway Gonda (UP)
AWARD
LUCKNOW. RAKESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer 27th May, 2014.
नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1211.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार उत्तर पूर्व रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम नयायालय, लखनऊ के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 61/2014) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11/06/2015 प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-41011/74/2014-आई आर (बी-1)] सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 11th June, 2015
S.O. 1211.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 61/2014) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Lucknow as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of North Eastern Railway and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 11/06/2015.
[No. L-41011/74/2014-IR(B-I)] SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer 1. By Order No. L-41011/74/2014-IR(B-I) dated: 09.10.2014 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 Anchal Sangthan Secretary, Rail Sevak Sangh, C/o Shri D.P. Awasthi, 49, Tilak Nagar, Lucknow and Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer, North Eastern Railway, DRM Office, Ashok Marg, Lucknow & the Chief Medical Superintendent, North Eastern Railway, Gonda (UP) for adjudication.
2. The reference under adjudication is:
''क्या पूर्वोत्तर रेल प्रशासन, लखनऊ व गोंडा द्वारा श्री देवानंद, सफ़ ाईवाला को पुरानी पेंशन न देकर नई पेंशन दिया जाना न्यायोचित एवं वैध है? यदि नहीं तो कामगार किस राहत को पाने का हकदार है?''
3. On receipt of the reference order the workman's union was issued registered notice to file his statement of claim complete with relevant documents, list of reliance and witnesses before Tribunal on 26.12.2014 with an advance copy to the opposite party. The Secretary of the workman's union appeared before this Tribunal and requested for a date for filing of statement of claim.
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-
CUM-LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW
4. On successive dates the management also turned up. Since the case was related to grant of old pension scheme instead of new pension scheme, the parties were advised to settle the dispute amicably through Lok Sadalat. Accordingly, the case was taken up at Lok Adalat on 08.05.2015.
PRESENT :
RAKESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer
I.D. No. 61/2014 Ref. No. L-41011/74/2014-IR(B-I) dated: 09.10.2014 5. On 08.05.2015, Shri D.P. Awasthi, Secretary of the workman's union was present whereas the opposite parties were represented by Shri Upendra Kumar Sharma, Chief Welfare Officer.
BETWEEN
Anchal Sangthan Secretary Rail Sevak Sangh C/o Shri D.P. Awasthi 49, Tilak Nagar Lucknow. (Espousing cause of Sri Devanand)
AND
1. Sr. Dvisional personnel Officer
North Eastern Railway
6. The opposite party filed M-5, letter signed by Sri P.B. Prasad, Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, North Eastern Railway, Lucknow, enclosing circular No. 2012/ F(E)III/I(I)/2 dated 29.10.2014 of the Railway Board. The management in letter M-3, referring circular dated 29.10.2014 has stated that the Railway Board, New Delhi vide their circular dated 29.10.2014 has directed to cover the employees who got temporary status prior to 01.01.2004 may be covered under Old Pension Scheme.
7. A copy of the M-3 was furnished to the workman's union. Shri D.P. Awasthi after going through the contents[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2571
Reference: No. 06/1993
of letter, M-3 and circular dated 29.10.2014 showed willingness to withdraw the present industrial dispute being claim settled; and made an endorsement thereupon as under:
"Since the relief claimed by the Union is accepted by the Rly. management. The further proceeding of case may kindly be dropped."
Employer in relation to the management of Mithila Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Darbhanga
AND
Their Workmen.
Present : Sri R.K. Saran, Presiding Officer
Appearances:
For the Employees : None For the workman : None
State : Jharkhand Industry : Bank
Dated: 12/5/2015
AWARD
8. In view of the submission/endorsement of the workman's union for dropping of the proceedings, there is no grievance left with the workman's union as the present industrial dispute pertains to non-grant of old pension to the workman by the railway management and the management of the railway has granted the same vide circular 2012/F(E)III/I(I)/2 dated 29.10.2014 of the Railway Board. Resultantly, the industrial dispute stands settled; and no relief is required to be given to the workman concerned. the reference under adjudication is answered accordingly.
9. Award as above.
LUCKNOW. RAKESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer 18th May, 2015.
By order No. L-12011/41/1992-IR (B-3) dated 23/12/1992, the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section (1) and sub-section (2A) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1212.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मीथला क्षेत्रीय ग्रामीण बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम नयायालय-1, लखनऊ के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 6/1993) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-12011/41/1992-आई आर (बी-I)] सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 11th June, 2015
S.O. 1212.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 6/1993) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No. 1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Mithila Kshetriya Gramin Bank and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 11/06/2015.
[No. L-12011/41/1992-IR(B-I)] SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer "Whether the action of the management of Mithila Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Darbhanga in reducing the Cashier In charge Allowance from Rs. 488 Rs. 316 per month to Rs. 189 per month with effect from 01/01/1991 was justified? If not, to what relief(s), the workmen are entitled to?"
2. After receipt of the reference, both parties are noticed. But appearing for certain dates none appears subsequently. Case remain pending. It is felt that the disputes between the parties have been resolved in the meantime. Hence No Dispute Award is passed. Communicate.
R.K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1213.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार दक्षिण पूर्व रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम नयायालय, जबलपुर के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 229/2014) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
ANNEXURE
[सं॰ एल-41012/97/92-आई आर (बी-1)] सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अधिकारी BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.1, DHANBAD In the matter of reference U/S 10(1)(d)(2A) of I.D. Act, 1947.
New Delhi, the 11th June, 2015
S.O. 1213.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central2572 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 229/ 93) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of S.E. Railway and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 11/06/2015.
[No. L-41012/97/92-IR(B-I)] SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
IDNUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/R/229/93
Late Shri Sant Ram, Ex-Pointman, SE Railway Colony, PO Gevra, Distt, Bilaspur
LR-
Shri Debi Ram Kashyap, S/o Late Santram, Porter, Railway Station Naila, Distt. Janjgir Champa ...Workman Session Judge, Bilaspur. The revision was dismissed on 12-2-1973. That workman was not taken on duty from 1-4-1970. Despite he handed over copies of the judgements to IInd party No. 3, that he was available and willing to perform his duties. He was kept away from duty without any reasons. IInd party No. 3, issued chargesheet of major penalty dated 31-8-77. Enquiry was held to the charges against him. Charges were not proved. IInd party No. 3 did not take action on the enquiry report. He himself held that charges were proved. There was no material fact before IInd party No. 3 Disciplinary authority to hold that charges are proved. No reasons were given for reaching such decision. IInd party issued showcause notice dated 20-9-77. Reply given by workman was not considered. Without any material on record, IInd party No. 3 issued notice for removal from service dated 8-11-77. Workman was removed from service from 28-11-77 from post of pointsman.
Versus
Divisional Railway Manager, SE Railway, Bilaspur
...Management 3. Ist party workman reiterates that his removal is illegal. Workman was allowed to join duty from 28-12-77. He was retired from 11-10-89. He was not allowed actual benefits for the period 14-9-48 to 27-12-77 in violation of principles of natural justice. On such ground, workman prays that order of his removal be quashed. IInd party be directed to settle the retiral dues considering his service from 14-9-48 to 30-9-89. That IInd party be directed to pay wages for the period 1-9-70 to 27-12-77.
AWARD
Passed on this 13th day of May, 2015
1. As per letter dated 20-22/10/93 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section-10 of I.D. Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L- 41012/97-92-IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:
"Whether the action of the DRM, SE Railway, Bilaspur is justified in removing from service of Shri Sant Ram, Ex Pointman vide order No. ESE/OPTG/ 37 dated May, 1977? If not, to what relief the workman concerned is entitled to?"
2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to parties. Ist party workman submitted of claim at Page 3/1 to 3/4. Case of Ist party workman is that he was employed by Non-applicant appointing him as porter from 14-9-48. He was retired on 30-9-89. At the time of his retirement, he was working as pointsman at Kothari Road Station in Bilaspur. He further submits that while he was in service of IInd party, he was falsely implicated for theft of coal in the year 1970. He was placed under suspension. In criminal Case No. 1989/70, ADM(J) Bilaspur found him not guilty. Workman was discharged on 10-11-1972. The state filed a criminal revision in the case before the District and 4. IInd party filed Written Statement opposing claim of the workman at Page 4/1 to 4/8. Case of IInd party is that workman was initially appointed on 21-1-1957. His appointment on 14-9-48 is denied. Workman was removed from service as per order dated 8-11-77 imposing punishment for unauthorized absence. After appeal preferred by workman, he was re-appointed as fresh candidate from 28-12-77. The retirement of workman from 30-9-89 is not disputed. The averments of workman w.r.t. his involvement in theft case was not brought to the notice of IInd party. Police Authority or workman himself did not disclose this fact to the management. The material facts were suppressed about alleged incident of theft. IInd party claims ignorance about prosecution of workman in criminal case before AGM(J) Bilaspur. It is reiterated that chargesheet was issued to workman for unauthorized absence for the period 1-4-70 to 22-4-70. The Discipline and Appeal proceeding started in 1976 for charges of unuahtorized absence. Rest of the allegations of workman are denied. W.r.t. revision filed by State dismissed on 12-2-73, IInd party contents the documents in that regard are not available. IInd party reiterates that in enquiry conducted against workman for unauthorized absence Enquiry Officer submitted report that charges are not proved. The authority not agree with the findings of Enquiry Officer. The Disciplinary Authority held that charges of unauthorised absence against workman are[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2573 proved after issuing showcause notice. Punishment of removal was imposed against workman. In appeal, the workman was re-appointed. The order of removal was not set-aside. There was not question of giving retiral benefit to the workman from 14-9-48 to 30-9-89. It is submitted that workman was not appointed in the year 1948 rather he was appointed on 21-1-1957. As punishment of removal was imposed against workman, he is not entitled to retirement benefits prior to his period of his re- appointment. On such ground, IInd party prays for rejection of claim.
5. Workman submitted rejoinder at Page 5/1 to 5/2. Workman submits that he was prosecuted by Railway Protection Force Department, copy of judgement was received by IInd party on 29-3-76. He was unauthorisely absent from 22-3-1970 to 28-12-77. Enquiry Report itself support his contentions. The Disciplinary Authority has disagreed with the findings of the Disciplinary Authority that the charges are not proved against workman.
6. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below:—
(i) Whether the action of the
DRM, SE Railway, Bilaspur is In Negative
justified in removing from service
of Shri Sant Ram, Ex Pointman
is legal and proper?
(ii) If not, what relief the As per final
workman is entitled to?" order Note Page 6/2 reads "I have gone through the explanation to the showcause notice. There is no new point raised by the party which merits consideration. He has not made any attempt to advise the Railway Administration of the facts, neither met any officer nor made direct representation nor has any documentary proof of having communicated with the Railway Administration. He had evidently no intention of resuming duty. Under the circumstances, I hold that the proposed penalty of removal from service should hold good.
Document at Page 6/3 is copy of letter given by workman to Divisional Operating Suptd., SE Railway, Bilaspur dated 10-10-77. The poor worker who were unnecessarily put to harassment by court case but I have been finally exonerated from the charges. Out of my ignorance, I did not keep any record of any correspondence witgh the administration. I had complete confidence on the Station Master and I was in fact, guided by him and since I was not taken back on duty by Station Master, I did not deam it necessary to approach the administration in any other matter, since to my eyes, station master was the representative of the administration. As a matter of fact, I was waiting for communication from Station Master which was not forthcoming. It is only when I was exonerated by the Court that-I approached DOS/ Bilaspur with the copy of the Court's judgment requesting him to take me back on duty.
If I have remained absenting from duty, it is only because of my ignorance and complete confidence on the station master who failed to intimate me the true position nor did he give me correct guidance.
REASONS
7. The term of reference relates to legality of removal from service of Ist party workman. As per Para-6, 7 in statement of claim, chargesheet was issued to workman on 31-8-77. That charges were found not proved. The Disciplinary Authority not agreed with the findings of Enquiry Officer and held that the charges are proved, the punishment of removal from service was imposed. Case was not fixed for evidence of workman. The ordersheet shows that the case was fixed for argument since 2-6-2003. Workman died during pendency and his LRs are brought on record around 20-4-06. The case was repeatedly adjourned for many years for argument. The record shows issues were framed on 23-8-95. (1) Whether enquiry was just and proper, (2) whether management is entitled to lead evidence, (3) whether the charges of misconduct are proved on facts of the case, (4) whether the punishment awarded is proper and legal & (5) Relief and costs. As discussed above, the issue about legality of enquiry was not decided. Workman died during pendency. His LRs are brought on record. Evidence of parties is not recorded. However documents are produced by IInd party.
Document P-6/4 is note dated 26-9-77 submitted by Divisional Operating Supdt. Se Railway, Bilaspur. This starts with I do not agree with the findings of the Enquiry Officer. The delinquent is clearly in the habit of absonding from duty from time to time. After his arrest and release on bail, delinquent had worked for some days. At a certain point of time thereafter the delinquent was not taken on duty by the Station Master who referred his case to the Divisional Office for decision. Prima facie it would appear that the delinquent could have been on duty but for the refusal of the station master to take him back and or the negligence of the Divisional office in communicating decision to the station master. However further analysis of the case will reveal that the delinquent has actually preferred to remain absent. For all these days till he turned up with a copy of the court's judgment there was no trace of him. There is no evidence on record nor any communication which would show that the delinquent had made any attempt to advise the Railway Administration of the facts, except that on a very distant past, he had met the Station Master and might have been made enquiries about his case, after which he disappeared from the scene. He has never met any Officer nor made any direct representation nor has any documentary proof of2574 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] having communicated with the Railway Administration to finalise his case of not being taken back on duty. Clearly he had no intention of resuming duty. Now that the court has exonerated him the delinquent has sought to put the blame of his absence on the so called negligence of the Railway Administration and its agents.
I therefore held that his absence was willful and therefore wholly unauthorized and that the charges have been proved.
Document at Page 6/5 is copy of letter sent by workman to Divisional Supdt. S.E Railway, Bilaspur. Para-2 of the letter states that workman has written that he was appointed in 1957. He completed 20 years service with the administration. He was removed from service for unauthorized absence, he was helpless. He has requested to consider his case and given him chance to work as leverman as a fresh appointment when he would be eke out his livelihood and maintain his family.
Document at Page 6/6 is office note by Sr. Divisional Optd. Supdt. The notes that I have been gone through the mercy appeal of Sri Santram for re-appointment. He appears to have been reported longback to the station master for taking him back on duty but the Station Master had then made a reference to the Sr. DPO for orders to take him back. This unfortunately was not replied. Shri Santram thinking that he would have to report on duty subsequently when called by the office waited for a very long period. In the meantime he got acquittal in the court case and then reported to the Divisional Office with the judgment of the Court.
While removal from service was in order, keeping in view the unauthorized absence for a period of about 7 years, I feel that in view of his satisfactory service, and acquittal in the court case, he may be re-appointed as a pointsman.
8. Document 7/2 is copy of document 6/4 discussed supra holding workman's absence was wholly unauthorizede.
9. Document 7/3 is copy of report of Enquiry Officer. Enquiry Officer held unauthorized absence of worker from August 1970 to April 76 was not proved. Document 7/4 to 7/6 is copy of the judgment in criminal case by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur. Workman was accused No. 15. All accused were acquitted.
10. Counsel for workman submitted written notes at Page 8 that enquiry was initiated. The record of Enquiry Proceedings is not produced. Therefore legality of enquiry could not be decided separately. However documents discussed above shows that Ist party workman had approached Station Master. As workman was prosecuted in criminal case, he attended duty for period. The station master had not allowed him on duty. Those aspects were not considered by the Disciplinary Authority while imposing punishment of removal from service. Documents 6/4 produced on record by IInd party itself shows the delinquent could have been on duty but for refusal of Station Master and referred his case to the Divisional Office, punishment of removal from service is not justified. The past service of workman from 1957 to 8-11-77 was also overlooked by the authority while imposing punishment of removal. The circumstances discussed above points out that the punishment of removal imposed against workman is excessive and disproportionate to the charges of unauthorized absence. I the circumstances, punishment of removal from service deserves to be modified to punishment of compulsory retirement. Consequently workman deserves to be allowed retiral benefits from date of initial appointment to his date of order of removal 8.11.77. The claim for wages from 1970 to 1977 by workman cannot be allowed as per statement of workman himself that he was not working during the above period. On principles of no work no pay, claim of workman for the wages cannot be upheld. For above reasons, I record my finding in Point No. 1 in Negative.
11. In the result, award is passed as under:—
(1) The action of the management is not legal and
proper.
(2) Punishment of removal from service is modified to punishment of compulsory retirement IInd party is directed to consider service period of Ist party workman form 1957 to 8.11.77 for the purpose of retiral benefits and fix his retiral benefits. The amount of retiral benefits as per above order be paid to LRs of deceased workman within 2 months from date of award.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1214.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार वैशाली क्षेत्रीय ग्रामीण बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकाें और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, ध्नबाद के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 66/1993) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-12012/198/1992-आईआर(बी-I)]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 11th June, 2015
S.O. 1214.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 66/1993) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No. 1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Vailshali Kshetriya Gramin Bank and their workman, received by the Central Government on 11/06/2015.
[No. L-12012/198/1992-IR(B-I)] SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2575
ANNEXURE
New Delhi, the 11th June, 2015
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT
No.1, DHANBAD
In the matter of reference U/s 10(1) (d) (2A) of I.D. Act 1947
Reference No. 66/1993
Employer in relation to the management of Vaishali Kshetriya Gramin Bank
AND
S.O. 1215.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 7/2012) of the Ernakulam as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of State Bank of India and their workman, received by the Central Government on 11/06/2015.
[No. L-12025/01/2015-IR(B-I)] SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
Their workmen
Present :
Sri R.K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
ERNAKULAM
Appearances:
For the Employers : Sri R.R. Prasad Advocated
For the workman : None
State: Jharkhand Industry : Bank Present: Shri D. Sreevallabhan, B.Sc., L.L.B. Presiding Officer
(Friday the 15th day of May, 2015/25th Vaisakha, 1937)
ID 7/2012
Dated 11/5/2015 Petitioner : Smt. Prabha Rajan
AWARD
By order No. L-12012/198/1992-IR(B-3) dated 12/02/1993, the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:
W/o Shri Rajan Veluthedath House Old St. Augustine Road Kochi-682018 By M/s. HB Shenoy Associates
Respondent : The General Manager
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of Vailshali Kshetriya Gramin Bank in terminating the service of Shri Anand Bihari w.e.f 10.03.1992 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to and from what date?"
State Bank of India Local Head Officer S S Kovil Road, Thampanoor Thiruvananthapuram-695001
By M/s George Thomas Mevada & Associates
This case coming up for final hearing on 30.04.2015 and this Tribunal-cum-Labour Court on 15.05.2015 passed the following:
AWARD
2. After receipt of the reference, both parties are noticed. But appearing for certain dates none appears subsequently. Case remain pending. It is felt that the disputes between the parties have been resolved in the meantime. Hence No Dispute Award is passed. Communicate.
R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1215.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, अरूनाकुलम के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 7/2012) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-12025/01/2015-आईआर(बी-I)] सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अधिकारी As the concillation proceeding in respect of the industrial dispute raised by the petitioner claiming to be the workman of the management bank ended in failure and without reference she filed this petition under Section 2A (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
2. The allegations in the petition, in breif, are that the workman was employed in the subourdinate cadre in the services of the management bank as a Peon at its Lissie Hospital Branch at Ernakulam in the year 1993. Ever since she had been employed continuously and regularly against the regular and permanent vacancy unit the termination of her service on 01.01.2011 orally by the Branch Manager. Agrieved by the termination of her service she had raised an industrial dispute by submitting2576 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] an application to the Assistantg Labour Commissioner (Central), Kochi on 14.02.2011. Pursuant to the filing of that application the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Kochi, who is also the Conciliation Officer, convened conciliation proceedings in the dispute. But it ended in failure on 23.12.2011. Hence she filed this petition before this Tribunal challenging the leglity and justifiability of the action of the management in termiating her services w.e.f. 01.01.2011. The termination of her service amount to retrenchment and the same was effected in violation of Section. 25F, 25G and 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, paragraphs 493, 507, 522, 523 and 524 of the Sastry Award. Management was in the continuous habit of employing workmen as temporaries against permanent vacancy one after another and retrenching them by employing new hands in the same way violating the statutory provisions in Awards and Bipartite Settlements. It amounts to unfair labour practice prohibited under Section 25T of the Industrial Disputes Act and violative of paragraphs 20.7 and 20.8 of First Bipartite Settlement and also paragraphs 495 and 522 of Sastry Award. The termination is illegal, unjust and void and hence she is to be reinstated in service with full back wages, continuity of service and other attendant benefits.
3. Management filed written statement denying the allegations as to her employment in the management bank and the termination of her service on 01.01.2011. It is further contended that she was never been an employee of the management bank and there was no master and servant relationship between her and the management. She was not in the pay roll of the management. The recruitment and employment of subordinate cadre employees is done strictly in accordance with the procedure laid out by the management from time to time. She was never employed or engaged as a subordinate staff of the management. As she was never in the service the question of termination or retrenchment does not arise at all. She had raised an industrial dispute against the management by submitting conciliation application on 14.02.2011 to the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Kochi. The conciliation proceedings ended in failure as she was not an employee in the Lissie Hospital Branch of the management at any point of time. There was no question of any termination by complying with the procedure provided under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act. There is no question of payment of compensation to her. Since she was not at all a workman the issue of violation of the provisions of Sastry Award does not arise. She used to supply tea to the members of the staff. The supply of tea, maintenance of library etc. are monitored and controlled by the Local Implementation Committee constituted by the staff of the Lisie Hospital Branch. It is an independent private body formed in the branch and it has nothing to do with the management. It is not an industry. It has got the freedom to engage any person to execute their works. The management has no responsibility or say in the matter. Management is not conducting any statutory canteen in that branch and there is no such requirement under any status. The persons so engaged are not entitled to claim regularisation as an employee in the services of the management bank. The workman is one such person and hence she cannot claim absorption as an employees of the management or claim any right or privilege as a workman. The discondinuation of her temporary service by the Local Implemenation Committee shall have no bearing at all on the management. The provisions of clause 20.12 of the First Bipartile Settlement dated 19.10.1966 have no relevance in the matter. The claim made by her is legally and factually unsustainable and hence she is not entitled to any relief.
4. Workman filed replication denying the contentions in the written statement and reiterating the allegations in the petition.
5. For the purpose of deciding this ID the workman was got herself examined as WWI. No documentary evidence was adduced from her side. On the side of the management one witness was examined as MWI and Exts. M1 to M30 were marked. After closing the evidence arguments for both sides were heard.
6. The points for determination are :
(i) Whether the workman was employed at any time against any regular and permanent vacancy in the Lissie Hospital Branch of the management bank?
(ii) Whether she was illegally terminated on 01.01.2011 by the Management in voilation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as alleged in the claim statement?
(iii) To what relief, if any, the workman is entitled to?
7. Point No. (i): It is the case of the workman that she was employed as a peon in the subordinate cadre in the Lissie Hospital Branch of the management bank in the year 1993 and ever since she had been employed continously and regularly against the regular and permanent vacancy. Since the management would deny her employment as such the burden is on her to prove that she was employed by the management as alleged by her.
8. At the very outset it is to be pointed out that there is absolutely no reliable evidence in this case to prove her engagement as a peon in the services of the management bank. There is no order of appointment or any other document to prove the same. The workman during her cross examination when examined as WWI has stated that there is no document in her possession to prove that she was employed in the Lissie Hospital branch of the management bank. The version given by her during her cross examination that she had worked there only in leave vacancy of peon would also disprove the case put[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2577 forward by her that she was continuously engaged against a regular and permanent vacancy.
9. There is a prescribed procedure for appointment in a permanent vacancy. Workman has no case that she was employed after observing any such procedure. Exts. M1 to M30 will also go to show that she was not employed as a permanent/temporary subordinate staff in the management bank. Regarding the payment of wages contradictory version was given by her during her examination. In para 5 of the proof affidavit it is averred that she was paid wages regularly on weekly basis on Saturdays. During her cross examination it was stated by her that the wages was paid on montly basis and payment of weekly wages was made only at times.
The burden to prove the same is on the workman and the same was not discharged by adducing any convincing evidence. The documents sought to be produced will also not help her to prove that there was continuous engagement for 240 days in the year preceeding the date of termination. Workman has failed to prove that she was employed in the services of the management bank as alleged by her and that she was illegally terminated by the management without complying with the procedure under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act.
13. Point No. (iii):—In the result an award is passed holding that the workman was not employed by the management bank in the Lisie Hospital Branch and was not illegally terminated and hence she is not entitled to any relief.
The Award will come into force one month after it
publication in the Official Gazette.
Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and passed by me on this the 15th day of May, 2015.
D. SREEVALLABHAN, Presiding Officer
APPENDIX
Witness for the workman
WW1 23.12.2014 Smt. Prabha Rajan
Witness for the management
10. According to the management she was engaged by the Local Implementation Committee in the canteen in the Lissie Hospital branch. During her cross examination WWI also would admit that she was preparing tea and hot water for drinking in the canteen. During the cross examination of MWI there was an attempt to bring out that the canteen was run by the management bank. No such case was put forward by the workman in her pleadings. The management has got a specific case that the canteen run by the Local Implementation Committee is an independent private body formed in the branch and it is having no connection with the management bank. There is no case for the workman that it is a statutory canteen run by the management. The engagement in the canteen by the Local Implementation Committee cannot be said to be on behalf of the management.
MW1 03.03.2015 Shri C.J. Roy
Exhibits for the workman NIL
Exhibits for the management
11. There is no reliable evidence in this case to prove that she was continuosly employed in the services of the management bank against a regular and permanent vacancy to do regular and permanent nature of duties from the year 1993 as alleged in the claim statement. Hence it cannot be held that she was employed in the service of the management at any point of time.
12. Point No. (ii):—It is the case of the workman that she was illegally terminated on 01.01.2011 by the management in violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act. It has come out in evidence that she was engaged in the canteen by the Local Implementation Committee of the management bank. She has no case either in the pleadings or during the course of her examination that she was engaged as a casual labour by the management bank. Even if she was engaged as a casual labour at any time in the services of the management bank that will not enable her to claim that she is liable to be terminated without complying with the procedure under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act in the absence of any proof as to her engagement continuously for a period of one year or for 240 days in the year preceding the date of termination. There is absolutely no evidence in this case to prove the same.
M1 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of January, 1993
M2 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of February, 1993
M3 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of January, 1994
M4 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of February, 1994
M5 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of January, 19952578 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] M6 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of February, 1995
M7 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of January, 1996
M8 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of February, 1996
M9 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of January, 1997
M10 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of February, 1997
M11 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of January, 1998
M12 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of February, 1998
M13 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of January, 1999
M14 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of February, 1999
M15 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of January, 2000
M16 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of February, 2000
M17 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of January, 2001
M18 — Copy of the relevant pages in the ledger for Establishment Charges of the Lisie Hospital Branch of the management bank as to the month of February, 2001
M19 — Copy of the relevant pages with the entries as to the subscriptions to the State Bank Employees' Provident Fund & Pension Fund for the month of January, 2002
M20 — Copy of the relevant pages with the entries as to the subscriptions to the State Bank Employees' Provident Fund & Pension Fund for the month of September, 2003
M21 — Copy of the relevant pages with the entries as to the subscriptions to the State Bank Employees' Provident Fund & Pension Fund for the month of February, 2004
M22 — Copy of Memorandum dated 23.03.2005 issued by the State Bank of India, Lisie Hospital Branch to Personnel Section, State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Ernakulam as to Imperial Bank of India Employees Provident & Guarantee Funds for the month of March, 2005.
M23 — Copy of the relevant pages with the entries as to the subscriptions to the State Bank Employees' Provident Fund & Interest for the month of August, 2006
M24 — Copy of the pay sheet of salaries and
allowances for the month of July, 2005
M25 — Copy of the relevant pages of the Salary Register of State Bank of India, Lisie Hospital Branch for the month of January, 2002
M26 — Copy of the relevant pages of the Salary Register of State Bank of India, Lisie Hospital Branch for the month of February, 2007
M27 — Copy of the relevant pages of the Salary Register of State Bank of India, Lisie Hospital Branch for the month of August, 2007
M28 — Copy of the relevant pages of the Salary Register of State Bank of India, Lisie Hospital Branch for the month of June, 2008
M29 — Copy of the computer printout of salary register of State Bank of India, Lisie Hospital Branch for the month of August, 2009
M30 — Copy of the computer printout of salary register of State Bank of India, Lisie Hospital Branch for the month of December, 2010[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2579 नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1216.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ त्रावनकोर के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, अरूनाकुलम के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 3/2015) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-12012/61/2014-आईआर(बी-I)] सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 11th June, 2015
S.O. 1216.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 3/2015) of the Central. Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Ernakulam as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of State Bank of Travancore and their workman, received by the Central Government on 11/06/2015.
[No. L-12012/61/2014-IR(B-I)] SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Government of India/Ministry of Labour vide Order No.-L-12012/61/ 2014-IR(B-I) dated 31.12.2014 referred the industrial dispute scheduled thereunder for adjudication to this tribunal.
2. The dispute is:
"Whether the action of the management of M/s. State Bank of Travancore in removing Smt. Sheeba Glory from its services before she attained the age of superannuations is fair and justifiable. If not, what relief she is entitled to?"
3. After receipt of summons workman entered appearance but did not file any claim statement in spite of granting adjournments. Afterwards the workman remained absent. Management also remained absent. Hence it can be treated that there exists no dispute and so a 'no dispute award' is passed in this case.
4. Reference is answered accordingly.
The award will come into force one month after its
publication in the Official Gazette.
ANNEXURE
Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and passed by me on this the 21st day of May, 2015.
D. SREEVALLABHAN, Presiding Officer BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM
नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2015
Present :
Shri D. Sreevallabhan, B.Sc., LL.B, Presiding Officer
(Thursday, the 21st day of May, 2015/31st Vaisakha, 1937)
ID 3/2015
Workman : Smt. Sheeba Glory
Chandanavila Velimon PO Kundara Kollam (Kerala)-691511 By Adv. Shri R. Lekshmana Iyer
Management : The Deputy General Manager
State Bank of Travancore Zonal Office, Poojappura Trivandrum
This case coming up for final hearing on 21.05.2015 and this Tribunal-cum-Labour Court on the same day passed the following:
का.आ. 1217.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, मुम्बई के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 50/2007) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-12012/115/2007-आईआर(बी-I)]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi, 11th June, 2015
S.O. 1217.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 50/2007) of the Central. Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of State Bank of India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 11/06/2015.
AWARD
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the
[No. L-12012/115/2007-IR(B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer2580 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2 MUMBAI
Present
K.B. Katake Presiding Officer
Reference No. CGIT-2/50 of 2007
Employers in relation to the management of State
Bank of India
The Chief General Manager State Bank of India, Local Head Office Synergy, Plot No. C-6, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex (PB No. 8123) Bandra (E) Mumbai-400051.
AND
Rs. 93,313/- in the account of one of the customer of the Bank. It is also alleged that the workman has withdrawn an amount of Rs. 50,000 from the said account on 5/8/2003. When inquiry was started by the official of the Bank, the workman confessed that he had fraudulently credited the amount in the S.B. A/C of Mr. Gama Bind and had withdrawn Rs. 50,000 from the said account. He has given letter to that effect to the Branch Manager. For the said fraud and misappropriation the workman was suspended. Domestic inquiry was held against him. He was held guilty and on the basis of report of I.O. the disciplinary authority terminated the services of the workman. The workman raised industrial dispute. As conciliation failed, on report of ALC © the Central Labour Ministry sent the reference to this Tribunal. In Award Part-I, the inquiry was held fair and proper and the findings of the Inquiry Officer are declared not perverse and the parties were directed to argue or lead evidence on the point of quantum of punishment.
Their Workmen
3. In this Part-II Award following are the remaining issues for my determination. I record my fingings thereon for the reasons to follow:
Sl. No. Issues Findings
The Dy. General Secretary State Bank of India Staff Union (Mumbai Circle) Synergy, Plot No. C-6, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex PB No. 8123 Bandra (E) Mumbai-400051.
3. Whether the punishment of Yes.
dismissal is shockingly disproportionate to the proved misconduct?
Appearances:
For the Employer : Mr. M.G. Nadkarni,
Advocate.
For the Workmen : Mr. Abhay Kulkarni
Advocate.
Mumbai, dated the 8th April 2015.
4. Whether the workman is No.
entitled to be reinstated in the service with full back- wages as prayed for?
5. What order? As per final
order.
AWARD PART-II
REASONS
Issues No. 3:
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment by its Order No. L-12012/115/2007-IR(B-I), dated 10.10.2007 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:
"Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India in dismissing Shri P.K. Prasad, Assistant (Cash/Accounts) from the service vide order dated 24/06/2006 is legal, proper, justified and in proportionate to the magnitude of misconduct? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled?"
2. The second party workman was the employee of the first party Bank. It was alleged that the second party workman had made flase and fraudulent credit entry of 4. According to the workman his confessional statement was written under the direction official Mr. Phansekar. It is further submitted that the workman has sent letter of retracting his alleged confessional statement and the witness of the Bank has admitted the same. In the circumstances the workman submits that the punishment of termination is shockingly disproportionate. It is further submitted on behalf of the workman that as his services were terminated, he and his family member suffered grave hardship and financial losses. He could not get any other service due to the stigma on his career. Currently workman is residing at Patna with his brother. His annual income is merely 96,000/-. He is in dire need of the job to support himself and his family. Therefore he prays that Bank be directed to reinstate him with full back wages.
[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2581capacity, the highest degree of integrity and
trustworthiness is a must and unexceptionable."
5. As against this it was submitted on behalf of the first party that the workman is found guilty by the Inquiry Officer for the alleged charges of fraud. The inquiry was held fair and proper and findings of the I.O. were also declared not perverse. In the circumstances it was submitted on behalf of the first party that the point of retracted confession needs no consideration. According to him confession was by free will and voluntary. Furthermore it was consistent to the entries in the account books and the circumstances on record. Therefore the Inquiry Officer rightly relied thereon and held the workman guilty. Therefore this Tribunal also in Part-I Award declared that the findings of the I.O. as not perverse.
9. The Ld. Adv. for the first party further submitted that once Bank lost confidence for serious misconduct such employees should not be continued in the service. In support of his argument Ld. Adv. resorted to Apex Court ruling in Janatha Bazaar South Canara Central Co- operative Wholesale Stores Ltd. & Ors. V/s. Secretary, Sahakari Noukarana Sangh & Ors. 2000 IILLJ 1395 wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated its earlier view taken in Punjab Dairy Development case (1997) 6 SCC 159. Wherein the Hon'ble Court has observed that;
"In view of proof of misconduct a necessary
consequence will be that management has lost
confidence that the workman would truthfully and
faithfully carry out his duties and consequently the
Labour Court rightly declined to exercise the
power under Section 11-A of the I.D. Act to grant
relief with minor penalty."
6. In this respect Ld. Adv. for the first party submitted that the workman was the employee of a Bank and supposed to work honestly with due diligence and integrity and dishonest person should not be allowed to work in the Banking field. In support of his argument the Ld. Adv. resorted to Apex Court ruling in Union Bank of India V/s Vishwamohan (1998) 4 SCC 310 wherein on the point Hon'ble Court observed that;
10. The Ld. Adv. also cited following rulings on the point of punishment. They are:
(1) Suresh Pathrella V/s. Oriental Bank of Commerce (2006) 10 SCC 572.
(2) State Bank of India V/s. Bela Bagchi & Ors. (2005) 7 SCC 435.
"It needs to be emphasized that in the banking
business absolute devotion, diligence, integrity and
honesty need to be preserved by every bank
employee and in particular the bank Officer. If this
is not observed, the confidence of the public
depositors would be impaired."
7. The Ld. Adv. further submitted that, no leniency can be shown in such type of fraud, misappropriation and corruption. In support of his argument Ld. Adv. relied upon Apex Court ruling in Municipal Corporation Bharadurgarh V/s. Krishnan Bihari and Ors. AIR 1996 SC 1249 wherein on the point in para 4 of the judgment the Hon'ble Court observed that;
(3) Regional Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation V/s. Sohanlal (2004) 4 SCC 218.
(4) U.P. State Road Transport Corporation V/s. Vinod Kumar 2008 (2) Mh. L.J. 161
(5) State Bank of Mysore & Ors. V/s. M.C. Krishnappa (2011) 7 SCC 325.
"... in case involving corruption there cannot be
any other punishment than dismissal. Any
sympathy shown in such cases is totally uncalled
for and opposed to public interest. The amount
misappropriated may be small or large, it is an act
misappropriation that is relevant."
8. On the point Ld. Adv. for the first party also cited another Apex Court ruling in Ganesh Santa Ram Sirur V/s. State Bank of India & Anr. AIR 2005 SC 314. In para 33 of the judgment Hon'ble Court referred its earlier judgement 2003 (3) SCC 605 and reiterated the observations;
11. In all these judgments the Hon'ble Court has held that the Bank employee should discharge his duties with utmost integrity, honesty, devotion and diligence and to do nothing which is unbecoming of a bank official. In respect of dishonest employee the Hon'ble Court also held that, to continue such an employee in the employment of Corporation by virtue of judicial verdict would be an act of misplaced sympathy which can find no foundation in law of equity.
"If the charged employee holds a position of trust
where honesty and integrity are inbuilt
requirements of functioning, it would not be proper
to deal with the matter leniently. Misconduct in
such cases has to be dealt with iron hands. Where
the person deals with public money or is engaged
in financial transactions or acts in a fiduciary
12. In the light of above cited rulings the Ld. Adv. for the first party further submitted that the disciplinary authority has rightly imposed the punishment of dismissal. He further submitted that, in the light of these rulings, the request of the workman to take lenient view and to reinstate him in service does not stand to reasons. As against this the Ld. Adv. for the second party brought to my notice that it has come on record that the second party workman has confessed that, he had fraudulently made the false credit entry and had withdrawn the amount of2582 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, जबलपुर के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 22/07) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-12012/81/2006-आई आर (बी-I)] सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 11th June, 2015
S.O. 1218.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 22/07) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Kshetriya Gramin Bank and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 11/06/2015.
[No. L-12012/81/2006-IR(B-I)] SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
Rs. 50,000/-. The Ld. Adv. for the second party also pointed out that it is the first act of misconduct on the part of the workman. He further submitted that, the workman has not only confessed his guilt but has also deposited the amount of Rs. 50,000/- which alleged to have been withdrawn fraudulently. In the circumstances he submitted that due to dismissal from service his entire family is being ruined and lenient view needs to be taken. I take into account all these facts. I have also given due consideration that it is first incident of misconduct of the workman. He has not only confessed but also deposited the amount alleged to have withdrawn fraudulently. In the circumstances as per present trend in criminal jurisprudence reformative theory of punishment is being adopted. Not only the workman but his entire family is being ruined as the workman falls prey to his lust of money. All these circumstances no doubt lead this Tribunal to take lenient view. At the same time the ratio laid down in the above referred rulings cannot be lost sight of. Where in it is observed that, such employee should not be reinstated or continued in service of a Bank. Reinstatement would amount to sympathy uncalled for as has been observed by Hon'ble Apex Court in one of the above referred rulings.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
No. CGIT/L/R/27/07
Shri Dilip Garhwal, S/o Shri J.L. Garhwal, R/o Kilapura Ward, Sohagpur, Distt. Hoshangabad ...Workman
Versus
13. In this respect in the light of ratio laid down in the above ruling the workman cannot be reinstated in service. At the same time, I take into consideration that there was no loss to the Bank and the workman has fairly confessed the act of misconduct. It was his first misconduct and poverty of workman seems the reason behind the act of misconduct. In this back drop instead of dismissal to meet the end of justice, I think it proper to award the punishment of compulsory retirement with all pensionary benefits as per rules so that workman would not be in service of the Bank at the same time his family would not be ruined and he would get some financial assistance in support of his family. Thus I decide the issue no. 3 partly in the affirmative and issue no. 4 in the negative and proceed to pass the following order:
The Chairman, Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Head Office, Mangalwara, Hoshangabad ...Management
AWARD Passed on this 13th day of May 2015
ORDER
I. The reference is partly allowed with no order as
to cost.
II. The punishment of dismissal from service is substituted by punishment of compulsory retirement with all pensionary benefits.
Date: 08 04.2015
K.B. KATAKE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1218.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14)की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार क्षेत्रीय ग्रामीण बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच 1. As per letter dated 6-2-07 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section-10 of I.D. Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-12012/ 81/2006-IR(B-I). The dispute under reference relates to:
"Whether the action of the management of Chairman, Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Hoshangabad in terminating the services of Shri Dilip Garhwal, S/o J.L. Garhwal as Authorised Collection Agent w.e.f. 14-2-2004 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to?"
2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. Ist party workman despite of repeated notices failed to participate in reference proceeding. He is proceeded exparte on 9-9-2011.
[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 25833. IInd party management filed exparte Written Statement. Case of IInd party is that it is merged in Central MP Gramin Bank having its head office at Chhindwara. The management Kshetriya Gramin Bank started Gramin Nidhi Deposit Scheme. Ist party workman was engaged on temporary basis as an agent under the scheme. He was entitled to 2% of total collection made by him each month. The commission was paid in Ist week of the month. The scheme was introduced during the period 1986 to 2000 in 15 branches of the Bank. The interest in the scheme was revised 13% of term deposit. On the saving Bank Deposit, the rate of interest was 5%. New review of the scheme was taken, the cost was found 6.3% for implementation of the scheme. The Bank was constrained to close down the scheme w.e.f 14-2-04. The decision was published in the newspaper. The agreement were entered between agents and the management. The agents were terminated. It is reiterated that the workman was engaged on temporary basis. He was paid commission. Ist party is not covered as workman under Section 2(s) of ID Act. His discontinuation is covered under Section 2(oo)(bb) of ID Act. IInd party referred to ratio held in various cases. IInd party submits that there was delay in raising dispute, no dispute award be passed.
4. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under. My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below:—
(i) Whether the action of the In Affirmative
management of Chairman, Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Hoshangabad in terminating the services of Shri Dilip Garhwal, S/o J.L. Garhwal as Authorised Collection Agent w.e.f. 14.2.2004 is legal and justified?
(ii) If not, what relief the workman Workman is is entitled to?" not entitled to any relief.
failed to establish that termination of his service suffers from illegality. Therefore I record my finding in Point No. 1 in Affirmative.
7. In the result, award is passed as under:—
(1) The action of the management of Chairman, Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Hoshangabad in terminating the services of Shri Dilip Garhwal, S/o J.L. Garhwal as Authorised Collection Agent w.e.f. 14-2-2004 is legal and proper.
(2) Workman is not entitled to any relief.
R.B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1219.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार डी॰आर॰एम॰ई॰ रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, धनबाद के पंचाट संदर्भ संख्या (48/2001) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-41012/241/2000-आईआर(बी-I)] सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 11th June, 2015
S.O. 1219.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 48/2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, No. 1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of D.R.M.E. Railway and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 11/06/2015.
[No. L-41012/241/2000-IR(B-I)] SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
REASONS
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, DHANBAD
In the matter of reference U/s 10(1)(d)(2A) of I.D. Act, 1947
Reference: No. 48/2001
5. Though termination of service of Ist party workman is challenged, as per the terms of reference, Ist party workman failed to file statement of claim. It is proceeded exparte on 9-9-2011. IInd party filed Written Statement contending that Ist party workman was temporarily engaged as per the deposit scheme. The cost of the scheme was high therefore management decided to close the scheme.
Employer in relation to the management of Eastern Railway Dhanbad,
AND
Their workmen.
Present :
6. Management's witness Shri Rajesh Kumar Agrawal filed affidavit of evidence covering above contentions in Written Statement. As workman is proceeded exparte, he has not participated in reference proceeding, I accept evidence of the witness of IInd party. The workman has Shri R.K. Saran, Presiding Officer2584 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Appearances:
For the Employers : Shri Sanjay Kumar Advocate For the workman : Shri D.K. Verma, Advocate
State : Jharkhand Industry : Railway
Dated: 20/05/2015
New Delhi, the 11th June, 2015
AWARD
S.O. 1220.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 63/2014) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Lucknow as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of North Eastern Railway and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 11/06/2015.
[No. L-41011/77/2014-IR(B-I)] SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
By Order No. L-41012/241/2000-IR(B-I) dated 15/02/2001, the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-
CUM-LABOUR COURT LUCKNOW
PRESENT :
Rakesh Kumar, Presiding Officer
I.D. No. 63/2014
Ref. No. L-41011/77/2014-IR(B-1) dated: 14.10.2014
BETWEEN
"Whether the action of D.R.M.E. Rly, Dhanbad in not regularizing the services of Workmen, S/Shri Ramnath Yadav, Gorakh Yadav and 19 others working as Parcel Porters under contract in Parcel office at Dhanbad Railway Station, Dhanbad, in view of the verdict of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in writ petititon (civil) No. 90/91, is justified, legal and proper?' If not to what relief the workmen are entitled to?"
List of workmen
1. Ayodhya Chaudhi 2. Sugriv Yadav 3. Gorakh Yadav 4. Ramnath Yadav 5. Shri Bhagwan Paswan 6. Dayasagar Yadav 7. Bhola Yadav 8. Basist Yadav 9. Sumer Yadav 10. Ram Surat Yadav 11. Rama Shankar Yadav 12. Harendra Yadav 13. Rajendra Yadav-I 14. Kundan Yadav 15. Rajendra Yadav-II.
2. After receipt of the reference, both parties are noticed. But appearing for certain dates, Ld. Counsel for the workman sumbits that workman is not interested to contest the case. It is felt that the disputes between the parties have been resolved in the meantime. Hence No Dispute Award is passed. Communicate.
R.K. SARAN, Presiding Officer Anchal Sangthan, Secretary Rail Sevak Sangh C/o Shri D.P. Awasthi 49, Tilak Nagar, Lucknow.
(Espousing cause of Shri Rakesh Chandra)
AND
1. Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer
North Eastern Railway DRM Office, Ashok Marg, Lucknow.
2. The Chief Medical Superintendent
North Eastern Railway Gonda (UP)
AWARD
नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1220.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार उत्तर पूर्व रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, लखनऊ के पंचाट संदर्भ संख्या (63/2014) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-41011/77/2014-आईआर(बी-I)] सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अधिकारी 1. By Order No. L-41011/77/2014-IR(B-I) dated: 14.10.2014 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 Anchal Sangthan, Secretary, Rail Sevak Sangh, C/o Shri D.P. Awasthi, 49, Tilak Nagar, Lucknow and Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer, North Eastern Railway, DRM Office, Ashok Marg, Lucknow & the Chief Medical Superintendent, North Eastern Railway, Gonda (UP) for adjudication.
[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 25852. The reference under adjudication is:
''क्या पूर्वोत्तर रेल प्रशासन, लखनऊ व गोंडा द्वारा श्री रमेश चन्द्र पुत्र मथुरा प्रसाद, सफ़ाईवाला को पुरानी पेंशन न देकर नई पेंशन दिया जाना न्यायोचित एवं वैध है? यदि नहीं तो कामगार किस राहत को पाने का हकदार है?''
3. On receipt of the reference order the workman's union was issued registered notice to file his statement of claim complete with relevant documents, list of reliance and witnesses before Tribunal on 26.12.2014 with an advance copy to the opposite party. The Secretary of the workman's union appeared before this Tribunal and requested for a date for filing of statement of claim.
4. On successive dates the management also turned up. Since the case was related to grant of old pension scheme instead of new pension scheme, the parties were advised to settle the dispute amicably through Lok Adalat. Accordingly, the case was taken up at Lok Adalat on 08.05.2015.
5. On 08.05.2015, Shri D.P. Awasthi, Secretary of the workman's union was present whereas the opposite parties were represented by Shri Upendera Kumar Sharma, Chief Welfare Officer.
9. Award as above.
Lucknow 27th May, 2014.
RAKESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1221.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार उत्तर पूर्व रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् ा में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण लखनऊ के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 29/2014) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-41011/29/2014-आईआर(बी-I)]
सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 11th June, 2015
S.O. 1221.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 29/2014) of the Central. Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Lucknow as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of North Eastern Railway and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 11/06/2015.
[No. L-41011/29/2014-IR(B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-
CUM-LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW
6. The opposite party filed M-5, letter signed by Shri P.B. Prasad, Senior Divisional Pesonnel Officer, North Eastern Railway, Lucknow, enclosing circular No. 2012/F/ (E) III/I(1)/2 dated 29.10.2014 of the Railway Board. The management in letter M-3, referring circular dated 29.10.2014 has stated that the Railway Board, New Delhi vide their circular dated 29.10.2014 has directed to cover the employees who got temporary status prior to 01.10.2004 may be covered under Old Pension Scheme.
PRESENT :
RAKESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer
I.D. No. 29/2014
Ref. No. L-41011/29/2014-IR(B-1) dated: 09.04.2014
BETWEEN
7. A copy of the M-3 was furnished to the workman's union. Shri D.P. Awasthi after going through the contents of letter, M-3 and circular dated 29.10.2014 showed willingness to withdraw the present industrial dispute being claim settled; and made an endorsement thereupon as under:
"Since the relief claimed by the Union has been accepted by the opposite parties, the further proceedings of this case may kindly be dropped."
8. In view of the submission/endorsement of the workman's union for dropping of the proceedings, there is no grievance left with the workman's union as the present industrial dispute pertains to non-grant of old pension to the workman by the railway management and the management of the railway has granted the same vide circular 2012/F(E)III/I(I)/2 dated 29.10.2014 of the Railway Board. Resultantly, the industrial dispute stands settled; and no relief is required to be given to the workman concerned. The reference under adjudication is answered accordingly.
Anchal Sangthan Secretary Rail Sevak Sangh C/o Shri D.P. Awasthi 49, Tilak Nagar Lucknow. (Espousing cause of Sri Akhilesh)
AND
1. Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer
North Eastern Railway DRM Office, Ashok Marg, Lucknow.
2. The Chief Medical Superintendent
North Eastern Railway Gonda (UP)2586 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 13, 2015/JYAISTHA 23, 1937 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
AWARD
1. By order No. L-41011/29/2014-IR(B-I) dated: 09.04.2014 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 Anchal Sangthan Secretary, Rail Sevak Sangh, C/o Shri D.P. Awasthi, 49, Tilak Nagar, Lucknow and Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer, North Eastern Railway, DRM Office, Ashok Marg, Lucknow & the Chief Medical Superintendent, North Eastern Railway, Gonda (UP) for adjudication.
2. The reference under adjudication is:
''क्या पूर्वोत्तर रेल प्रशासन, लखनऊ व गोंडा द्वारा श्री अखिलेश पुत्र श्री जयश्री राम उग्रह तिवारी, सफ़ाईवाला को पुरानी पेंशन न देकर नई पेंशन दिया जाना न्यायोचित एवं वैध है? यदि नहीं तो कामगार किस राहत को पाने का हकदार है?''
3. On receipt of the reference order the workman's union was issued registered notice to file his statement of claim complete with relevant documents, list of reliance and witnesses before Tribunal on 25.06.2014 with an advance copy to the opposite party. The Secretary of the workman's union appeared before this Tribunal and requested for a date for filing of statement of claim.
4. On successive dates the management also turned up. Since the case was related to grant of old pension scheme instead of new pension scheme, the parties were advised to settle the dispute amicably through Lok Adalat. Accordingly, the case was taken up at Lok Adalat on 08.05.2015.
5. On 08.05.2015, Shri D.P. Awasthi, Secretary of the workman's union was present whereas the opposite parties were represented by Shri Upendera Kumar Sharma, Chief Welfare Officer.
is no grievance left with the workman's union as the present industrial dispute pertains to non-grant of old pension to the workman by the railway management and the management of the railway has granted the same vide circular 2012/F(E)III/I(I)/2 dated 29.10.2014 of the Railway Board. Resultantly, the industrial dispute stands settled; and no relief is required to be given to the workman concerned. The reference under adjudication is answered accordingly.
9. Award as above.
Lucknow 18th May, 2015
RAKESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2015
का.आ. 1222.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार उत्तर पूर्व रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण लखनऊ के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 28/2014) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11/06/2015 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं॰ एल-41011/28/2014-आईआर(बी-1)] सुमति सकलानी, अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 11th June, 2015
S.O. 1222.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 28/2014) of the Central. Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Lucknow as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of North Eastern Railway and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 11/06/2015.
[No. L-41011/28/2014-IR(B-1)] SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-
CUM-LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW
PRESENT :
6. The opposite party filed M-3, letter signed by Shri P.B. Prasad, Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, North Eastern Railway, Lucknow, enclosing circular No. 2012/F/ (E)III/I(1)/2 dated 29.10.2014 of the Railway Board. The management in letter M-3, referring circular dated 29.10.2014 has stated that the Railway Board, New Delhi vide their circular dated 29.10.2014 has directed to cover the employees who got temporary status prior to 01.10.2004 may be covered under Old Pension Scheme.
RAKESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer
I.D. No. 28/2014 Ref. No. L-41011/28/2014-IR(B-1) dated: 09.04.2014
BETWEEN
7. A copy of the M-3 was furnished to the workman's union. Shri D.P. Awasthi after going through the contents of letter, M-3 and circular dated 29.10.2014 showed willingness to withdraw the present industrial dispute being claim settled; and made an endorsement thereupon as under:
"Since the relief claimed by the Union is accepted by the rail management. The further proceedings of case may kindly be dropped."
8. In view of the submission/endorsement of the workman's union for dropping of the proceedings, there Anchal Sangthan Secretary Rail Sevak Sangh C/o Shri D.P. Awasthi 49, Tilak Nagar Lucknow. (Espousing cause of Sri Shikari)[भाग IIखण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 13, 2015/ज्येष्ठ 23, 1937 2587 AND
1. Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer
North Eastern Railway DRM Office, Ashok Marg, Lucknow.
2. The Chief Medical Superintendent
North Eastern Railway Gonda (UP)
5. On 08.05.2015, Shri D.P. Awasthi, Secretary of the workman's union was present whereas the opposite parties were represented by Shri Upendera Kumar Sharma, Chief Welfare Officer.
AWARD
1. By order No. L-41011/28/2014-IR(B-I) dated: 09.04.2014 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 Anchal Sangthan Secretary, Rail Sevak Sangh, C/o Shri D.P. Awasthi, 49, Tilak Nagar, Lucknow and Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer, North Eastern Railway, DRM Office, Ashok Marg, Lucknow & the Chief Medical Superintendent, North Eastern Railway, Gonda (UP) for adjudication.
2. The reference under adjudication is:
''क्या पूर्वोत्तर रेल प्रशासन, लखनऊ व गोंडा द्वारा श्री शिकारी पुत्र श्री जुम्मन, सफ़ाईवाला को पुरानी पेंशन न देकर नई पेंशन दिया जाना न्यायोचित एवं वैध है? यदि नहीं तो कामगार किस राहत को पाने का हकदार है?''
3. On receipt of the reference order the workman's union was issued registered notice to file his statement of claim complete with relevant documents, list of reliance and witnesses before Tribunal on 25.06.2014 with an advance copy to the opposite party. The Secretary of the workman's union appeared before this Tribunal and requested for a date for filing of statement of claim.
4. On successive dates the management also turned up. Since the case was related to grant of old pension scheme instead of new pension scheme, the parties were advised to settle the dispute amicably through Lok Adalat. Accordingly, the case was taken up at Lok Adalat on 08.05.2015.
6. The opposite party filed M-5, letter signed by Shri P.B. Prasad, Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, North Eastern Railway, Lucknow, enclosing circular No. 2012/F(E) III/I(1)/2 dated 29.10.2014 of the Railway Board. The management in letter M-3, referring circular dated 29.10.2014 has stated that the Railway Board, New Delhi vide their circular dated 29.10.2014 has directed to cover the employees who got temporary status prior to 01.10.2004 may be covered under Old Pension Scheme.
7. A copy of the M-3 was furnished to the workman's union. Shri D.P. Awasthi after going through the contents of letter, M-3 and circular dated 29.10.2014 showed willingness to withdraw the present industrial dispute being claim settled; and made an endorsement thereupon as under:
"Since the relief claimed by the Union is accepted by the Railway Management. The further proceedings of this case may kindly be dropped."
8. In view of the submission/endorsement of the workman's union for dropping of the proceedings, there is no grievance left with the workman's union as the present industrial dispute pertains to non-grant of old pension to the workman by the railway management and the management of the railway has granted the same vide circular 2012/F(E)III/I(I)/2 dated 29.10.2014 of the Railway Board. Resultantly, the industrial dispute stands settled; and no relief is required to be given to the workman concerned. The reference under adjudication is answered accordingly.
9. Award as above.
Lucknow 18th May, 2014
RAKESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer
Printed by the Manager, Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064 and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054.