4706

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS

(Department of Personnel and Training)

New Delhi, the 17th December, 2015

S.O. 2327.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (8) of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Ratanlal Chhanalal Kodekar, Advocate as

Special Public Prosecutor for conducting prosecution of cases in RC. 3(S)/2011/SC.III/New Delhi (Sadiq Jamal

Encounter Case) and RC. 5(S)/2011/SCB/Mumbai (Ishrat Jahan Encounter Case) instituted by the Delhi Special Police

Establishment in the Court of Sessions No. 1 and 2 at Ahmedabad (Gujarat), appeals, revisions or other matters arising

out of these cases in appellate or revisional courts establishment by law, for a period of three years from the date of

engagement of disposal of the cases entrusted to the said Counsel, whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 225/25/2015-AVD-II]

Md. NADEEM, Under Secy.

ubZ fnYyh] 17 fnlEcj] 2015

dk-vk- 2328.—dsUnz ljdkj ,rn~}kjk naM izfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 (1974 dk 2) dh /kjk 24 dh mi&/kjk (8) }kjk iznÙk

'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] Jh jruyky Nukyky dksMsdj] vf/oDrk dks vgenkckn (xqtjkr) fLFkr l=k la- 1 ,oa 2 U;k;ky; esa

fnYyh fo'ks"k iqfyl LFkkiuk }kjk laLFkkfir vkjlh- 3(,l)@2011@,llh-III@ubZ fnYyh (lkfnd teky eqBHksM+ ekeyk) ,oa

vkjlh- 5(,l)@2011@,llhch@eqEcbZ (b'kjr tgka eqBHksM+ ekeyk) ekeyksa dk vfHk;kstu lapkyu djus rFkk fof/ }kjk laLFkkfir

vihyh; ;k iqujh{k.k U;k;ky;ksa esa mu ekeyksa ls mRiUu izklafxd vU; ekeyksa esa vihy] iqujh{k.k gsrq fo'ks"k yksd vfHk;kstd ds :i

esa muds }kjk dk;ZHkkj laHkkyus dh rkjh[k ls rhu o"kks± dh vof/ rd vFkok dkmalsy dks lkSais x, ekeyksa ds fuiVku rd] tks Hkh igys

gks] fu;qDr djrh gS A

¹iQk- la- 225@25@2015&,ohMh&IIº

eks- unhe] voj lfpo

New Delhi, the 17th December, 2015

S.O. 2328.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (8) of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Ratanlal Chhanalal Kodekar, Advocate as

Special Public Prosecutor for conducting prosecution of cases in RC. 3(S)/2011/SC.III/New Delhi (Sadiq Jamal

Encounter Case) and RC. 5(S)/2011/SCB/Mumbai (Ishrat Jahan Encounter Case) instituted by the Delhi Special Police

Establishment in the Court of Sessions No. 1 and 2 at Ahmedabad (Gujarat), appeals, revisions or other matters arising

out of these cases in appellate or revisional courts establishment by law, for a period of three years from the date of

engagement of disposal of the cases entrusted to the said Counsel, whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 225/25/2015-AVD-II]

Md. NADEEM, Under Secy.

मानव संसाधन िवकास मंालय

(उ च

उ च

उ चतर िश ा िवभाग

तर िश ा िवभाग

तर िश ा िवभाग)

(राजभाषा यूिनट

राजभाषा यूिनट

राजभाषा यूिनट)

नई द ली, 14 दस बर, 2015

का

का.आ. 2329

. 2329

. 2329.—के ीय सरकार, राजभाषा (संघ के शासकय योजन के िलए योग) िनयम, 1976 के िनयम 10

के उप िनयम 4 के अनुसरण म', मानव संसाधन िवकास मं*ालय (उ, चतर िश/ा िवभाग और 1 कूल िश/ा एवं सा/रता

िवभाग) के अंतग3त िन निलिखत काया3लय को, ऐसे काया3लय के 5प म', िजनके 80 ितशत से अिधक कम3चारी-वृ द ने

िह दी का काय3साधक 9ान ा: त कर िलया है, अिधसूिचत करती है:-

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4707

भारतीय उ, च अ; ययन सं1 थान,

रा= >पित िनवास,

िशमला-171005

नवोदय िव?ालय सिमित के अंतग3त आने वाले िन निलिखत 78 िव?ालय

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय औरैया, उर देश-206244

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय बाराबंक, उर देश-225126

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय बती, उर देश-272151

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय चंदौली, उर देश-232107

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय फतेहपुर, उर देश-212635

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय हमीरपुर, उर देश-210431

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय कौज, उर देश-209733

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय कौशा बी, उर देश-212207

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय मुरादाबाद, उर देश-244601

10.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय रायबरेली, उर देश-229306

11.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय शाहजहापुर, उर देश-242306

12.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय !ावती, उर देश-271831

13.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय सोनभ$, उर देश-231216

14.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय देहरादून, उराखंड-248197

15.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय नैनीताल, उराखंड-263135

16.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय पौड़ी, उराखंड-246193

17.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय िपथोरागढ़, उराखंड-262530

18.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय *$याग, उराखंड-246439

19.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय अरवाल, िबहार-804401

20.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय ब,सर, िबहार-802129

21.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय पूव- चंपारण, िबहार-845429

22.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय गया, िबहार-805236

23.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय खग0रया, िबहार-851201

24.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय लखीसराय, िबहार-811202

25.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय मधेपुरा, िबहार-852126

26.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय नवादा, िबहार-805124

27.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय रोहतास, िबहार-821305

28.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय िसवान, िबहार-841226

29.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय िशवहर, िबहार-843329

4708

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

30.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय वैशाली, िबहार-844126

31.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय देवघर, झारखंड-814142

32.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय धनबाद, झारखंड-828207

33.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय दुमका, झारखंड-814145

34.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय गो3ा, झारखंड-814165

35.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय कोडरमा, झारखंड-825410

36.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय पाकुर- I, झारखंड-816107

37.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय पूव4 5सहभूम, झारख7ड-832101

38.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय हजारीबाग, झारखंड-825402

39.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय जामताड़ा, झारखंड-815351

40.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय पाकुर – II, झारख7ड- 816107

41.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय पलामू- II, झारखंड-822101

42.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय पलामू- II, झारख7ड-822101

43.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय सरायकेला, झारखंड-831002

44.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय िसमडेगा, झारखंड-835235

45.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय पि8म 5सहभूम, झारखंड-833201

46.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय बांकुड़ा, पि8म बंगाल-722,146

47.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय मु9शदाबाद, पि8म बंगाल-742101

48.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय दा9ज5लग, पि8म बंगाल-734214

49.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय पु*िलया, पि8म बंगाल-723147

50.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय अमरेली, गुजरात-365610

51.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय भ;च, गुजरात-393110

52.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय आनंद, गुजरात-338530

53.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय नम4दा, गुजरात-393151

54.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय डांग, गुजरात-394720

55.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय गांधीनगर, गुजरात-382315

56.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय नवसारी, गुजरात-396580

57.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय अकोला, महारा=-444104

58.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय औरंगाबाद, महारा=-431103

59.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय धुले, महारा=-424002

60.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय ग?@दया, महारा=-441702

61.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय नंदुरबार - 2, महारा=-425415

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4709

62.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय रायगढ़, महारा=-402120

63.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय मेवात, ह0रयाणा-122107

64.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय !ीगंगानगर- II, राजथान- 335804

65.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय पूव- िसयांग, अ*णाचल देश-791102

66.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय पापुमपारे, अ*णाचल देश-791112

67.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय तवांग, अ*णाचल देश-790104

68.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय लोअर सुबानिसरी, अ*णाचल देश-791120

69.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय पि8म कामDग, अ*णाचल देश-790001

70.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय ब,सा, असम-781372

71.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय ब?गईगांव, असम-783380

72.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय री भोई, मेघालय-793102

73.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय गोमती, िFपुरा-799013

74.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय अनूपपुर, मGय देश-484886

75.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय हरदा, मGय देश-461444

76.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय रायसेन, मGय देश-464665

77.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय िसवनी, मGय देश-480990

78.

जवाहर नवोदय िवालय लHIीप, लHIीप-682559

[सं. 11011-2/2015-रा.भा.ए.]

सुखबीर Dसह संधु, संयुE त सिचव

MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT

(Department of Higher Education)

(O. L. UNIT)

New Delhi, the 14th December, 2015

S.O. 2329.—In pursuance of sub. rule (4) of rule 10 of the Official Languages (Use for Official Purposes of the

Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies the following offices under the Ministry of Human

Resource Development, (Department of Higher Education & Department of School Education & Literacy) as office,

whose more than 80% members of the staff have acquired working knowledge of Hindi.

1. Indian Institute of Advanced Study,

Rashtrapati Nivas,

Shimla- 171005

2. The following 78 Schools under NavodayaVidyalaya Samiti

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Auriya, Uttar Pradesh-206244

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Barabanki, Uttar Pradesh-225126

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Basti, Uttar Pradesh-272151

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Chandauli, Uttar Pradesh-232107

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Fatehpur, Uttar Pradesh-212635

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Hamirpur, Uttar Pradesh-210431

4710

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Kannauj, Uttar Pradesh-209733

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Kaushambi, Uttar Pradesh-212207

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh-244601

10.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Raebareli, Uttar Pradesh-229306

11.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Shahjahapur, Uttar Pradesh-242306

12.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Shrawasti, Uttar Pradesh-271831

13.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Sonebhadra, Uttar Pradesh-231216

14.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Dehradun, Uttarakhand-248197

15.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Nainital, Uttarakhand-263135

16.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Pauri, Uttarakhand-246193

17.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Pithrogarh, Uttarakhand-262530

18.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Rudraprayag, Uttarakhand-246439

19.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Arwal, Bihar-804401

20.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Buxar, Bihar--802129

21.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya East Champaran, Bihar-845429

22.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Gaya, Bihar-805236

23.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Khagaria, Bihar-851201

24.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Lakhisarai, Bihar-811202

25.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Madhepura, Bihar-852126

26.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Nawada, Bihar-805124

27.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Rohtas, Bihar-821305

28.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Siwan, Bihar-841226

29.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Sheohar, Bihar-843329

30.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Vaishali, Bihar-844126

31.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Deoghar, Jharkhand-814142

32.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Dhanbad, Jharkhand-828207

33.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Dumka, Jharkhand-814145

34.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Godda, Jharkhand-814165

35.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Kodarma, Jharkhand-825410

36.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Pakur-I, Jharkhand-816107

37.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya E. Singhbhum, Jharkhand-832101

38.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Hazaribagh, Jharkhand-825402

39.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Jamtara, Jharkhand-815351

40.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Pakur-II, Jharkhand-816107

41.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Palamu-I, Jharkhand-822101

42.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Palamu-II, Jharkhand-822101

43.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Saraikela, Jharkhand-831002

44.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Simdega, Jharkhand-835235

45.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya W. Singhbhum, Jharkhand-833201

46.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Bankura, West Bengal-722146

47.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya D. Dinajpur, West Bengal-733103

48.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Darjeeling, West Bengal-734214

49.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Purulia, West Bengal-723147

50.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Amreli, Gujarat-365610

51.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Bharuch, Gujarat-393110

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4711

52.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Anand, Gujarat-338530

53.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Narmada, Gujarat-393151

54.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Dang, Gujarat-394720

55.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Gandhinagar, Gujarat-382315

56.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Navsari, Gujarat-396580

57.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Akola, Maharashtra-444104

58.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Aurangabad, Maharashtra-431103

59.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Dhule, Maharashtra-424002

60.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Gondia, Maharashtra-441702

61.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Nandurbar - 2, Maharashtra-425415

62.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Raigad, Maharashtra-402120

63.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Mewat, Haryana-122107

64.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Sriganganagar, Rajasthan- - 335804

65.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya East Siang, Arunachal Pradesh-791102

66.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Papumpare, Arunachal Pradesh-791112

67.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Tawang, Arunachal Pradesh-790104

68.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Lower Subansiri, Arunachal Pradesh-791120

69.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya West Kameng, Arunachal Pradesh-790001

70.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Baksa, Assam-781372

71.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Bongaigaon, Assam-783380

72.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Ri Bhoi, Meghalaya-793102

73.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Gomati, Tripura-799013

74.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Anuppur, Madhya Pradesh-484886

75.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Harda, Madhya Pradesh-461444

76.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Raisen, Madhya Pradesh-464665

77.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Seoni, Madhya Pradesh-480990

78.

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Lakshadweep, Lakshadweep -682559

[No. 11011-2/2015-O.L.U.]

SUKHBIR SINGH SANDHU, Jt. Secy.

उपभो ता

उपभो ता मामले

मामले

मामले, खा और सावजिनक िवतरण मंालय

खा और सावजिनक िवतरण मंालय

(उपभो ता

(उपभो ता मामले िवभाग)

मामले िवभाग)

(भारतीय मानक यू

भारतीय मानक यू

भारतीय मानक यूरो

रोरो

रो)

नई द ली, 13 दस बर, 2015

का

का.आ. 2330

2330

2330.—भारतीय मानक यूरो

(माणन)

िविनयम

1988

के िविनयम 6 के उपिविनयम (3) के अनुसरण म भारतीय मानक

यूरो ,rn~}kjk नीचे अनुसूची म दए गए उ पाद! क" मुहरांकन शु क अिधसूिचत करता है :

4712

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

अनुसूची

[संदभ4: सीएमडी -2/16:4505]

सी. के. महेK वरी, वैLािनक ‘जी’ एवं उपमहािनदेशक (माणन)

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

(BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS)

New Delhi, the 13^th December, 2015

S.O. 2330.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (3) of regulation 6 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification)

Regulations 1988, the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies the Marking Fee for the product given in the

schedule:

SCHEDULE

[Ref. : CMD-2/16:4505]

C. K. MAHESHWARI, Scientist ‘G’ & DDG (Certification)

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

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

ubZ fnYyh] 6 uoEcj] 2015

dk-vk- 2331.—Hkkjrh; vk;q²oKku ifj"kn~ vf/fu;e] 1956 (1956 dk 102) dh /kjk 11 dh mi&/kjk (2) }kjk iznÙk

'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUnz ljdkj lEc¼ fo'ofo|ky; ds ifjorZu ds dkj.k Hkkjrh; v;q£oKku ifj"kn~ ls ijke'kZ djus ds

i'pkr~] ,rn~}kjk mDr vf/fu;e dh izFke vuqlwph esa dqN vkSj fuEufyf[kr la'kks/u djrh gSA

¶,pvkb,pVh fo'ofo|ky;¸ ds mijkar mi;qZDr igyh vuqlwph esa vuqlwph esa ¶Lokeh jkek fgeky;u fo'ofo|ky;]

nsgjknwu¸ tksM+k tk,xk vkSj ¶ekU;rk izkIr fpfdRlk ;ksX;rk¸ (dkWye 2 esa) 'kh"kZd ds rgr vkSj ¶iathdj.k ds fy, la{ksi.k¸

(dkWye 3 esa) 'kh"kZd ds rgr ¶Lokeh jkek fgeky;u fo'ofo|ky;] nsgjknwu¸ ds lkeus fuEufyf[kr dks var²o"V fd;k

tk,xk] vFkkZr~ %&

भारतीय

मानक

सं या

भाग

अनु

भाग

वष

उ पा

उ पाद

इकाई

यू

यूनतम मुहरांकन

नतम मुहरांकन

शु क

शु क ()

()

इकाई

दर

लै

लैब

ब

ब 1

()

लै

लैब म

ब म

इकाईयां

इकाई दर

लै

लैब

ब

ब 2

()

लै

लैब म

ब म

इकाईयां

इकाई

दर लै

दर लैब

ब

3 ()

लै

लैब म

ब म

इकाईयां

चालन

ितिथ

वृहद त

वृहद तर

एम.

एस.

एम. ई

4505

2015

सोिडयम

फॉम डीहाईड

सलफो सीलेट-

िविशि (पहला

पुनरीण)

मै. टन

43000

34400

300

1000 तक

200

अगले

5000 के

िलए

100

शेष

20 11 2015

No.

Part

Sec

Year

Product

Units

Minimum Marking Fee

(Rs.)

Unit

Rate

Slab-1

Fee(Rs.)

Units

Slab-1

Unit

Rate

Slab-2

Fee(Rs.)

Units in

Slab-2

Unit

Rate

Slab3

Fee(Rs.)

Units in

Slab-3

Effective

Date

Large

Scale

MSME

4505

2015

Sodium

Formaldehyde

Sulphoxylate

Specification

(First Revision)

1 MT

43000

34400

300

1000

200

5000

100

Remaining

20. 11 2015

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4713

(2)

(3)

cSpyj vkWiQ esfMflu

,e- ch- ch- ,l-

rFkk cSpyj vkWiQ ltZjh

(1 twu] 2014 dks vFkok mlds ckn fgeky;u fpfdRlk foKku laLFkku] nsgjknwu

esa izf'kf{kr fd, tk jgs Nk=kksa ds laca/ esa ¶Lokeh jkek fgeky;u fo'ofo|ky;]

nsgjknwu¸ }kjk LohÑr fd, tkus ij ekU;rk izkIr fpfdRlk vgZrk gksxh A

¹la- ;w- 12012@84@2012&,ebZ&Iº

Mh- oh- ds- jko] voj lfpo

MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE

(Department of Health and Family Welfare)

New Delhi, the 6th November, 2015

S.O. 2331.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of the Section 11 of the Indian Medical

Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956), the Central Government, after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes

the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act, due to change of affiliating University, namely

:—

In the said First Schedule after “HIHT University” “Swami Rama Himalayan University, “Dehradun” shall be

added and against “Swami Rama Himalayan University Dehradun under the heading ‘Recognized Medical

Qualification’ [in column (2)] and under the heading ‘Abbreviation for Registration’ [in column (3)], the

following shall be inserted, namely :—

(2)

(3)

Bachelor of Medicine and

M.B.B.S.

Bachelor of Surgery

(This shall be a recognized medical qualification

when

granted

Swami

Rama

Himalayan

University, Dehradun in respect of students being

trained at Himalayan Institute of Medical Science,

Dehredun on or after 1^st June, 2014.

[No. U. 12012/84/2012-ME-I]

D. V. K. RAO, Under Secy.

कौशल िवकास और उमशीलता मंालय

नई द ली, 11 दस बर, 2015

िवषय:

िवषय:- भारतीय उ?मशीलता सं1 थान (आईआईई), गुवाहाटी, असम के अधीन िविभ न िनकाय म' सरकारी सद1 य क

िनयुिE त।

का

का.आ. 233

233

2332.—आईआईई के संगम 9ापन और िनयमावली के अंतग3त भारत सरकार (काय3 आबंटन िनयमावली)

1961 म' संशोधन कए जाने के बारे म' मंि*-मG डल सिचवालय क अिधसूचना संI या का.आ.1200 (अ) दनांक 2 मई,

2015 के अनुसरण म' िन निलिखत पदािधकारी, तK काल भाव से सं1 थान के शासी पLरषद और काय3काLरणी सिमित के

पदेन पदािधकारी हगे।

शासी परषद

माननीय कौशल िवकास और उ?मशीलता राO य मं*ी (1 वतं*

भार), भारत सरकार

अपर सिचव एवं िवK तीय सलाहकार, कौशल िवकास और

उ?मशीलता मं*ालय, भारत सरकार

संयुE त सिचव, कौशल िवकास और उ?मशीलता मं*ालय, भारत

सरकार

अ; य/

उपा; य/

सद1 य

4714

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

कायकारी सिमित

सिचव, कौशल िवकास और उ?मशीलता मं*ालय, भारत सरकार

वLर= ठ सलाहकार, कौशल िवकास और उ?मशीलता मं*ालय, भारत

सरकार

अपर सिचव एवं िवK तीय सलाहकार, कौशल िवकास और

उ?मशीलता मं*ालय, भारत सरकार

संयुE त सिचव, कौशल िवकास और उ?मशीलता मं*ालय, भारत

सरकार

अ; य/

उपा; य/

सद1 य

इसे स/म ािधकारी के अनुमोदन से जारी कया जाता है।

[सं. I. 34020/24/2015-एसडीई]

डॉ० बी० के० रे, उप सिचव

MINISTRY OF SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP

New Delhi, the 11th December, 2015

Subject: - Appointment of official members to different bodies under the Indian Institute of Entrepreneurship (IIE),

Guwahati, Assam.

S.O. 2332.—In pursuance of the Notification No. S.O.1200 (E) dated 2^nd May, 2015 of the Cabinet Secretariat

relating to amendment in the Government of India (Allocation of Business Rules) 1961 and in accordance with the

provisions under the Memorandum of Association and Rules frames there under of IIE, the following functionaries shall

be the ex-officio office bearers of the Governing Council and Executive Committee of the institute with immediate

effect.

GOVERNING COUNCIL

Secretary, Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship,

Government of India.

Chairman

Additional Secretary & Financial Advisor, Ministry of Skill

Development and Entrepreneurship, Government of India.

Member

Joint

Secretary,

Ministry

Skill

Development

and

Entrepreneurship, Government of India.

Member

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

Secretary, Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship,

Government of India.

Chairman

Senior Advisor,

Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship, Government

of India.

Vice- Chairman

Additional Secretary & Financial Adviser, Ministry of Skill

Development and Entrepreneurship, Government of India.

Member

Joint

Secretary,

Ministry

Skill

Development

and

Entrepreneurship, Government of India.

Member

This issues with the approval of the Competent Authority.

[No. I. 34020/24/2015-SDE]

Dr. B. K. RAY, Dy. Secy.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4715

नई द ली, 11 दस बर, 2015

िवषय:

िवषय:-

रा ी

रा ीय

य

य उमशीलता और लघु

उमशीलता और लघु

उमशीलता और लघु या

या

यापार

पार

पार िवकास

िवकास

िवकास सं था

सं था

सं थान (नी ब

(नी ब

(नी बड)

ड)

ड), नोएडा के अ

नोएडा के अ

नोएडा के अधीन

धीन

धीन िविभ% न

िविभ% न

िविभ% न िनकाय&

िनकाय&

िनकाय& म'म'म'म' सरकारी

सरकारी

सद य&

सद य& क( िनयुि) त

क( िनयुि) त

क( िनयुि) त।

का

का.आ. 233

233

2333.—नी1 बड के संगम 9ापन और िनयमावली के अंतग3त भारत सरकार (काय3 आबंटन िनयमावली)

1961 म' संशोधन कए जाने के बारे म' मंि*-मG डल सिचवालय क अिधसूचना संI या एस.ओ.1200 (ई) दनांक 2 मई,

पदेन पदािधकारी हगे।

सोसायटी (सामा% य

सोसायटी (सामा% य सभा)

सभा)

(i)

माननीय कौशल िवकास और उ?मशीलता राO य मं*ी (1 वतं* भार),

भारत सरकार

(ii)

सिचव, कौशल िवकास और उ?मशीलता मं*ालय, भारत सरकार

सभापित

उप-सभापित

शासी परषद

(i)

माननीय कौशल िवकास और उ?मशीलता राO य मं*ी (1 वतं* भार),

भारत सरकार

(ii)

सिचव, कौशल िवकास और उ?मशीलता मं*ालय, भारत सरकार

(iii)

वLर= ठ सलाहकार, कौशल िवकास और उ?मशीलता मं*ालय, भारत

सरकार

(iv) अपर सिचव एवं िवK तीय सलाहकार, कौशल िवकास और

उ?मशीलता मं*ालय, भारत सरकार

(v)

संयुE त सिचव, कौशल िवकास और उ?मशीलता मं*ालय, भारत

सरकार

(vi) संयुE त सिचव, रा= >ीय कौशल िवकास िनगम (एनएसडीसी), भारत

सरकार

अ; य/

उपा; य/

सद1 य

कायकारी सिमित

(i)

सिचव, कौशल िवकास और उ?मशीलता मं*ालय, भारत सरकार

(ii)

वLर= ठ सलाहकार, कौशल िवकास और उ?मशीलता मं*ालय, भारत

सरकार

(iii)

अपर सिचव एवं िवK तीय सलाहकार, कौशल िवकास और

उ?मशीलता मं*ालय, भारत सरकार

(iv)

िश/ण महािनदेशक (डीजीटी), कौशल िवकास और उ?मशीलता

मं*ालय, भारत सरकार

(v)

संयुE त सिचव, कौशल िवकास और उ?मशीलता मं*ालय, भारत

सरकार

अ; य/

उपा; य/

सद1 य

इसे स/म ािधकारी के अनुमोदन से जारी कया जाता है।

[सं. I. 34020/24/2015-एसडीई]

डॉ० बी० के० रे, उप सिचव

4716

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi, the 11^th December, 2015

Subject:- Appointment of official members to different bodies under the National Institute for Entrepreneurship

and Small Business Development (NIESBUD) Noida.

S.O. 2333.—In pursuance of the Notification No. S.O.1200 (E) dated 2^nd May, 2015 of the Cabinet Secretariat

relating to amendment in the Government of India (Allocation of Business Rules) 1961 and in accordance with the

provisions under the Memorandum of Association and Rules frames there under of NIESBUD, the following

functionaries shall be the ex-officio office bearers of the Society, Governing Council and Executive Committee of the

institute with immediate effect.

SOCIETY (GENERAL BODY)

(i)

Hon’ble Minister of State for Skill Development and

Entrepreneurship (Independent Charge) Government of India.

President

(ii)

Secretary, Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship,

Government of India.

Vice President

GOVERNING COUNCIL

(i)

Hon’ble Minister of State for Skill Development and

Entrepreneurship (Independent Charge) Government of India.

Chairman

(ii)

Secretary, Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship,

Government of India.

Vice- Chairman

(iii)

Senior Advisor, Ministry of Skill Development and

Entrepreneurship, Government of India.

Member

(iv)

Additional Secretary & Financial Advisor, Ministry of Skill

Development and Entrepreneurship, Government of India.

Member

(v)

Joint Secretary, Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship,

Government of India.

Member

(vi)

Joint Secretary, National Skill Development Corporation (NSDC),

Government of India.

Member

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

(i)

Secretary, Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship,

Government of India.

Chairman

(ii)

Senior

Advisor,

Ministry

Skill

Development

and

Entrepreneurship,Government of India.

Vice- Chairman

(iii)

Additional Secretary & Financial Advisor, Ministry of Skill

Development and Entrepreneurship, Government of India.

Member

(iv)

Director General of Training (DGT), Ministry of Skill Development

and Entrepreneurship, Government of India

Member

(v)

Joint

Secretary,

Ministry

Skill

Development

and

Entrepreneurship, Government of India.

Member

This issues with the approval of the Competent Authority

[No. I. 34020/24/2015-SDE]

Dr. B. K. RAY, Dy. Secy.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4717

इ पा

इ पात मंालय

मंालय

नई दली, 18 दस बर, 2015

का

का.आ. 2334

. 2334

. 2334.—राजभाषा संघ के शासकय योजन के िलए योग िनयम, 1976 (यथासंशोिधत, 1987) के

िनयम 10 के उप िनयम (4) के अनुसरण म', के ीय सरकार ,rn~}kjk इ1 पात मं*ालय के शासिनक िनयं*णाधीन

िन निलिखत काया3लय, िजनके 80 ितशत से अिधक कम3चारीवृ द ने िह दी का काय3साधक 9ाना: त कर िलया है, को

अिधसूिचत करती है:—

1. शाखा िबX काया3लय, रा= >ीय इ1 पात िनगम िलिमटेड, 101 अपोलो एवे यू, 30बी, पुराना पलािसया,

पलािसया पुिलस 1 टेशन के पीछे, इ दौर – 452001

2. /े*ीय काया3लय उK तर रा= >ीय इ1 पात िनगम िलिमटेड, चौथी मंिजल, चौथा टावर, एनबीसीसी : लाजा, पु= प

िवहार, सेE टर-5, साकेत, नई द ली- 110017

3. शाखा िबX काया3लय रा= >ीय इ1 पात िनगम िलिमटेड, साई आE ड3, 16/34 भाग3व इ1 टेट,िसिवल लेन,

कानपुर- 208001

4. शाखा िबX काया3लय, रा= >ीय इ1 पात िनगम िलिमटेड, मेघालय टावर, III फलोर, ओ ड स'ट चच3 के पीछे, सी-

300, संसार िवहार, एमआई रोड, जयपुर-302001

5. शाखा िबX काया3लय रा= >ीय इ1 पात िनगम िलिमटेड, 101 [ ेस हाउस, [ ेस जरनल रोड,

मु बई- 400021

6. /े*ीय काया3लय (पि\म) रा= >ीय इ1 पात िनगम िलिमटेड, 101 [ ेस हाउस, [ ेस जरनल रोड,

मु बई- 400021

7. शाखा िबX काया3लय रा= >ीय इ1 पात िनगम िलिमटेड, एनबीसी हाउस, थम तल, शहजानंद कालेज के पास,

कामधेनू कां पलेE स के पीछे, अ बावदी, अहमदाबाद-380015

8. एनएमडीसी िलिमटेड, /े*ीय काया3लय, खिनज भवन, पोट3 /े*, िवशाखापटटनम-530035

9. एनएमडीसी िलिमटेड मुI यालय, ‘खिनज भवन, 10-3-311/ए, कैसल िह स, मसाब ट]क, हैदराबाद-500028

10.

10. एमएसटीसी िलिमटेड, शाखा काया3लय, 21 कमलाजंसी, दूसरी मंिजल, टयूब कंपनी के सामने, ओ ड पादरी

रोड, बडोदा-390020

11.

11. फैरो 1 Xेप िनगम िलिमटेड, 303 कैलाश टॉवर,दोडडाबे लापुर, यलहंका, ब]गलु5-560064 (कना3टक)

[सं. ई-11011(1)/2012-िह दी]

टी. _ीिनवास, संयुE त सिचव

MINISTRY OF STEEL

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2015

S.O. 2334.—In pursuance of sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Language (Use for Official Purposes of the

Union) Rules, 1976 (as amended, 1987) the Central Government hereby notifies the following offices under the

administrative control of Ministry of Steel, wherein more than 80% of the staff have acquired the working knowledge of

Hindi :-

1. Bracnch Sales Office, Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited, 101 Apollo Avenue, 30 B Old Palasia, Opp. Palasia

Police Station, Indore-452001

2. Regional Office (North), Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited, 4^th Floor, 4^th Tower, NBCC Plaza, Pushp Vihar,

Sector-5, Saket, New Delhi-110017

3. Branch Sales Office, Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited, Sai Arcade, 16/34 Bhargava Estate, Civil Lanes,

Kanpur-208001

4718

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

4. Branch Sales Office, Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited, Meghalaya Towers, 3^rd Floor, Opp. Old Saint

Church, C-300 Sansar Villa, M.I. Road, Jaipur-302001

5. Branch Sales Office, Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited, 101 Free Press House, Free Press Journal Road,

Mumbai-400021

6. Regional Office (Western), Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited, 101 Free Press House, Free Press Journal

Road, Mumbai-400021

7. Branch Sales Office, Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited, NBCC House, 1^st Floor, Near Sahajanand College,

Opp. Kamdhenu Complex, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad-380015

8. NMDC LTD., Regional Office, Khanij Bhawan, Port Region, Vishakhapatnam-530035

9. NMDC Limited (HQs), Khanij Bhawan, 10-3-311/A, Castle Hills, Masab Tank, Hyderabad-500028

10. MSTC Limited, Branch Office, 21 Kamlanjali, 2^nd Floor, Opp. Tube Co., Old Padri Road,

Vadodara-390020

11. Ferro Scrap Nigam Limited, 303 Kailash Tower, Doddabellarpur, Yelahanka, Benguluru-560064

(Karnataka)

[No. E. 11011(1)/2012-Hindi]

T. SRINIVAS, Jt. Secy.

व

व मंालय

मंालय

नई दली, 21 दस बर, 2015

का

का.आ. 2335

. 2335

. 2335.—केीय रेशम बोड3 अिधिनयम, 1948 [1948 का 61] क धारा-8 ग क उपधारा [1] aारा दb

शिcय का योग करते dए केीय रेशमकट बीज सिमित से परामश3 के प\ात् के सरकार इसके aारा अिधसूचना

एस.ओ.2333 [ई] दनांक 22.09.2010 aारा अिधसूिचत कना3टक राOय के तुमकुर िजला, कु ि◌ णगल तालुक के Xम सं.464,

466, 475 एवं 479 के बdज बीज /े* म' िनhिलिखत संशोधन करती है ।

Xम सं.464 "ित मयानापाया" के िव?मान बीज /े* के िलए बीज /े* "ित:पयानापाया" रखा जाए ।

Xम सं.466 "अगदहली" के िव?मान बीज /े* के िलए बीज /े* "हेjगडbीहली" रखा जाए ।

Xम सं.475 "कादरामदा" के िव?मान बीज /े* के िलए बीज /े* "कादरापुरा" रखा जाए ।

Xम सं.479 "िहbलूk " के िव?मान बीज /े* के िलए बीज /े* "िहbलहली" रखा जाए ।

[फा. सं. 25017/12/2015-रेशम(ii)]

सीताराम गु: ता, अवर सिचव

MINISTRY OF TEXTILES

New Delhi, the 21st December, 2015

S.O. 2335.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sec.(1) Section-8(C) of the Central Silk Board Act,

1948 (LXI of 1948) the Central Government after consultation with the Central Silkworm Seed Committee hereby

makes the following amendment to the Multivoltine Seed Area at Sl.Nos.464, 466, 475 and 479 of Tumkur District,

Kunigal Taluk of Karnataka State notified vide Notification S.O.2333(E) dated 22.09.2010.

For the existing seed area in Sl.No.464 “Thimmayanapalya”, the seed area “Thippayanapalya” be substituted.

For the existing seed area in Sl.No.466 “Agadahalli”, the seed area “Heggadathihalli” be substituted.

For the existing seed area in Sl.No.475 “Kadaramada”, the seed area “Kadarapura” be substituted.

For the existing seed area in Sl.No.479 “Hithaluru”, the seed area “Hittalahalli” be substituted.

[F. No. 25017/12/2015-Silk (ii)]

SITARAM GUPTA, Under Secy.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4719

नई दली, 21 दस बर, 2015

का

का.आ. 2336

2336

2336.—केीय रेशम बोड3 अिधिनयम, 1948 [1948 का 61] क धारा-8 ग क उपधारा [1] aारा दb

शिcय का योग करते dए केीय रेशमकट बीज सिमित से परामश3 के प\ात् के सरकार का मत है क रेशमकट बीज

क गु णवbा को िनयंि*त करने के िलए आवlयक और उिचत है, और इसिलए अिधसूिचत करती है क रेशमकट बीज तथा

बीज कोस क िनhिलिखत कार या उपजाित नीचे िनmदnानुसार िनhिलिखत राOय//े* म' उKपादत कया जाए । आगे,

के सरकार यह भी अिधसूिचत करती है क Kयेक बीज उKपादक या बीज कोसा उKपादक या कृषक के िलए यह आवlयक

होगा क वह रेशमकट बीज/बीज कोस क केवल अिधसूिचत िवशुp जाितय का उKपादन अिधसूिचत /े* म' ही करे और

अय कसी क1म अथवा जाित के रेशमकट बीज तथा बीज कोस का उKपादन न करे ।

कना

कनाटक राय

टक राय

िज बीज े

िजला

तालुक

होली

म

म सं.

सं.

!ाम का नाम

रेशम

रेशम क"ट उपजाित

क"ट उपजाित

बेलगावी

गुगरेनPी

नंदी हQली

हीरेबागेवाडी

बDदीगेरी

सुलेबावी

नागेनPी

बदल अंकलगी

मुथनल

मरीहल

मोदगा

कमकरPी

तुमरगु3ी

दरंी

उचगाव

बेलगुंडी

सुलगा

सोनोली

सी.एस.आर 2

नवगे

बीजाRनी

वंगवाडे

यQलूर

गोजगा

अते

अगसगा

कQलेवली

कुदरेमणी

रायदुगा4

बकनूर

अंकली

होडली

Sडली

होीहाल

4720

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

बैलह?गल

देवलापुर

वकुंद

सी.एस.आर 2

अिनगोल

िचवतगुंडी

बेलगावी

बेिवनकोTपा

नेसग-

मQलपुर

मेकलमड-

हनबरPी

नगनूर

मुरकबावी

@कूर

कुलवQली

हीरेनं@दहQली

कदथनल

कलाबावी

गजु4र

सी.एस.आर 2

देवगाव

नेगीताहल

नेगीनाहल

यरदल

कोधनपुर

पPीहल के.बी

खानापुर

देवलथी

कमसीनाकोTपा

वदेबेल

करमबल

केरवद

गोलीहQली

मोदेकोTपा

बोरनक

सी.एस.आर 2

पोतगल

बेडी

हलसी

बेकवाड

SUेरी

येलीमुनवQली

SUेरी

अजु4नवद

बेQलद बागेवाडी

हनजनP

सीरगव

सीरदन

SQलोQली

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4721

यदगुड

बेनवद

केK ती

सी.एस.आर 2

जीनरल

बसपुर

बीबगी

बगरनल

होसूर

यरगPी

यQलापुर

सरपुर

सी.एस.आर 2

बेलगावी

SUेरी

सी*र

हगेदल

गुदस

यमकनमड-

हथरगी

अथीहल

बेलवंक

यु.खानपुर

हनचाना

संकेK वर

गोटूर

संकेK वर

बद

अ मनगी

नेल-

हेVबाल

बदकुं$ी

सवदी

कD चलरकोTपा

असुंदी

100

कतमQली

101

बतसुर

102

गुरलहोसूर

103

संRशकोTपा

मुनवQली

104

Sली

105

हीरेकुंबी

106

तDगीहल

107

सWदोगी

सी.एस.आर 2

सवदी

108

यUेरी

109

ही*र

4722

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

110

हQलूर

111

बंदरहQली

112

येनगी

113

मुनवली

मूरगोड

114

मुरगोड

115

इंचल

116

ग?तमर

117

िचUोTपा

118

*$पुर

119

माQलूर

120

करलकPी

बेलगावी

सवदी

121

यरगनवी

122

मुगलीहल

सी.एस.आर 2

123

सीगेरी

124

मुगबसव

हासन

आलूर

पाQय

125

यलगनहQली

126

कQलहQली

127

बवसहQली

128

कनतूर

129

कारजुवQली

130

मंजलगोडु

131

होवQली

132

हलूवQली

कसब

133

नकलगुडु

134

किडिगहQली

135

चपुर

136

तोगरनहQली

137

देवराजपुरा

138

इमुीपुरा

139

मडगेरे

140

गोवलाकPे

141

अगसरहPी

142

SनसवQली

143

कवलीकेरे

144

भारतवQली

कूंदूर

145

कYगरवQली

146

मूडनाहQली

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4723

147

िबिलगरहQली

148

मेवZ

क.होसकोटे

149

मलगलले

150

अनगलले

बेलूर

कसब होबली

151

दVबे

152

कोटीगनहQली

153

आई.Sनसेकेरे

154

िन\टू*

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर 4

155

हेVबलु

156

कQलहQली

157

शंभूगनहQली

मधीहQली

158

संिपगेमरदा कोTपलु

159

अलदाहQली

160

अडगूर

161

रामचं$पुरा

162

मQलीकाजु4नपुरा

163

वीरदेवनहQली

164

मूलेनहQली

165

सूलेदेवरहQली

166

सोमेनहQली

167

सूरपुरा

168

िचQ कूर

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर 4

हलेबीडू

169

बं@दलUनकोTपलू

170

कQलूसेPीहQली

171

5लगTपनकोTपलू

172

GयवTपनहQली

173

मचेनहQली

174

चचतनहQली

175

मयग?डनहQली

बीUोड

176

बीUोडू

177

केसगोडू

178

मोगसवरा

सकलेशपुर

कसब

179

बो मनकेरे

सी.एस.आर 2

180

,यनहQली

हनबलु

181

कुमाराहQली

182

बचनहQली

183

अगलहPी

सकलेशपुर

बेलगोडु

184

सुंदहQली

सी.एस.आर 2

185

फथीमपुरा

186

लकुं3ा

4724

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

187

हेVबनहQली

येसलूर

188

मंजू*

हासन

दु3ा

189

कोरवनगला

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

190

हे3नहQली

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

191

एच मैलहQली

192

जोडीकृ^णपुरा

193

अPवरा

सीएसआर2,सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

194

करेबोरेकवलू

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

195

हेरगु

196

को डीहQली

हासन

कसब

197

SQलेनहQली

सीएसआर2,सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

198

डी.एम.हQली

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

199

िचUमंडीगनहQली

200

नरेहQली

201

5नगेगौडनकोTपलु

202

तPेकेरे

203

मरगनहQली

204

हलूवगीलू

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

205

अिगनहQली

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

206

हनुमंतपुरा

207

कोकंनगPा

208

येरेहQली

209

SवीनहQली

210

हं@दनकेरे

211

हचग?डनहQली

212

तेजूर

213

िचUक?डगुला

214

हरलहQली

कPया

215

शंकरनाहQली

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

216

गदेनहQली

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

217

िबलगुंडा

218

डी.एन.हQली

219

कPया

220

कलZ

221

बQलकेरे

222

मु_ेनहQली

223

मिQलगेवलू

224

सीगराहQली

225

कQलाहQली

226

बो मेनहQली

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4725

227

`टीमने

228

सीगरहQलीकवलू

229

सीगरहQलीकोTपलू

हासन

सलगमे

230

वेदवती

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

231

म@दहQली

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

232

रामदेवराहQली

233

कUेहQली

234

शंखदहोसहQली

235

सोमनहQली कवलू

236

कददरवQली

237

सोTपनाहQली

238

बीकनहQली

239

मQलेनहQली

240

मारनाहQली

शां ितRामा

241

गेकरविQल

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

242

दो3ाहोेनहQली

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

243

वलZकोTपलु

244

शांतीRामा

245

रंगनाथपुरा

246

एच बैरपुरा

247

हरनाहQली

हासन

248

कनजनहQली

249

मोसलेहोसहQली

250

कु*बरहQली

251

बंटराहQली

252

मुीगेहीरेहQली

253

मोसले

254

Sलुवरे

255

तमलपुरा

अरसीकेरे

कसब

256

यदपुरा

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

257

जवनहिQल

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

258

बो मनहिQल

259

मुरंडी बी तांaा

260

मुरंडी

261

गोQलरकोTपलू

262

तलतोरे

263

बोचेनहिQलकवलु

264

नागेनहिQल

265

दु मेनहिQल

266

ए.एन.हQली

4726

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

267

येरेहQली

268

िवPलपुरा

कनकPे

269

हरलकPा

270

िग0रबो मेनहQली

271

रामपुरा

272

दो3मेटेकुरके

हासन

गंडसी

273

आ@दिधहQली

274

5चदेनिQल

275

होसहिQल बी

276

!ीरामपुरा

277

मंगलापुरा

278

कD केरे

279

मािवनकेरे

280

नर मनहQली

281

भरमदेवराहQली

282

बैरगौडनाहQली

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

283

बागेशपुरा

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

284

बािगवलु

285

महादेवरहQली

286

चागचागेरे

287

बोरेहQली

288

जUहQली

289

मरशेPनाहQली

290

SलीयTपनापाQय

291

अTपेनहQली

292

िबलेनहिQल

जावगल

293

अरेकेरे

294

धनंजयपुरा

295

कतूरीकोTपल

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

296

ित*पितहिQल

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

297

जावगल

298

कोलगुंडा

299

अिगु3कवलु

बाणावरा

300

वलेहिQल

301

बैरमबिड

302

बनवरा

होलेनरसीपुरा

कसब

303

अनकविQल

304

गिकडा

305

होलेि बगे

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4727

306

Sिलवलु

307

नगलपुरा

308

तPेकेरे

309

दो3बैगतविQल

हासन

हलेकोटे

310

हंगरहQली

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

311

तेरbया

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

312

ह0रहरपुरा

313

येQलेशपुरा

होलेनरसीपुरा

314

दो3कुंचेवु

315

`0टगु3कवलु

316

बेरेहोसू*

317

गुिनसतेनहिQल

318

@करहिQल

319

मुदलकोTपलु

320

कQलहिQल

321

5सगनगुTपे

322

जोिगकोTपलु

323

गोहिQल

324

हदय

325

गु_ेनहहQली

326

मोतनयकनहहQली

327

िनदुवनी

328

ल,कू*

329

एलचगनहQली

330

सी.5हदलहQली

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

331

बुवनहहQली

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

332

केरगोडु

333

उ_* होसहQली

हQलीमैसूर

334

बं@दशेीहQली

335

के मु_नहQली

336

5चनहQली

337

वदेनहिQल

338

जोडीगुVबी

339

मचगोदनहQली

340

िबदरU

341

नेरले

342

एदेग?डनहQली

343

मरहQली

4728

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

344

रािगहQली कवलु

345

मकबिQल

346

होेनहQली

347

अनेकनंब@द

348

मारनायकनहQली

हासन

हQलीमैसूर

349

बचेनहQली

350

गुQलदपुरा

351

अलग?डनहQली

352

नागरनहQली

353

िहरीतललु

354

इ@दगनहोसू*

चेरायपटना

कसब

355

नQलू*

356

नं@दपुरा

357

cदडगु*

358

िचUग?डनहQली

359

क0रमारनहQली

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

360

वी.सोमनहQली

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

361

देिवगेरे

362

कल5सदा

363

एम.होेनहQली

364

नागसमु$

365

मिचगनहQली

366

ससलुपुरा

367

मQलेनहQली

368

यदुवनहQली

369

हरलहQली

370

अडगु*

371

दददहQली

372

ए.चोलनहQली

373

दो3गि

374

जी.बDडेनहQली

375

मारेनहQली

दंिडगनहQली

376

बलदरे

377

उदयपुरा

378

बेPदपुरा

379

िह0रहQली

380

वगरहQली

381

वाई.5सगेनहQली

382

यिलयू*

383

जUेनहQली

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4729

384

बेलगुली

385

मोदलपुरा

386

अTपेनहQली

387

डी.करदेवु

हासन

चेरायपटना

388

बी.चवदेनहQली

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

389

बरगु*

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

390

िचUमितगP

391

उिपनहQली

392

धरिसगP

393

मदब

394

होसो*

395

द_मिथगP

396

कPरीगP

397

ननिबहQली

398

मलेनहQली

399

एन.बDदनहQली

400

कQलेनहQली

401

सगथविQल

402

नंदनहQली

!वण बेलगोला

403

गु0रगरनहQली

404

मंजुनाथपुरा

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

405

अलदहQली

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

406

कोरेनहQली

407

बी.होेनहQली

408

सुंदहQली

409

कVबलू

410

कंतीरायपुरा

411

अ*वनहQली

412

हलुमितगP

413

बरलू

414

गिगबो मेनहQली

415

बी.मंचेनहQली

416

सनेनहQली

बगु*

417

कोडीहQली

418

वलगेरहQली

419

के.िथमलपुरा

420

िबचगोडनहQली

421

कD बलू

422

कUहQली

423

िब$े

4730

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

424

बलगPा

425

एम.िशवरा

426

मु_नहिQल कवलु

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

427

बी.होेनहQली

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

428

कुंबरहQली

429

चवेनहQली

430

निवले

िह0रसवे

431

अरकेरे

432

सोरेकायीपुरा

433

मितगPा

434

कसरनहQली

435

िबरनहQली

436

चेनहQली

437

दासरहQली

438

एम.होसो*

439

इं$नहQली

440

Sलीगेरे

441

डी.तुमकु*

442

मंदिलकनहQली

443

कVबिQल

नुYगेहिQल

444

अितहQली

445

जमबु*

446

Sिलकेरे

447

म@दहQली

448

हनुमंतपुरा

449

सोसलगेरे

450

िव*पाHपुरा

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

451

चगोनहQली

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

452

संतेिशवरा

453

रामपुरा

454

SQलेनहQली

455

दुYगेनहQली

456

करेहQली

तुमकूर

िचUनया

शेPीकेरे

457

होेबिग

सीएसआर शुd व संकर

हिQल

458

कदेननहQली

459

शेPीकेरे

460

कोडलगरा

461

बेटेरंगनहQली

462

मQलग?डनहQली

463

रंगनाथपुरा

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4731

464

मंचेकPे

465

िस_पुरा

466

तरबेनहQली

467

हेसरहQली

468

अरिलकेरे

469

कुTपु*

470

थ म@दहQली

471

तोटेगौडनपाQया

472

बYगनहQली

कं @दकेरे

473

बेलवडी

474

बैरनकPे

475

भीमUनकPे

476

बरकनहQली

477

िस_नकPे

478

बडकेगुडलू

479

SQलेनहQली

480

मदनहQली

481

अeीहQली

482

अिfगु3े

483

5सगदहQली

484

िचUिबदरे

485

दो3ािबदरे

Sिलय*

486

मुथुगदहQली

487

अंमबरपुरा

488

नूलेनु*

489

कQलेनहQली

तुमकूर

ितपतूर

कसब

490

टी.एल.पाQया

सीएसआर शुd व संकर

491

गंगनगPा

492

दसरीगPा

493

SgनहQली

494

एस.होसूर

495

एस.ल@UहQली

496

बसवनहQली

497

िचUिबदरे

498

दिसहQली

499

थदसूर

500

कोनेहQली

501

चटनहQली

4732

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

502

कोिडहQली

होवQली

503

हलकु0रके

504

मंजुनाथपुरा

505

बसवराजपुरा

506

मQलदेिवहQली

507

YयरगPा

508

वसुदेवनहQली

509

मुिन@ककेरे

नोनवीनाकेरे

510

नागरघPा

511

के.मQलेनहQली

तुमकूर

512

यदगरहQली

सीएसआर शुd व संकर

513

होेनहQली

514

एन.मेलनहQली

515

ने िलकेरे

516

गोपालपुरा

517

मुगितहQली

518

क0रकेरे

519

बजगूर

520

SQलेनहQली

521

मसवनघPा

522

सेनहQली

523

सूगूर

524

मितघPा

525

जयपुरा

526

नोनिवनाकेरे

527

अलबूर

सीएसआर शुd व संकर

@कVबनहQली

528

करदलु

ितपतूर

529

करदलू पाQय

530

अरलगुTपे

531

नयकेनहQली

532

कुंदूर

533

कPेहQली

534

बलेयकPे

535

बो मेनहQली

536

कामग?डनहQली

537

िहbदीसकेरे पाQय

538

िगन@ककेरे

539

@कVबनहQली

540

कुंदरपाQया

तु*वेकेरे

कसबा

541

कQलनकेरे

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4733

542

IारानहQली

543

म@दहQली पाQय

544

संगलपुरा

545

एच.बो मनहQली

तुमकूर

546

िचUनहQली

547

तालेकेरे

548

कQलकेरे

549

मुुगदहQली

550

के.होसहQली

551

म_नहQली

552

हेVबे नागसं$ा

553

िचUपुरा

554

किचहQली

555

बो मनहQली

556

के.दो3ेरी

557

इPीगेहQली

558

बैदरहQली

559

दो3मQलीगेरे

560

स?डेमारनहQली

561

बनसं$ा

562

कुिणकेनहQली

563

कोडीगेहQली

564

अबलकPे

565

मरसरको0Pगे

566

दो3गPा

567

िचUनहQली कावल

568

मारTपनहQली

569

थंदगा

570

नडुिवनहQली

571

Sिलकल

572

h हदेवरहPी

573

अलदहQली

574

गोपालपुरा

575

ह0रकरनहQली

सीएसआर शुd व संकर

576

द?बरमहPी

577

थोिवनकेरे

578

गोTपेनहQली

579

िच मनहQली

580

!ीरामपुरा

4734

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

581

दो3ेनहQली

582

कु*बरहिQल

583

मQलदेवनहQली

584

कTपु*

585

बी.सी.कवलु

586

गु3iयनपाQया

587

अंगडीगेरे

कसब

588

मोसले. कोTपलू

589

कमनहQली

590

नरगोनहQली

591

बQलेकेरे

592

ये मदहQली

593

अरेबूवनहQली

594

कृ^णराजपेट

595

मतीगPा

596

येदहQली

597

कलेगौडनकोTपलू

598

लjमीपुरा

599

बंडी होले

600

अRहारा बचहQली

601

ह0ररायनहQली

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

602

गो5वदेगौडन कोTपलू

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

603

ह0रहरपुरा

604

बो मनहQली

मंaा

के.आर.पेट

605

होसहोललू

606

गांधीनगर

607

बेिQलबेPदाकावल

608

कुंदनहQली

609

िचUनहQली

610

पुरा

611

मQलेनहQली

612

िवPलपुरा

613

यगचकुTपे

614

अरलकुTपे

615

मदु िवनकोडी

616

नटनहQली

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4735

बो@कनकेरे

617

परदेिशगौडनकोTपलु

618

कपनहQली

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

619

बुकनकेरे

620

रंगनाथपुरा

621

मोडूर

622

बो मेगौडना

कोTपलु

623

बनकेरे

624

केरेमेगलाकोTपलु

625

इचनहQली

626

बेनहQली

627

चोकनहQली

628

बो मलपुरा

629

अगसरहQली

630

मतीकेरे

631

गं िजगेरे

632

दो3गिडगनहQली

633

मािवनकेरे

634

कPेली

635

कु*बरहQली

636

मु िडगेरे

@कUेरी

637

चूजल,यातनहQली

638

गो5वदनहQली

मंaा

के.आर.पेट

639

इचलगु3ेकवल

640

कD िपकोTपलु

641

उिजनहQली

642

िबदरहQली

643

चौडेनहQली

644

सोQलेपुरा

645

@कUेरी

646

भ$नकोTपलू

647

इकनहQली

648

बसवनहQली

649

अनेगोला

650

मंदिलकनहQली

651

तD िगनगPा

652

मरगोनहQली

653

लjमीपुरा

अ@UहेVबलु

654

!वणनहQली

655

मंदगेरे

4736

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

656

,यातनहQली

657

चौड समु$

658

मंचीबीडू

659

हंगरमु_नहQली

660

व3रगुडी

661

जैनहQली

662

सोमनहQली

663

अंिबगरहQली

664

मुडलपुरा

665

अ@UहेVबलू

शीलनेरे

666

होेनाहQली

667

हे मदहQली

668

मरदहQली

669

अंचेमु_नहQली

670

हरलहQली

671

मैलनहQली

672

नीितमंगल

673

राजगPा

674

म*वनहQली

675

kोगनाहQली

संते

676

कोर0टकेरे

बचहिQल

677

नारायणपुराकोTपल

678

SVबनहQली

679

अTपनहQली

680

कोमारनहQली

681

िगददबोTपनहQली

682

मािवनकPेकोTपल

683

लोकनहQली

684

बेददहQली

वDगलु;नगर

आनेकल

कसब

685

समंदु*

686

[एस.मिडवाला]

687

[एस.ित मसं$ा]

688

[गांधीनगर]

689

चेना अRहारा

690

मारनायकनहQली

691

सबमंगला

692

गेरतगेनबेले

693

कुवDपुनगर

694

गुडनहQली

695

मुथगPे

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4737

696

िचUनहQली

697

कु*बरहPी

698

वनकनहQली

699

सुनवरा

700

5सगसं$ा

701

सोलू*

702

मेिण सगनहQली

703

[कDपुदो मसं$ा]

704

चूडनहQली

705

पटनगेरे गोQलहQली

706

कलनायकनहQली

707

िबदरकडहQली

708

तेलगरहQली

709

करपु*

710

अरवंतीगेपुरा

711

हंदेनहQली

712

रचमनहQली

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

713

िबदरगेरे

एफसी1,एफसी2,एनबी4डी2

714

बेतमनहQली

715

[@दू*]

716

VयागदनहQली

717

कुनमिडवाला

718

कD पव3रहQली

719

दो3हगदे

720

[यQल मनपाQया]

721

अवदेनहQली

722

क मसं$ा अRहारा

723

[कवलहोसहQली]

724

िचUहगदे

725

तातनहQली

726

सोTपहQली

727

सुरगजUनहQली

728

िसिdहोसकोटे

729

गोरेनहQली

730

होmकलसपुरा

731

ए.मे@दहQली

732

अगसि मनहQली

733

हिस*वािण

734

अ मिनकेरे दो3केरे

4738

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

735

सं7णनायकनपुरा

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

एफसी1,एफसी2,एनबी4डी2

736

[िस_नपाQया]

737

अडू*

738

[िचयनपाQया]

739

[बोडरहQली]

740

इंडलवाडी

741

[लjमीपुरा]

742

[बसवनपुरा]

743

अरेहQली

744

[बंगलदो3ी]

745

बYगनदो3ी

746

कडुजUनहQली

747

राजोडी

748

िबिलयनदो3ी

749

[नागयंनदो3ी]

750

त मनायकनहQली

751

चूडहQली

752

िचUहोसहQली

753

िचUनहQली

754

इंडलवाडीपुरा

755

[करकलघPा]

756

मूू*

757

मैसूर मनदो3ी

758

[ित यंनदो3ी]

759

ित मसं$ा

760

कुंबरहQली

761

5लगपुरा

762

[नायनहQली]

बDगलू;

आनेकल

िजगनी

763

हरग_े

764

सीतानायकनहQली

765

नोसेनू*

766

एन.गोQलहQली

767

हरग_ेव_रहQली

768

मदपटना

769

Gयावसं$ा

770

कQलबलू

771

िग_ेनहQली

772

जी.बंगीपुरा

773

वडेरमंचनहQली

774

बुUसागरा

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4739

बDगलू* नगर

आनेकल

िजगनी

775

[ससबी @दे]

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

एफसी1,एफसी2,एनबी4डी2

776

[कसुिवनकुंPे]

777

महंत5लगपुरा

778

बलार बंडे

779

कृ^णदो3ी

780

पुजारी5सगयनदो3ी

781

यQल मनदो3ी

782

िग_ेगौडनदो3ी

783

मादTपनदो3ी

784

जवरेगौडनदो3ी

785

दासTपनदो3ी

786

गोिननायकनदो3ी

787

बो मनदहQली

788

कोनसं$ा

789

हरपनहQली

790

कुTपिसdांयनदो3ी

791

िजगनी

792

बंडेनQलसं$ा

793

,यलसनहQली

794

[!ीरामपुरा]

795

हेगारा

796

हेगारा अमिनकेरे

797

यरंडहQली

798

एच.होसहQली

799

कचनायकनहQली

800

मतेनहQली

801

िहU

802

राजपुरा

803

रामकृ^णपुरा

804

Sिलमंगला

805

मरग?डनहQली

806

एस.5बिगपुरा

807

पोडु

808

कD पापुरा

809

वबसं$ा

810

नंजपुरा

811

कोTपा

812

कोTपगेट

813

िशखारीपाQया

814

रािगहQली

4740

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

बDगलू* नगर

आनेकल

िजगनी

815

[मादयनदो3ी]

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

एफसी1,एफसी2,एनबी4डी2

816

[कोरटगेरेदो3ी]

817

[अयनदो3ी]

818

[सेवानायकनदो3ी]

819

[रामनायकनदो3ी]

820

[बसवनदो3ी]

821

िशवनहQली

822

[वंटेमारनहQली]

823

[मुिननंजTपनदो3ी]

824

[सोQलेपुरादो3ी]

825

[पुPेगौडनदो3ी]

826

सुVबेगौडनदो3ी]

827

जयपुरादो3ी

828

[क0रयTपनदो3ी]

829

[उिfनTपनदो3ी]

830

[कटेरीदो3ी]

831

[गुंडiयनदो3ी]

832

मुदलयनदो3ी

833

मंटपा

834

कलेnरी

835

जंगलपाQ या

836

[वoहQली]

837

SQलहQली

838

[चPेकेरेपाQया]

839

िचयनपाQलया]

840

लjमीपुरा

841

[संपंिगरामनगर]

842

हलेसंिपगेहQली

843

मलेनQलसं$ा

844

रायसं$ा

845

सकलवरा

846

SलकसवनहQली

अिबेले

847

वडेरहQली

848

बेिगहQली

849

अमिन िबदरकेरे

850

बुजंगदसंकेरे

851

बे*घPा

852

ब*घPाकवल

853

[कDपनायकनहQली]

854

संिपगेहQली

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4741

अिबेले

855

बुतनहQली

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

856

[ह@Uिप@U कालोनी]

एफसी1,एफसी2, एनबी4डी2

857

िश5ल$दो3ी

858

[Vयाटरयनदो3ी]

859

[बैलमरादो3ी]

860

बैरTपनहQली

861

कनाकनअRहारा

862

[कुलुवेपाQया]

863

अमृतनगर

864

[मुिनमारनदो3ी]

865

िबलवरदहQली

866

[शानूभोगनहQली]

867

[कDचiयनदो3ी]

868

[कैसरगुTपे]

869

गोQलहQली

870

अिबेले

871

बQलूर

872

दासनपुरा

873

कोडलीपुरा

874

अरेहQली

875

हलेहQली

876

मायासं$ा

877

मुतसं$ा

878

कंबलीपुरा

879

[हारोहQली]

880

एम.मे@दहQली

881

भिpपुरा

882

िबदरगुTपे

883

[मलेनहQली]

884

नरसपुरा

885

इंडलाबेले

886

िचUनहQली

887

िजगला

888

अरेनू*

889

चंदापुरा

890

लjमीसागर

891

चंदापुरा चFकने

892

रामसागर

आनेकल

अिबेले

893

अंदपुरा

894

हीलालगे

4742

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

बDगलू* नगर

आनेकल

895

इगलूर

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

एफसी1,एफसी2एनबी4डी2

896

नेरलू*

897

ित*मग?डनहQली

898

बलगरनहQली

899

यदवनहQली

900

अिडग?डनहQली

901

बDिडगनहQली

902

गु3हPी

903

कृ^णसागर

904

िग_नहQली

905

ऐचंगु*

906

[ऐचंगू* व3रपाQय

907

हेVबगोडी

908

ित*पाQया

909

वीरसं$ा

910

गोQलहQली

911

क मसं$ा

912

व3रपाQय

913

बो मसं$ा

914

@कतंगनहQली

सजा4पुरा

915

बनहQली

916

बंगलपेटे

917

सजा4पुरा

918

मुगलूर

919

कुटगनहQली

920

[भोिवपाQय]

921

पं िडतन अRहारा

922

मनहQली

923

गुिडगPनहQली

924

दो3ित मसं$ा

925

महलचौडेनहQली

926

कुगु*

927

बनहQली

928

ितbडलू

929

मदTपनहQली

930

देशपंडेगPहQली

931

सीगनायकनहQली

932

िचUनहQली

933

कमनहQली

934

[राजीवगांधीनगर]

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4743

935

ने0रग

सीएसआर2, सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

एफसी1,एफसी2,एनबी4डी2

936

िचUेने,कुंडी

937

नेकुंिडडो मसं$ा

938

जंतग?डनहQली

939

गो िनगटपुरा

940

कटरीगुTपे

941

हेग?डनहQली

942

हलसQलीितTपसं$ा

943

रामनयकनहQली

944

िचUदासरहQली

945

नंगनRाहारा

946

िचUवदेनूर

947

हंडेनहQली

948

कोटगनहQली

949

सोQलेपुरा

950

िबकनहQली

951

एस.मेदीहQली

952

िबQलपुरा

953

बुरेगुंटे

954

अिडगरकQलहQली

955

[सुQतानपाQया]

956

तैवकनाहQली

957

बैयतैवहQली

958

िबलिचUनहQली

959

यमरे

960

सोमपुरा

961

कदRहारा

962

चंबेनहQली

963

टी.सी.हQली

964

बी.होसहQली

965

वी.कQलहQली

966

इPनगु*

967

दो मसं$ा

968

मुथनQलू*

969

नारायणघPा

970

अिलबो मसं$ा

971

समनहQली

972

गोपसं$ा

973

को मसं$ा

974

िचUित मसं$ा

4744

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

975

5सगेनRहारा

976

मुथनQलू* अमिनकेरे

977

िचUदोसं$ा

978

rसकूर

979

गुिलमंगला

980

अवलहQली

981

चोUसं$ा

982

हरोहQली

983

5चतलमिडवाला

984

कYगिलपुरा

985

कूsलू

986

गPाहQली

987

चूडसं$ा

988

रायसं$ा

989

िचUनागमंगला

990

शांितपुरा

991

व3रपाQया

कोडगू

मिडकेरी

बागमंडला

992

चेरंगला

सीएसआर2

993

सदुिलकेतु

994

कोरंगला

995

कोTपPी

मिडकेरी

बागमंडला

996

बPेगे0र

997

तवु*

संपगे

998

हTपू*

999

िबलीगेरी

वीराजपेटे

1000

बेQलूमडु

सोमवारापेटे

कुशालनगर

1001

भुवनिग0र

सीएसआर2 & सीएसआर4

1002

Sडुगू*

1003

िचUू*

कोडगू

1004

दो3ू*

1005

हे**

1006

बQलू*

1007

मनजू*

1008

बसवनहQली

1009

बसवनतू*

सामवारापेटे

1010

अVबू* कPे

1011

बेलू*

1012

कुसबू*

1013

ति*हQला

1014

मसगोडू

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4745

शिनवारासंते

1015

कुगेकोडी

1016

होसगुPी

कोडलीपेटे

1017

िचUकुंडा

1018

िन*गुंडा

1019

जनाध4नहQली

1020

शीरंगला

सीएसआर संकर

1021

@कू*

1022

कोनेगनहQली

1023

मगधहQली

1024

होसगुPी

उ$र

उ$र क%ड़ िजला

क%ड़ िजला

अंकोला

1. बेलले

1025

तोगसे

1026

बीरला बैल

1027

िहQलू*

1028

क0रकल

1029

सुंकसला

1030

अचवे

1031

मबगी

1032

कुंटकिन

2. बेलेकेरी

1033

हरवदा

भटकल

3 सुसुडी

1034

अYगा

1035

अंतरवQली

4 मवQली

1036

शीराली

1037

कोTपा

5 मुख4वादा

1038

SQलPी

1039

चFनला

1040

बी.के.हQली

सीएसआर शुd & संकर

उर कड़

1041

कवलवदा

1042

नं@दग3ा

1043

मुख4वदा

1044

गालेहQली

हिलयाला

1045

थेगनQली

1046

अलोQली

1047

हविग

1048

गु तीगेरी

1049

सतनQली

1050

Sनसवदा

1051

मुडंU

1052

मदनQली

6 दाडDली

1053

यदोगा

4746

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1054

रामपुरा

1055

आलूरा

7 सांhाणी

1056

कुरीग3ा

हिलयाला

7 सांhाणी

1057

अगसलकPा

1058

अजगवा

होावरा

8 मािवनकुवा4

1059

SUQली

1060

कोलग3े

9 मनक

1061

कुgोली

1062

मुंद*

1063

मगोडु

10 होावरा

1064

कदिन*

1065

होडीकेशी**

1066

चंदवरा

कारवार

11@करा

1067

बग4ल

1068

बेलू*

1069

नगेकोवे

कुमटा

12 मीरजना

1070

बेटकुली

1071

मुलेकेरी

1072

हेबैल

1073

होरेमस@क

1074

!ीगुंजी

1075

मरकल

1076

SणसेकोTपा

1077

हलग3े

13 कुजिQल

1078

मुंडगेज_ी

1079

दीवाली

1080

कोजQली

1081

उQलू*

1082

कQलVबे

मुंडगोडा

14मुंडगोडा

1083

थPीहQला

1084

शीडलगुंडी

1085

इंदू*

1086

अPबैल

1087

बसवनज3ी

1088

बेUोडा

उर कड़

िसdपुरा

15 क?डली

1089

िबUलसे

सीएसआर शुd & संकर

1090

चनमओ

1091

हंिचनचा

1092

हUलकेरी

1093

tयारसी

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4747

1094

गोलग?डा

16 उमबलेमने

1095

गनदमने

1096

अ0रशीनगोडा

1097

अीसवला

1098

हेYगरबैल

1099

थलगरा

1100

कुQले

1101

केसरला

1102

थंडगुंडी

17 कोडकिन

1103

अदमने

1104

शीरो*

1105

गुनवतते

1106

वंदने

1107

िबल4मU

1108

बैलिQल

1109

अलविQल

1110

लUज_ी

1111

नेिQलकोTपा

1112

पुरदमता

1113

मलवQली

1114

इगलीकोTपा

1115

मनमने

1116

अरDदु*

1117

अरसीबैल

1118

कलरा

1119

कोटेकोTपा

1120

िजUनमदक

1121

तDगीनमU

1122

कोननतले

1123

बसवनबैल

1124

मरग3े

िसdपुरा

1125

बेननगुंडी

1126

मतने

1127

हलग3े

1128

होसू*

1129

चं$गटगी

शीरसी

18 बनवासी

1130

दनगनाहQली

1131

कोटेकोTपा

1132

मललगवा

1133

घरसी

4748

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

19 संपखंडा

1134

@कVबली

1135

नेYगू

1136

बनतकोsलू

1137

कोरसे

सीएसआर शुd & संकर

1138

हनीकेरी

1139

बंsला

1140

केरेगनी

1141

कोलगीबीस

उर कड़

1142

देवनQली

1143

को3ग3े

1144

SUलेबैल

1145

हिQलकेरी

1146

कनमने

1147

िबUग3े

1148

सरगुTपा

1149

हसनगी

1150

सवले

20 Sलेकल

1151

लमेलेनQली

1152

बो मनQली

जोयदा

21 जोयदा

1153

बमनगी

1154

नगरी

येQलपुरा

22 मंचीकेरी

1155

केशिनकोडलू

1156

भरणी

1157

वनकेमने

1158

उ मचागी

1159

थुडुगुनी

1160

कंगोडा

1161

थेरीमU

1162

गुडंदू*

1163

जमबेसला

1164

बैलंदूरा

1165

ओनीतोटा

1166

गेरला

1167

दोनगरा

शु( मैसूर बीज े

शु( मैसूर बीज े –अित-र.

अित-र.

तुमकूर

हेVबूर - हेVबूर

हेVबूर

िगरीनायकनपाQया

मारादीगरपाQया

िसdनायकनपाQया

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4749

ग_ेनरसैनापाQया

कलकेरे

कलकेरे पाQया

सगैहनपाQया

शानेगौड़नापाQया

नरसापुरा

िसdणनपाQया

संगलापुरा कॉलोनी

हेVबूर -

गंगोनपाQया

महीमनापाQया

गोQलरहPी

जी.एच. रीसाला

नागेनहिQल

कुंबीपाQया

हेVबूर -

गंगोनपाQया

सीनTपानाहिQल

सीनTपानहिQलकालोनी

कोडूमु_नहिQल

कुंटरायानापाQया

SणसेमरदापाQया

हेVबूर - कनकुTपे

मणीकसबरपाQया

5लगपुरा

कचेनाहिQल

कनकुTपे

बोवीपाQया

Vयाटारायनापुरा

मरीय मनपाQया

तुमकूर

बैचेनाहिQल

गरगदकुTपे

रायवरा

ित मसं$ा

िचUदेवरहPी

मरीिचUiयापाQया

हेVबूर - बQलगेरे

बQलगेरेकवल

कQयाणपुरा

हनुमंतनगर

दो3ेiयानाकPेपाQया

वUोडiयनापाQया

दसेगौडनापाQया

दासरहQली

4750

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

माय मनापाQया

कुिणगल

Sिलयूरदूगा4-

िनदसले

चालमनसं$ा

िशवनहिQल

SFीदुगा4

नागनहिQल

स?डलगेरे

रामनगरम

मागडी

सोलूर

`Vबनकेरे

`Vबनकुंटे पाQया

अरसीनकुंटे

टीएमजी पाQया

चोलापाQया

ित मसं$ा

िसdांiयानपाQया

Vयालाकेरे

हUनल

होसापाQया

अनकनापाQया

एम.आर.पाQया

भ$ापाQया

रंगेनहिQल

बीसं$ा

हेमपुरा

गंगेनापुरा

Sदकुंटे

कूदूर

अलदकPे

ए.एम.पाQया

वoहQली

केमपोहQली

बेतरपाQया

येसTपानपाQया

कनसं$ा

अरेपाQया

चीलूर

थेरनाहिQल

हनुमपुरा

मदबल

जूदोघPा

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4751

कवलपाQया

पूलहQली

टी.जी.पाQया

तिमल नाडू राय

िज बीज े

िजला

तालुक

हो ली

हो ली/लॉक

/लॉक

म

!ाम का नाम

रेशमक"ट उपजाित

सं.

धमा4पुरी

पTपीरे3ीपPी

मोरTपूर

जलीयूर

ह*र

िचकुTपम

नामUल

रसीपुरम

वेंदूर

कलनकुलम

ित*Tपूर

धम4पुरम

धरपुरम

कनकयमपाQयम

ित*वमलै

वंथवसल

को\टुपUम

पुदुकोPै

कुलथूर

कंतकोइल

नQलथंगलपPी

सीएसआर2 , सीएसआर4, एफसी1 &

एफसी2

वीरालीमलै

थेथीरायनपPी

अलनकुडी

ित*वरनकुलम

थडीयमनइ

वDकटकुलम

पुदुकोPै

कांथतवकोPै

कुपuनपPी

करमबकुडी

थीथनीपPी

छ$ीसगढ़

छ$ीसगढ़ राय

राय

तसर बीज े

िजला

तालुक

हो ली

हो ली/लॉक

/लॉक

म

!ाम

!ाम का नाम

का नाम

रेशम

रेशम क"ट उपजाित

क"ट उपजाित

सं.

जांगीर

भामनीदीह

भमनीदीह

सारागांव

बलोदा

रामपुर

िFज

मSदा

करहीदी

कंकेर

चारमा

िFज

नारहरपुर

नारहरपुर /कंकेर

नवगांव

रायगढ़

घरघोदा

तमनर

गरे बुदीया कसदोल

लैलूंगा

कतकलीया

धमा4जैगर

हटी

खारसीया

बरा

दिवज

सारनगढ़

कनकबीरा

बरमकेला

कंडोला

बरमकेला

सरीया

4752

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

घरघोदा

कुदुमकेला

तमनर

तमनगर

धमा4जैगर

सीvWगा

सारनगढ़

कनकबीरा

बरमकेला

िFज

तोरना

5सघारी

ड?गरीपाली

असम राय

मूगा बीज े

िजला

तालुक/हो ली

तालुक/हो ली/लॉक

/लॉक

म

!ा

!ाम का नाम

म का नाम

रेशमक"ट उपजाित

सं.

डीhूगढ़

wटगखxग

1 सं.गांधीया

ऐिbथ0रया आसामा

2 सं.गांधीया

1 सं.बेटोनी

रायड?गीय

नचानी

केकूरी सोनोवाल

ओफुलीय सोनोवाल

2 सं.थDगल

खोवांग

नहोरानी

Sंगुिb गया

कोरडोइगुरी

नपथर

नतून भरली

कतैगुरी

टDगखाट

तमूलीखात

बोरबम

जॉयपुर

1 सं.दोलमुरी

सुकनी

िनगम

कोमरगांव

कD दुगुरी

कचार

अyी

थलीRाम

चूंगूरबांड

ितलनगर

जीबंRम

कुमचेरा

डोलोइचेरा

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4753

जोयपुरा

मोहनखल

सोनीतपुर

बालीपारा

उलुब*

तराबरी

बालीपारा

उदमरी

भलूकपुंग

रंगपरा

उपर कचरीगांव

2 सं. नहरनीRांट

बोरसोला

बोरोसला

बोरभोिगया

नतून बोरझार

पब बोरझार

पिचम बोरजहर

काम;प

बोनगांव

दोलतोवा

संतैकोना

बतकुची

मेकमदल

मजैलरी मोड?गप

ललमित

कोमपदूली

बuगजDग

वाकमेगzाप

नोपारा

ऐिbथ0रया आसामा

zोनपारा

बोको

मेगाडाप

समरंग

हहीम

दैनी तरबरी

ब{परा

सखती

रानीखत

उTपरतरबरी

टंगखुला

बोको

िगहनीमरा

नमतराबरी

दोइनी

दैनी तरबरी

गोहलकोना

गोलपारा

रंगजूली

साल पारा

4754

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

मलंगकोना

चोरैबाहा

बुरबुरी

ब{पारा

गारोपारा

सोनालीपरानौवापारा

पतपारा

औगुरी

कहीबरीगरोपारा

मदंग

ितलापारा

चेचजझारा

धनुभंग

बमुनपारा

जोलापारा

दकुआकता

ओयमरी

दुरमरी

बतबरी

@दयोधवीता

फकरपारा

पलसा

कथलमुरी

धोनतोला

गतीयपारा

गोहीलबोरी

पीपलीबरी

पुतीमरी

सवलीबोरी

बाघदोबा

बलीजना

भलूकदूबी

कु*वाभाषा

100

भोइशखुली

101

दोसरपारा

102

अलंगपारा

103

कQयानपुर

104

बूधीपारा

105

कोचपारा

106

सोलमरी

107

ह0टगांव

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4755

108

बोदहापुर

109

बैजुरी

ऐिbथ0रया आसामा

110

बोरदक

111

दलोक

112

रपखापारा

बलीजना

112

दोरापारा

113

चौकापारा

114

पखरपारा

लखीपुर

115

मोघो

116

हतीसीला

117

ज?गपारा

118

तीसीमकली

119

बलसरी

120

नेहलीवीता

121

बैदा

जोरहट

चीपहीखुला

122

ककोजन

123

पीराकोता

124

होल?गपारा

125

मबकुकुरचोवा

126

मोरंगांव

127

बैलूंग गांव

किलयापानी

128

जोगदूर

129

कलीपानी गोहैन गांव

130

सीमोलीगुरी

131

बलमा

132

हंचारा

133

बामुनपुखरी

तीताबार

134

रंगजन

135

बीबीजन

136

बो;ला

137

राजबहार

138

खरखोवा

139

बेबजीय

140

@दयोघो0रया

141

कचूघाट

142

तोकौबरी

सेलDघाट

143

हेमलै

144

नकचारी

145

बोलीमोरा

146

इरागांव बोमगया

4756

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

147

चूंगी लहWग

148

मोरोनगीअल

गोलघाट

पदुमोनी

149

कब*गांव

150

बोगोरीजDग

151

चेलDगी

कथालगुरी

152

सं.1 सेनचोवा

153

सं.2 सेनचोवा

154

दखीन मौखुवा

155

अकागांव

156

दुलखोरीय

बोकखत

157

थंगल फान

मोर?ग

158

प?का

159

बोरचापोरी

ककदुंग

160

बतीपोरीया

161

कचुगांव

162

सुमोनी

सा*पाथार

163

जलजोरी

164

लंगथा

165

िबलपाथर

166

नवजान

ऐिbथ0रया आसामा

लखीपुरा

नरायनपुर

167

घंगरा

168

स?धारा

169

केसे*गुरी

170

घेमगढ़

171

1 सं.र?गतो

172

तीनीअली हंडीक़

173

3 सं.िनमूरी

174

4 सं.िनमूरी

175

बलीपुखुरी

176

जुतूलीबारी

177

बाSपाथर

178

बातीपा0रया

179

नवघुली

180

पनीगांव

181

खलीहमरी

182

जोरहतीय

183

बेज़रचुक

184

भीतरडोलोनी

185

गेलेक

186

दीब*आ

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4757

िशवसागर

चपंगानी

187

Sदु पारा अभयपु0रया

खंिगया गांव

खेलूवा

188

बनमुख दे5हिगया

189

बारहो5तग

190

बोगीदल भरलीगांव

देमौ

191

बोइरघीबार

192

कचरीपाथर

193

पतकु

अमगुरी

194

दुिलया गांव

सोनरी

195

सेपॉन ितफोक गांव

पि8म अभोरीपुर

196

मथुरापुर भकोत गांव

एरी बीज े

िजला

तालुक/होली/लॉक

म

!ाम का नाम

रेशमक"ट उपजाित

सं.

िडhूगढ़

बरब*आ

मधुपुर देवरी गांव

@फलोसोिमया 0रिसनी - nेत जाित

सादा व धVबायुp

परोिलगुरी

गोहैगांव

ितनसु@कया गांव

1 सं.सेसाकोश

मनकोटा

हितमोरा

खोवांग

2 सं.चराईहािब

ग?धोइगुरी

गजपु0रया कोनवार गांव

गजपु0रया नेपाली गांव

जॉयपुर

कचरी पाथर

@फलोसोिमया 0रिसनी -@दफू जाित

करबी अंगलॉग

लुंबज?ग

इंगी गांव

सरते तेरॉगांव

िहदी सािजर गांव

िज़रला गांव

तरलनगसो गांव

राम5सग तेरॉगांव

समेलांगसो

र?गमीरन बेयगांव

cदगासो तेरॉगांव

भलूकजन गांव

4758

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

िचनत?ग हनसेगांव

मेशपारा गांव

पालम एंगटी गांव

हवराघाट

लान,लDग तेर?गांव

आyी

उमसुवै मॉडल िवलेज

रामफन गांव

उमसलन गांव

िहउbदू बॉि त

मलांग गांव

बोरम0रजन गांव

कQयाणपुर

@फलोसोिमया 0रिसनी - nेत जाित

सादा व धVबायुp

द*इखल

5जबनRाम

कचार

Dचनगर

तैफुंनगर

गुआबारी

खासपुर

सोनीतपुर

सूितया

चारDगीया

ना-पाम

बारा भूयन

नलबढ़ी बोरभेती

जोयिसधी

बािलजुरी

िनज़ारपार

ना-दुआर

तलकाबारी

बोरपखुरीपार

दीकारायगुरी

कुसुमटोला

0रहाबारी

गोहाई चुक

तुपीया

बेतगुरी

ह5तगा

नािबल

तौभांग

नहरबारी

बलीपारा

िसरंगजूली

दलंगबती

मोरीसुती

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4759

अमलॉगा

बाटाबारी

चापागुरी

धेकदोल

बोरपुखुरीपार

रंगपारा

ऊपर कचारीगांव

@फलोसोिमया 0रिसनी - nेत जाित

सादा व धVबायुp

2 सं.नहरानीRांट

2 सं.नमनीगांव

बोरसोला

नैतुन बोज़हार

पब-बोरझार

दालबारी

बीहागुरी

घातुवा

िनरैओित

ब*आदोलोनी

पुितमारी

बपुभेटी

बोरगांव चापरी

प?जरी

उलूबारी

1 सं.बरफूकुरी

धे@कयाजूली

सीराजूली सFा

ब?डैजरानी

पीराकाता

बगरीबाडी

5सहरी

नहरबारी

मज़-रौमारी

बलीसुित

पंच-नॉय

नागांव

कथीयाटोली

छोटा कॉडोली

उदली

लांग मैलू

बीनाकंदी

मोदरतोली

होजाई

उदली

लांग मैलू

बीनाकंदी

मोदरतोली

काम;प

चायनी बो*दुअर

खोखापारा

@फलोसोिमया 0रिसनी - बोरदुआर

बगान जाित सादा, धVबायुp व जेhा

मािनकपुर

बोरदुआर

तDगखल

100

हितबंधा

4760

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

101

घीलाबारी

102

युजूला

103

उमसोर

104

हनपारा

105

राजापारा

106

नागांव

107

पतगांव

108

सलसेर

काम;प

रानी

109

बाटाबारी

@फलोसोिमया 0रिसनी - बोरदुआर

बगान जाित सादा, धVबायुp व जेhा

110

िमलानपुर

111

िबलपारा

112

रानीबारी

113

ज़ीमपुता

114

2 सं.जपांगपुरी

115

मैरापुर

116

गणेशपारा

117

पुनमपुर

118

बोरजूली

119

हेरकाजूली

120

पUालाइन

121

सामपुर

छायागांव

122

नारायणपुर

123

सीिमयन

124

रंगमित

125

जोगीबारी

126

पतगांव

127

औगुरी

128

2 स.रतनपुर

129

भेरभेरी

130

दकुआपारा

131

करदेगुरी

132

रतनपुर

133

बोरजहर

134

जलूकाबारी

ब?गांव

135

िनिचनपुर

136

लमगांव

137

लमपारा

138

चौधुरीपारा

139

फालापुंग

140

संतीपुर

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4761

141

बोरखाल

142

1 सं.बोरखाल

143

ल*बामा

लुक बेकेली

144

हाटीपारा

145

मौचौवा

146

गारोघुSली

147

लांगकोना

148

नंबरजूली

149

सुकुनीपारा

150

िगरीमा

151

बोरीपारा

152

भालापारा

153

उलीपारा

154

गरबंधा

155

दावगांव

दीमो0रया

156

कलनपुर

157

मगुरसीला

158

तलानी

गोलपारा

रंगजुली

159

साल पारा

@फलोसोिमया 0रिसनी - nेत जाित,

सादा एवं धVबायुp

160

मलंगकोना

161

चोराईबाल

162

बुराबुरी

163

बखरापारा

164

गरोपारा

165

सोनालीपारा

166

नौपारा

167

पतपारा

168

औगुरी

169

हदीपारा

170

गारोवीता

171

गारोपारा

172

सारापारा

173

महजोनपारा

174

राउमरी

175

सुतरपारा

176

सरदारपारा

177

सीिमलीटोला

178

डॉ,टोपारा

179

देवनपारा

4762

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

कुचधोवा

180

कुमारपारा

181

बंगालपारा

182

बेचीमारी

183

स$ापारा

184

हतखोलाबारी

बलीजाना

185

हांथीगांव

186

बोदहपुर

187

बैजुरी

188

बोरदक

189

दलोक

190

रोखापारा

191

दोरापारा

192

चौकापारा

193

पखारपारा

194

सT लेकांता

195

कतापारा

196

पुितमरी

197

ाइमरी

198

केतकबारी

199

Iारका

200

देवली

@फलोसोिमया 0रिसनी - nेत जाित,

सादा व धVबायुp

201

कोसलोतपारा

धेमाजी(जोनाई

उपम7डल)

मरकॉगसेलेक जनजाित िवकास खंड

202

केमी जेलूम

203

लेकु जेलूम

204

उजोइनी बीजोयपुर

205

उदपुर देबे चपोरी

206

मजुलीपुर सं.1 + सं.2

207

जमीजDग

208

हंदीक िमलॉन

209

सं.3 मुरक?ग सेलेक

210

सीमेन चपोरी

211

हंगामा चपोरी

212

ब*बली

213

कोरोयबारी

दरांग

पि8म मंगलडोई

214

कबीकरा

215

दहीगंनकपारा

216

दही बिनयापारा

217

सोतानगर

पुब मंगलडोई

218

बंदीया

219

के.बं@दया

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4763

220

बं@दया चपोरी

221

अलगाचार

बेचीमारी

222

हीरापारा

223

ब*आझार

224

ब*आपारा

दरांग

बेचीमारी

225

बताबारी

@फलोसोिमया 0रिसनी - nेत जाित,

सादा व धVबायुp

सीपाझार

226

सतघ0रया

227

कबीचूबा

228

चDगापारा

229

बोरदौलगुरी

230

नागांव

231

गो*खुटी

232

समला

233

रायकाबारी

234

झाकुआपारा

235

महािलयापारा

236

नंकारा

कलैगांव

237

कचारीपारा

238

चारं~ा

239

बाघरबारी

जोरहाट

बागचुंग

240

जलूकोनी

241

तमुलबारी

242

खोरीको0टया

243

नगधोली अधोलको0टया

244

खेरिमया

245

नम*िपया

धेकोरगोरह

246

बहफोला

247

कलबारी

248

नमदेउरी

249

को@कलामुख

धेकोरगोरह

250

लोिलतीमुख

251

बोराहोम

252

खुितयापुता

@फलोसोिमया 0रिसनी - nेत जाित,

सादा व धVबायुp

सेलेनघाट

253

हेमलाई

254

नाकाचारी

255

बोलीमोरा

256

एरागांव बोरंगया

257

चूंगी लहWग

258

मॉर?िगया

मजुली

259

रतनपुर

4764

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

260

रौनापारा

261

बोनगांव

262

बंगेनती

263

कनीजन

264

दो0रयागांव

गोलाघाट

पदुमोनी

265

मोकरॉग

266

बलीजन

कथालगुरी पदुमोनी

267

बोटग सेनचौवा

268

कब*

गोमरी

269

गरीगांव

270

मोराचुक

कथालगुरी

271

मोयदामोनी

272

अकागांव

273

नाथगांव

274

सौटोली

मोर?गी

275

पDकगांव

276

कनैघाट

देरागांव

277

सागुढ़ी

278

नतुनचापोरी

279

दनीयचापोरी

280

ना-भ?गा

281

खकंदगुरी

282

कचारीपम

गोलाघाट

देरागांव

283

दखीन डोलीजोला

@फलोसोिमया 0रिसनी - nेत सादा व

धVबायुp

बोकाखात

284

दुसुतीमुख

285

अलामी

बोकाखात

286

राजबारी

287

बोसागांव

सा*पाथर

288

जोलजोरी

289

गेलािबल

290

िबलगांव

291

िबलपाथार

292

नवजान

ककदुंगा

293

बातीपा0रया

मोरीगांव

भूरबंधा

294

औजारी

295

मिणपुर

296

गसरगुरी

मयॉग

297

बखाराबारी

298

गरमारी

299

घाघवा

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4765

300

मीखाबारी

301

कुमारकुची

302

बंगफोर

303

बेिहथा

@फलोसोिमया 0रिसनी - nेत सादा व

धVबायुp

304

खWदेहर

305

सेनैकुची

306

संतीपुर

307

बेSबारी

308

दरेपनीगांव

कपीली

309

िमकरगांव

310

लूककुची

311

पFाबारी

312

बनपारा

ितनसु@कया

ककपथार

313

काकापाथर

314

फलोबरी

315

दनगरी

316

मैथंग

इतखूली

317

मितयाखाना

गुइजन

318

ना-सराय

319

बरगुरी

मरघे0रता

320

नमसल

321

जागुन

322

मकुमपाथर

323

मकुम@कQला

लखीमपुर

नाथ4 लखीमपुर

324

कोरचान

@फलोसोिमया 0रिसनी - nेत, सादा

धVबायुp एवं जेhा

325

भोगमॉन

326

नोवर गांव

327

चरायमारी

328

बकल गांव

329

बोरकमलाब0रया

330

बोरछापरी

331

घुनसुती

332

घरमारा

तेलही

333

गोहैन तेकेला

334

बाहपती नाथ गांव

335

मोदरगुरी

336

दा-गती

337

र?गपु0रया

338

बोरसोरीय

339

जोरिह टया

4766

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

बोगीनदी

340

गगलदुबी बोरखेिलया

लखीमपुर

बोगीनदी

341

गगलदुबी बलीगांव

@फलोसोिमया 0रिसनी - nेत, सादा

धVबायुp एवं जेhा

342

गगलदुबी माजगांव

343

1 सं.लालपानी

344

2 सं.लालपानी

345

बोगीनदी नगर नगांव

346

बोगीनदी कचारी गांव

347

जरधारा

348

कदम बेगान गांव

349

राजगढ़

350

बोधकारा मजगांव

िशवसागर

छापनगनी

351

न-पम ब*वती

352

दुलकखोरीया

353

चानबेषा

354

रेबती कपSवा

355

बौलीमोइदम

@फलोसोिमया 0रिसनी - nेत, सादा

धVबायुp एवं जेhा

गौरीसागर

356

लाइया

357

चीपही

खेलुवा

358

बनमुख नगांव

359

कलूगांव

देमौ

360

कचरीपाथार

361

धुरामुख

362

बाम राजबरी

363

ना-हत

एन.सी.िहQस

(दीमहसौ)

मैबॉग

364

देहर फ?गलो

365

लॉगखार

366

कालाचंद

367

खेजुरबांग

368

दमदी हौवर

369

पूण4 माइबूग

370

गीदWग पार

371

हरी चं$पुर

372

बसबरी

373

दीमलीकपुर

हाफलांग

374

दीकरीक

375

दीबराय

376

दीमलीक राजी

377

तुलाराम राजी

378

तोपोदीशा

379

बोलीदुरा

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4767

380

सूरजनगर

381

अम*दीशा

382

बोरोवाशीिलग

383

लंRी

असम राय

शहतूत बीज े

िजला

तालुक/होली/लॉक

म

म सं.

सं.

!ाम का नाम

रेशमक"ट उपजाित

कचार

1 कामरंग

बSज - सा*पत

नागांव

कथीयाटोली

2 पि8म सेचोवा

बSज - सा*पत व िनतरी

काम;प

छायागांव

3 जोगीरबारी, र€पुर

बSज - सा*पत व िनतरी

गोलपारा

बलीजना

4 बूधीपारा

एम वी - सा*पत

5 दोरापारा

िIज - एनबी4डी2, सीएसआर1,

सीएसआर2

6 चौकापारा

दरांग

पि8म मंनगलदोई

7 कबीकारा

बSज - स*पत,िनतरीिIज -

सीएसआर1, सीएसआर2, सीएसआर4

8 सोतनगांव

9 बोरमगांव

10 िनज़ दही

11 बनीयापारा

12 गोसाईगांव

पुब मंगलदोई

13 चेनीयलपारा

14 खतनीयापारा (धुला)

सीपझार

15 सतघ0रया

16 बलीपारा

17 बताबारी

18 गभाहारा

19 हQदा

20 िनज़-िसपाझार

21 हरीमु0रया

22 सतखाली

कलैगांव

23 हीरापारा

24 बघरबारी

25 दलाघाट

26 गोरीयपारा

27 चरनधारा

28 हपमारा

29 बलीपोता

30 बहजनी

4768

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

जोरहाट

बगचुंग

31 जलूकोनी

बSज - सा*पत, िनतरीिIज -

सीएसआर1, सीएसआर2, सीएसआर4

32 तमुलबारी

33 खोरीकोटीया

34 ^{नागाघोली}

अधोलको0टया

35 खेरिमया

36 नम*िपया

धेकोरगोरह

37 बहफोला

38 कालबारी

39 नामदेवरी

40 पोतीया गांव

41 लोलीितमुख

42 बोराहोम

43 िनमती गोरWयभोगा

44 उTपर बाहफोला

45 नमोनी बाहफोला

46 सगुरी

47 करDग छापोरी

48 उTपर देवरी

49 नाम देवरी

50 छारीघोरीया

जोरहाट

धेकोरगोरह

51 बोरखु

बSज - सा*पत, िनतरीिIज -

सीएसआर1, सीएसआर2, सीएसआर4

तीताबर

52 रंगजान

53 बीबीजान

54 बोरSला

55 राजाबाहर

56 खारखोवा

57 बेरबेजीया

58 देवघोरीया

59 काचुखाट

60 तोकोबारी

जोरहाट

मजौली

61 रतनपुर

62 रौनापारा

63 बेनगांव

64 बेनगेनटी

65 कानीजन

66 दोराइगांव

67 रंगाचाही

68 लूइतपारा

69 सलमोरा

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4769

70 बीरीाबारी

71 गौल गांव

लखीमपुरा

घीलमारा

72 बोरपतीया

िIज - एनबी4डी2, एनबी18,

सीएसआर2Xसीएसआर4

73 स*पतीया

74 धूलपेटा

75 मतनीबारी

76 केकूरी

77 सपेखाती

78 1 सं.घीलामारा

79 कोरोइगुरी

80 बलीयोनोय

81 सोनारी सपारी

82 छारीकुरीया

83 मोरनोइ बेबेजीया

84 पतीर चूक

उर लखमीपुर

85 उ जलपुर

86 काचीपाथर

87 जनकपुर

88 सतकपुर

89 िसयाबारी

90 ना-पम

िशवसागर

गौरीसागर

91 ^{मथीयचीग देहीनगीया}

गांव

िIज - सीएसआर1, सीएसआर2 ,

सीएसआर4

खेलूवा

92 कुकुआछुरा

देमौ

93 धुb दरमुख

94 पलांगी

बोडोल5ड

बोडोल5ड टेरीटो-रयल

टेरीटो-रयल

टेरीटो-रयल क6िसल

क6िसल

क6िसल (बीटीसी)

(बीटीसी)

(बीटीसी), कोकराझार

कोकराझार

एरी बीज े

िजला

तालुक/हो ली

तालुक/हो ली/लॉक

/लॉक

म

म सं.

सं.

!ाम का नाम

रेशमक"ट उपजाित

कोकराझार

तालुक- परबतझोरा Vलॉक -

देवीटोला

1 दोलनझोरा

एरी

2 मोलंदुबी

3 ब?गशीझोरा

तालुक - कोकराझार Vलॉक -

तीतागुरी

4 बेथगांव

5 बमुनपारा

6 बोरो कुरसाकती

7 नायकगांव

बकसा

तालुक-मुशलपुर Vलॉक-

मुशलपुर

8 नारायणपुर

9 दारागांव

10 उज़ीबारी

11 जलाह

4770

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

तालुक - तमुलपुर Vलॉक

- नगरीजुली

12 नगरीजूली

तालुक - सलबारी Vलॉक -

सलबारी

13 हसोरा

उदलगुरी

तालुक- उदलगुरी Vलॉक -

उदलगुरी

14 धनसी0र‚ती

15 बारगेन

16 हजोजूली

17 दैफंगखुती

18 वरंग

19 हाबवे

20 बुराचूबूरी

21 अलीकगुरी

22 बोसकोबरी

तालुक- उदलगुरी Vलॉक -

रौता

23 बलीसाहबी

24 दहीगोला

25 बाटाबारी

तालुक - उदलगुरी Vलॉक -

मज़बत

26 नलबारी

27 कलबारी

28 कथपुरी

29 बलीसीहा

मूगा बीज े

िजला

तालुक/हो ली

तालुक/हो ली/लॉक

/लॉक

म

!ाम का नाम

रेशमक"ट उपजाित

सं.

कोकराझार

तालुक - कोकराझोर Vलॉक

- तीतागुरी

1 बेसरगांव

मूगा

2 बोरो कुरसकटी

ब,सा

तालुक - मुशलपुर Vलॉक -

जलाह

3 जलाह

4 उज़ीबारी

5 बथौपुरी

तालुक - तमुलपुर Vलॉक

- तमुलपुर

6 कुमारीकाता

तालुक - सलबारी Vलॉक

- सलबारी

7 सलबFी

8 मजोतमखा

उदलगुरी

तालुक - भेरगांव Vलॉक -

भेरगांव

9 नलबारी

10 सी लीबारी

तालुक- भेरगांव Vलॉक -

खैराबारी

11 कुहीरकुची

12 बगरीबारी

13 ज़ारगांव

14 अरDगपारा

तालुक - भेरगांव Vलॉक -

कलैगांव

15 बरजार

16 नीज़-दोला

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4771

मिणपुर राय

िज बीज े

िजला

तालुक/हो ली

तालुक/हो ली/लॉक

/लॉक

म

म सं.

सं.

!ाम का नाम

रेशमक"ट उपजाित

इंफाल पूव4

सवोमबंग

सेइजांग

सी102 व जे101

अचानबीगइ

सी102 व जे101

कैराव

बमोन कंपू

सी102 व जे101

इंफाल पि8म

हऔरंग सबल

फूमलौ

सी004 व जे003

तौथांग

सी004 व जे003

थौबल

कक5चग

सी102 व जे101

थौबल

लेइर?गतेल

सी102 व जे101

उलयल

सी102 व जे101

िब^णुपुर

मोईरंग

वांगू

सी004 व जे003

कूंबी

सी004 व जे003

नमबल

वरोइ5चग

सी004 व जे003

उख*ल

Sनडुंगु

सी102 व जे101

सेनापित

सेनािप त

सेनापित

सी102 X सी004 व जे101 X जे003

तदुबी

कर?ग

सी102 X सी004 व जे101 X जे003

चंदेल

चंडेल

पQलेल

सी004 X सी102 व जे003 X जे101

चकपीकर?ग

चकपीकरांग

सी004 X सी102 व जे003 X जे101

कंगपोकपी

मोलसंग

सी102 X सी004 व जे101 X जे003

सैतु

मोतबुंग

सी102 X सी004 व जे101 X जे003

तमDगलांग

नुंगबा

नोनी

सी004 X सी102 व जे003 X जे101

तुपुल

सी004 X सी102 व जे003 X जे101

सी सी पुर

टी.डी.Vलॉक

पDगज़ाल

सी004 X सी102 व जे003 X जे101

साइपुम

सी004 X सी102 व जे003 X जे101

2. आगे, उp अिधिनयम क धारा-8 ग क उप-धारा [2] के खंड-[क] क द शिpय? का योग करते Sए केb$ सरकार उp सिमित क

िसफ़ा0रश? पर रेशमकट बीज क अिधसूिचत @कम? अथवा जाितय? के bयूनतम गु णवा मानक? को भी िविन…द† करती है ।

एएन (I) - शहतूत रेशमक"ट के ािधकृत नए ि*ज संकर

(एचएसी *ारा 30.07.2013

30.07.2013

30.07.2013 को ािधकृत)

म

संसंसंसं.

संकर

राय

राय/े

े

े /आंचल

आंचल

कटपालन आंकड़ा

अंडजनन

मता

(संसंसंसं)

फुटन मता

(%)

उरजीिवता

कोसा उपज

कोसा उपज /100

रोमुबीच

रोमुबीच (क ा

क ा

क ा)

!यूपीकरण

दर

दर (%)

कोस& क सं.

कोस& क सं./

क ा

सीएसआर50x

सीएसआर51

दिण अंचल नामत: कना टक,

आं देश, तिमलनाडु व

महारा

≥480

≥90

≥67

≥90

≥550

एपी71 x एपी72

दिण अंचल नामत: कना टक,

आं देश, तिमलनाडु व

महारा

≥500

≥ 95

≥ 90

≥ 66

≥ 90

≥ 570

(सीएसआर52x

सीएसआर50) x

(सीएसआर51x

सीएसआर53)

भारत के सभी रेशम उ!पादन

अंचल

≥500

≥90

≥68

≥90

≥540

4772

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

एएन (II) ािधकृत नए ब-ज x ि*ज शहतूत रेशमक"ट संकर

(एचएसी *ारा 4.03.2013

.03.2013

.03.2013 एवं 30.07.2013

30.07.2013

30.07.2013 को ािधकृत)

म

संसंसंसं.

संकर

राय

राय/े

े

े /आंचल

आंचल

कटपालन आंकड़ा

अंडजनन

मता

फुटन मता

(%)

उरजीिवता

कोसा उपज

कोसा उपज /

100 रोमुबीच

रोमुबीच

(क ा

क ा

क ा)

!यूपीकरण

दर

दर (%)

कोस& क सं.

कोस& क सं./

क ा

एनxएनबी4डी2

पि#म बंगाल, झारखंड,

ओिडशा, असम, मिणपुर,

मेघालय, नागलै+ड

≥400

≥90

≥45

≥90

≥650

एन(एम)

x(एसके6xएसके7)

पूव- एवं उ/र-पूव- े0

≥ 400

≥ 90

≥ 47

≥ 90

≥ 750

एम6डीपी(सी)x

एसके4सी

पूव- एवं उ/र-पूव- े0

≥ 450

≥ 90

≥ 50

≥ 90

≥ 700

एएन (III) – अिधसूचना के िलए ािधकृत नए ि*ज शहतूत रेशमक"ट पैतृक बीज

म

संसंसंसं

जाित

अंडजनन मता

फुटन मता

(%)

उरजीिवता

उरजीिवता %

कोसा उपज

कोसा उपज /

100 रोमुबीच

रोमुबीच

(क ा

क ा

क ा)

!यूपीकरण दर

(%)

कोस& क सं.

कोस& क सं./ क ा

क ा

एनबी4डी2

≥475

≥90

≥45

≥90

≥800

एपी71

≥ 500

≥ 95

≥ 89

≥ 60

≥ 90

≥ 640

एपी72

≥ 480

≥ 95

≥ 91

≥ 63

≥ 91

≥ 625

सीएसआर50

≥475

≥90

≥62

≥90

≥530

सीएसआर51

≥500

≥90

≥92

≥60

≥92

≥550

सीएसआर52

≥ 480

≥ 90

≥ 61

≥ 90

≥ 540

सीएसआर53

≥ 465

≥ 90

≥ 91

≥ 60

≥ 91

≥ 545

एसके4सी

≥ 510

≥ 90

≥ 52

≥ 90

≥ 680

एसके6

≥ 505

≥ 90

≥ 48

≥ 90

≥ 660

एसके7

≥ 500

≥ 90

≥ 47

≥ 90

≥ 650

एएन (IV) - अिधसूचना के िलए ािधकृत नए ि*ज शहतूत रेशमक"ट पैतृक बीज

म

सं.

जाित

अंडजनन "मता

#फुटन "मता

(%)

उ'रजीिवता

को

कोसा उपज

सा उपज

सा उपज /

100 रोमुबीच

रोमुबीच

((क)ा

(क)ा

(क)ा)

*यूपीकरण दर

(%)

कोस, क- सं.

कोस, क- सं./

(क)ा

एम6डीपी(सी)

≥ 450

≥ 90

≥ 36

≥ 90

≥ 850

[फा. सं. 25017/12/2015-रेशम(i)]

सीताराम गुT ता, अवर सिचव

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4773

New Delhi, the 21st December, 2015

S.O. 2336.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section-8 C of Central Silk Board Act,

1948 (LXI of 1948) the Central Govt. after consultation with the Central Silkworm Seed Committee, is of the opinion

that it is necessary and expedient to regulate the quality of silkworm seed and therefore hereby notifies the following

kinds or varieties of silkworm seed and seed cocoons, which shall be produced in the particular State / area as indicated

below against each. The Central Government further notifies that onus lies upon every seed producer or seed cocoon

producer or farmer in the particular notified area to produce notified pure races of silkworm seed/seed cocoon only and

no other kind or varieties of silkworm seed and seed cocoons.

KARNATAKA STATE

Bivoltine Seed Area:

District

Taluk

Hobali

SL.

Name of Village

Silk worm Variety

No.

Belgavi

Gugarenatti.

CSR2

Nandi halli

Hirebagevadi

Bendigeri

Sulebavi

Nagenatti

Badal Ankalgi

Muthnal

Marihal

Modaga

Kamakaratti

Tummarguddi

Darantti

Uchagav

Belagundi

Sulaga

Sonoli

Navage

Bijagrni

Vagavade

Yallur

Gojaga

Aste

Agsaga

Kallevli

Kudremani

Rayadurg

Bakanur

Ankali

Hudali

Honnihal

Bailhongal

CSR2

Devalapur

Vkkund

Anigol

Chivtagundi

Bevinakoppa

CSR2

Nesaragi

Mallapur

Mekalmardi

Hanabaratti

Naganur

Murakibavi

Kithur

Kulavlli

Hirenandihalli

Kadathnal

Kalabavi

4774

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Garjur

Devagav

Neginahal

Yaradal

Kodhanapur

Pattihal.K.B

Khanapur

Devalathi

Kamasinakoppa

Vdebail

Karambal

Keravad

CSR2

Golihalli

Modekoppa

Boranaki

potagal

Bedi

Halasi

Bekavad

Hukkeri

Yelimunavalli

CSR2

Hukkeri

Arajunavad

Belld bagevadi

Hanajanatt

Siragav

Siradan

Hullolli

Yadagud

Benavad

Keshti

Jinaral

Basapur

Bannibagi

Bagaranal

Hosur

Yaragtti

Yallapur

Sarapur

Belgavi

Sirur

CSR2

Hagedal

Gudas

Yamakanmardi

Hthargi

Athihal

Belavanki

U.Khanapur

Hanchana;

Sankeshwar

Gotur

Sankeshwar

Bad

Ammanagi

Nerli

Hebbal

Badakundri

Savadathi

CSR2

Kenchalarkoppa

Asundi

100

Katamalli

101

Batasur

102

Gurlahosur

103

sangreshakoppa

Munavalli

104

Huli

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4775

105

Hirekumbi

106

Teggihal

107

Sindogi

108

Ykkeri

109

Hirur

110

Hallur

111

Bandarhalli

112

Yenagi

113

Munavlli

114

Muragod

115

Inchal

116

Gonthamar

117

Chikkoppa

118

Rudrapur

119

Mallur

Belgavi

Savadathi

120

Karalkatti

CSR2

121

Yaraganavi

Muragod

122

Mugalihal

123

Sattigeri

124

Mugabasav

Hassan

Alur

Palya

125

Yalaganhalli

CSR2

126

Kallahalli

127

Bavasahalli

128

Kanatur

129

Kaarjuvalli

130

Manjalagodu

131

Honnavalli

132

Haluvalli

Kasaba

133

Nakalgudu

134

Kodagihalli

135

Channapura

136

Togaranahalli

137

Devarajapura

138

Imuttipura

139

Madagere

140

Gowlakatte

141

Agasarahatti

142

Hunasavalli

143

Kavalikere

144

Bharatavalli

Kundur

145

Kaggaravalli

146

Moodanahalli

147

Biligarahalli

148

Merve

K.Hosakote

149

Malagalale

150

Anagalale

Belur

Kasaba Hobali

151

Dabbe

CSR2, CSR2XCSR4

152

Kotiganahalli

153

I. hunasekere

154

nitturu

155

Hebbalu

156

Kallahalli

157

Shambhuganahalli

Madhihalli

158

Sampigemarada

Koppalu

CSR2, CSR2XCSR4

159

Aladahalli

160

Adagur

161

Ramachandrapura

162

Mllikarjunapura

163

Veeradevanahalli

4776

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

164

Moolenahalli

165

Suledevarahalli

166

Somenahalli

167

Soorapura

168

Chilkur

Halebeed

169

Bandilakkanakoppalu

170

kallusettihalli

171

Lingappanakoppalu

172

Dyavappanahalli

173

Machenahalli

174

Chachatanahalli

175

Mayagondanahalli

Biccodu

176

Biccodu

177

Kesagodu

178

Mogasavara

Sakaleshpur

Kasaba

179

Bommanakere

180

Kyanahalli

Hanabalu

181

Kumarahalli

CSR2

182

Bachanahalli

183

Agalahatti

Belagodu

184

Sundahalli

185

Phathimapura

186

Lakundda

187

Hebbanahalli

Yeslur

188

Manjuru

Hassan

Dudda

189

Koravangala

CSR2, CSR2x CSR4,

FC1, FC2, NB4D2

190

Heddanahalli

191

H Mylahalli

192

Jodikrishnapura

193

Attavara

194

Kareborekavalu

Hassan

195

Heragu

196

Kodihalli

Kasaba

197

Hullenahalli

CSR2, CSR2x CSR4,

FC1, FC2, NB4D2

198

D.M.Halli

199

Chikkamandiganahalli

200

Narehalli

201

Ningegowdanakoppalu

202

Tattekere

203

Marganahalli

204

Haluvagilu

205

Anniganahalli

206

Hanmanthapura

207

Kokkangatta

208

Yerehalli

209

Huvinahalli

210

Handinakere

211

Hachagondanahalli

212

Tejur

213

Chikkakondagula

214

Haralahalli

Kattaya

215

Shankaranahalli

CSR2, CSR2x CSR4,

FC1, FC2, NB4D2

216

Gadenahalli

217

Bilagunda

218

D.N.Halli

219

Kattaya

220

Karle

221

Ballakere

222

Muddanhalli

223

Malligevalu

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4777

224

Sattigarahalli

225

Kallahalli

226

Bommenahalli

227

Ontimane

228

Sattigarahallikavalu

229

Sattigarahallikoppalu

Hassan

Salagame

230

Vedavati

CSR2, CSR2x CSR4,

FC1, FC2, NB4D2

231

Madihalli

232

Ramadevarahalli

233

Kakkehalli

234

Shankadahosahalli

235

Somanahalli kavalu

236

Kadadaravalli

237

Soppanahalli

238

Bikanahalli

239

Mallenahalli

240

Maranahalli

Shantigrama

241

Gekaravalli

242

Doddahonnenahalli

243

Varlekoppalu

244

Shantigrama

245

Ranganathapura

246

H Byrapura

Shantigrama

247

Haranahalli

CSR2, CSR2x CSR4,

FC1, FC2, NB4D2

Hassan

248

Kanajanahalli

249

Mosalehosahalli

250

Kurubarahalli

251

Bantarahalli

252

Muttigehirehalli

253

Mosale

254

Huluvare

255

Tamalapura

Arasikere

Kasaba

256

Yadapura

CSR2, CSR2x CSR4,

FC1, FC2, NB4D2

257

Javanahalli

258

Bommanahalli

259

Murundi B Tandya

260

Murundi

261

Gollarakoppalu

262

Talatore

263

Bochenahallikavalu

264

Nagenahalli

265

Dummenahalli

266

A.N.Halli

267

Yerehalli

268

Vittalapura

Kanakatte

269

Haralakatta

270

Giribommenahalli

271

Rampura

272

Doddametekurke

Gandasi

273

Adihalli

CSR2, CSR2x CSR4,

FC1, FC2, NB4D2

274

Chindenahalli

275

Hosahalli B

276

Srirampura

277

Mangalapura

278

Kenkere

279

Mavinakere

280

Narammanahalli

281

Bharmadevarahalli

282

Byragowdanahalli

283

Bageshapura

4778

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

284

Bagivalu

285

Mahadevarahalli

286

Chagachagere

287

Borehalli

288

Jakkahalli

289

Marashettanahalli

290

Huliyappannapalya

291

Appenahalli

292

Bilenahalli

Javagal

293

Arekere

CSR2, CSR2x CSR4,

FC1, FC2, NB4D2

294

Dhanajayapura

295

Kasturikoppal

296

Tirupatihalli

297

Javagal

298

Kolagunda

299

Attiguddakavalu

Banavara

300

Valehalli

301

Byrambudi

302

Banavara

Holenarasipura

Kasaba

303

Ankavalli

304

Gannikada

305

Holeambige

306

Hulivalu

307

Nagalapura

308

Tattekere

309

Doodabyagatavalli

Hassan

310

Hangarahalli

311

Teranya

Halekote

312

Hariharapura

Holenarasipura

313

Yelleshpura

314

Doddakunchevu

315

Ontiguddakavalu

316

Barehosuru

317

Gunisatenahalli

318

Kinnarahalli

319

Mudalakoppalu

Hallimysore

320

Kallahalli

321

Singanaguppe

322

Jogikoppalu

323

Gohalli

324

Hadya

325

Guddenahalli

326

Motanayakanahalli

327

Niduvani

328

Lakkuru

329

Elechaganahalli

330

C.Hindalahalli

331

Boovanhalli

332

Keragodu

333

Udduru Hosahalli

334

Bandishettihalli

335

K Muddanhalli

336

Chittanahalli

337

Vadenahalli

338

Jodigubbi

339

Machagodanahalli

340

Bidarakka

341

Nerale

342

Edegondanahalli

343

Marahalli

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4779

344

Ragihalli kavalu

345

Makaballi

346

Honnenahalli

347

Anekanambadi

348

Maranayakanahalli\

Hassan

Hallimysore

349

Bachenahalli

CSR2, CSR2x CSR4,

FC1, FC2, NB4D2

350

Gulladapura

351

Alagondanahalli

352

Nagaranahalli

353

Hiritalalu

354

Idiganahosuru

Channaraya

patna

Kasaba

355

Nalluru

356

Nandipura

357

Dindaguru

358

Chikkagondanhalli

359

Karimaranahalli

360

V. Somanhalli

361

Devigere

362

Kalasinda

363

M. Honnenahalli

364

Nagasamudra

365

Manchiganahalli

366

Sasalupura

367

Mallenahalli

368

Yaduvanahalli

369

Haralahalli

370

Adaguru

371

Dadadahalli

372

A. Cholenahalli

373

Doddaganni

374

G. Bendenahalli

375

Marenahalli

Dandiganahalli

376

Baladare

377

Udayapura

378

Bettadapura

379

Hirihalli

380

Vagarahalli

381

Y. Singenahalli

382

Yaliyuru

383

Jakkenahalli

384

Belaguli

385

Modalapura

386

Appenahalli

387

D. Karadevu

Channaraya

patna

388

B.Chwadenahalli

389

Baraguru

390

Chikkamatthigatta

391

Upinahalli

392

Dharasigatta

393

Madaba

394

Hosoru

395

Daddamathigatta

396

Kattarigatta

397

Nanbihalli

398

Malenahalli

399

N. Bendenahalli

400

Kallenahalli

401

Sagathavalli

402

Nadanahalli

Shravana Belagola

403

Gurigaranahalli

4780

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

404

Manjunathapura

405

Aladahalli

406

Korenahalli

407

B. Honnenahalli

408

Sundahalli

409

Kabbalu

410

Kantirayapura

411

Aruvanahalli

412

Halumathigatta

413

Baralu

414

Gagibommenahalli

415

B. Manchenahalli

416

Sanenahalli

Baguru

417

Kodihalli

418

Valagerahalli

419

K.Thimlapura

420

Bichagodanahalli

421

Kembalu

422

Kakkihalli

423

Bidare

424

Balagatta

425

M.Shivara

426

Muddanahalli Kavalu

427

B. Honnenahalli

428

Kumbarahalli

429

Chavvenahalli

430

Navile

Hirisave

431

Arakere

432

Sorekayipura

433

Mathigatta

434

Kasaranahalli

435

Biranahalli

436

Channenahalli

437

Dasarahalli

438

M.Hosoru

439

Indranahalli

440

Huligere

441

D.Thumakuru

442

Mandalikanahalli

CSR2, CSR2x CSR4,

FC1, FC2, NB4D2

443

Kabballi

Nuggehalli

444

Athihalli

445

Jamburu

446

Hulikere

447

Madihalli

448

Hanumanthapura

449

Sosalagere

450

Virupakshapura

451

Channagonahalli

452

Santheshivara

453

Rampura

454

Hullenahalli

455

Duggenahalli

456

Karehalli

Tumkur

Chikkanayakana

Shettikere

457

Honnebagi

CSR- Pure races &

CSR Hybrids

halli

458

Kadenanahalli.

459

Shettikere

460

Kodalagara

461

Beteranganahalli

462

Mallagondanahalli

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4781

463

Ranganathapura

464

Manchekatte

465

Siddapura

466

Tharabenahalli

467

Hesarahalli

468

Aralikere

469

Kuppuru

470

Thammadihalli

471

Thotegowdanapalya

472

Bagganahalli

Kandikere

473

Belavadi

474

Byranakatte

475

Bheemakkanakatte

476

Barakanahall

477

Siddanakatte

478

Badakegudlu

479

Hullenahalli

480

Madanahalli

481

Astrihall

482

Ajjigudde

483

Singadahalli

484

Chikkabidare

485

Doddabidare

Huliyaru

486

Muthugadahalli

487

Ambarapura

488

Nulenuru

489

Kallenahalli

Tiptur

Kasaba

490

T.L. Palya

CSR Pure races & CSR

Hybrids

491

Ganganagatta

492

Dasarighatta

493

Huchanahalli

494

S. Hosur

495

S. lakkihalli

496

Basavanahalli

497

Chikkabidare

498

Dasihalli

Tumkur

499

Thadasur

500

Konehalli

501

Chatnahalli

502

Kodihalli

Honnavalli

503

Halkurike

504

Manjunathapura

505

Basavarajapura

506

Malladevihalli

507

Gyaragatta

508

Vasudevanahalli

509

Manukikere

Nonavinakere

510

Nagaraghatta

511

K.Mallenahalli

512

Yadagarahalli

513

Honnenahalli

514

N. Melanahalli

515

Nellikere

516

Gopalapura

517

Mugtihalli

518

Karikere

519

Bajagur

520

Hullenahalli

521

Masavanaghatta

522

Sannenahalli

4782

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

523

Sugur

524

Mathighatta

525

Jaipura

526

Nonavinakere

Tumkur

TIPTUR

527

Albur

CSR Pure races &

Hybrids

Kibbanahalli

528

Karadalu

529

Karadalu palya

530

Aralaguppe

531

Nyakenahalli.

532

Kundur

533

Kattehalli

534

Balleyakatte

535

Bommenahalli

536

Kamagondanahalli

537

Hindiskere Palya

538

Ginakikere

539

Kibbanahalli

540

Kundurpalya

TURUVEKERE

Kasaba

541

Kallanakere

542

Dwaranahalli

543

Madihally palya

544

Sanglapura

545

H.Bommanahally

546

Chikkonahally

547

Thalekere

548

Kallakere

549

Muthugadahally

550

K.Hoshally

551

Maddanahally

552

Hebbe Nagasandra

553

Chikkapura

554

Kachihally

555

Bommenahally

556

K. Dodderi

557

Ittigehally

558

Byadarahally

559

Doddamalligere

560

Sondemaranahally

561

Banasandra

562

Kunikenahally

563

Kodigehally

Tumkur

TURUVEKERE

Kasaba

564

Abalakatte

CSR Pure races &

CSR Hybrids

565

Marasarakottige

566

Doddagattha

567

Chikkanahally kaval

568

Marappanahally

569

Thandaga

570

Naduvinahally

571

Hulikal

572

Brahmadevarahatty

573

Aladahally

574

Gopalapura

575

Harikaranahally

576

Dombaramahatty

577

Thovinakere

578

Goppenahally

579

Chimmanahally

580

Srirampura

581

Doddenahally

582

Kurubarahalli

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4783

583

Malladevanahally

584

Kappuru

585

B.C. Kavalu

586

Guddaiahnapalya

587

Angadigere

Mandya

K.R.Pet

Kasaba

588

Mosale. Koppalu

CSR2, CSR2x

CSR4,FC1, FC2,

NB4D2

589

Kamanahalli

590

Nargonahalli

591

Ballekere

592

Yemmadahalli

593

Areboovanahally

594

Krishnarajapet

595

Mathigatta

596

Yedahalli

597

Kalegowdanakoppalu

598

Laxmipura

599

Bandi Hole

600

Agrahara Bachahalli

601

Harirayana halli

602

Govindegowdana

Koppalu

603

Hariharapura

604

Bommenahalli

605

Hosaholalu

606

Gandinagara

607

Bellibettadakaval

608

Kundanahalli

609

Chikkonahalli

610

Pura

611

Mallenahalli

Bookinakere

612

Vittalapura

613

Yagachakuppe

614

Aralakuppe

615

Maduvina Kodi

616

Natanahalli

617

Paradeshigowdana

Koppalu

618

Kapanahalli

619

Bukanakere

620

Ranganathapura

621

Modur

622

BommegowdanaKoppalu

CSR2, CSR2x

CSR4,FC1, FC2,

NB4D2

623

Bannanakere

624

KeremegalaKoppalu

625

Ichanahalli

626

Bannenahalli

627

Chokanahalli

628

Bommalapura

629

Agasarahalli

630

Mathikere

631

Ganjigere

632

Doddagadiganahalli

633

Mavinakere

634

Kattally

635

Kurubarahally

636

Mudigere

Kikkeri

637

Chujjalakyatanahalli

638

Govindanahalli

639

Echalaguddekaval

4784

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

640

Kempikoppalu

641

Uginahalli

642

Bidarahalli

643

Chowdenahalli

644

Sollepura

645

Kikkeri

646

Bhadranakoppalu

647

Ikanahalli

648

Basavanahalli

649

Anegola

650

Mandalikanahalli

651

Thenginagatta

652

Margonhalli

653

Lakshmipura

Akkihebbalu

654

Sravananahally

655

Mandagere

656

Kyathanahally

657

Chowda samudra

658

Manchibeedu

659

Hangaramuddanahally

660

Vaddaragudi

661

Jainahalli

662

Somanahalli

663

Ambigarahalli

664

Mudalapura

665

Akkihebbalu

Sheelnere

666

Honnenahalli

667

Hemmadahalli

668

Maradahalli

669

Anchemuddnahalli

670

Hralahalli

671

Mailanahalli

672

Neethimangala

673

Rajaghatta

674

Maruvanahalli

675

Uygonahalli

Santhe bachahalli

676

Koratikere

677

Narayanapurakoppal

678

Hubbanahalli

679

Appanahalli

680

Kotthamaranahalli

681

Gidadaboppanahalli

682

Mavinakattekoppal

Mandya

K.R.Pet

Santhe bachahalli

683

Lokanahalli

CSR2, CSR2x CSR4,

684

Bedadahalli

FC1, FC2, NB4D2

Bangalore

Urban

Anekal

Kasaba

685

Samanduru

CSR2, CSR2x

CSR4,FC1, FC2,

NB4D2

686

[S.Madivala]

687

[S.Thimmasandra]

688

[Gandhinagara]

689

Channena Agrahara

690

Maranayakanahalli

691

Sabmangala

692

Geratagenabele

693

Kuvempunagar

694

Gudnahalli

695

Muthagatte

696

Chikkanahalli

697

Kurubarahatti

698

Vanakanahalli

699

Sunavara

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4785

700

Singasandra

701

Soluru

702

Menasiganahalli

703

[Kempudommasandra]

704

Choodenahalli

705

Patnagere Gollahalli

706

Kalanayakanahalli

707

Bidarakadahalli

708

Telagarahalli

709

Karpuru

710

Aravantigepura

711

Handenahalli

712

Rachamanahalli

713

Bidaragere

714

Bestamanahalli

715

[Dinnuru]

716

Byagadenahalli

717

Kunmadivala

718

Kempavaderahalli

719

Doddahagade

720

[Yallammanapalya]

721

Avadenahalli

722

Kammasandra

Agrahara

723

[Kavalahosahalli]

724

Chikkahagade

725

Thattanahalli

726

Soppahalli

727

Suragajakkanahalli

728

Sidihosakote

729

Gowrenahalli

730

Honnakalasapura

731

A.Medihalli

732

Agasathimmanahalli

733

Hasiruvani

734

Amanikere Doddakere

735

Sannanayakanapura

736

[Siddanapalya]

737

Aduru

738

[Chinnayanapalya]

739

[Bodarahalli]

740

Indlavadi

741

[Laxmipura]

742

[Basavanapura]

Bangalore

Urban

Anekal

Kasaba

743

Arehalli

CSR2, CSR2x

CSR4,FC1, FC2,

NB4D2

744

[Bangladoddi]

745

Bagganadoddi

746

Kadujakkanahalli

747

Rajannaoddi

748

Billayanadoddi

749

[Nagaiyanadoddi]

750

Thammanayakanahalli

751

Choodahalli

752

Chikkahosahalli

753

Chikkanahalli

754

Indlavadipura

755

[Karakalaghatta]

756

Mutturu

757

Mysorammanadoddi

758

[Thimmaiahanadoddi]

4786

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

759

Thimmasandra

760

Kumbarahalli

761

Lingapura

762

[Nayanahalli]

Jigani

763

Haragadde

764

Seethanayakanahalli

765

Nosenuru

766

N.Gollahalli

767

Haragadde Vaddarahalli

768

Madapatna

769

Dyavasandra

770

Kallabalu

771

Giddenahalli

772

J.Bangipura

773

Vaderamanchanahalli

774

Bukkasagara

775

[Sattasabi Dinne]

776

[Kasuvinkunte]

777

Mahanthlingapura

778

Balar bande

779

Krishnadoddi

CSR2, CSR2x

CSR4,FC1, FC2,

NB4D2

780

Pujjarisingayandoddi

781

Yallamandoddi

782

Giddegowdandoddi

783

Madappandoddi

784

Javaregowdandoddi

785

Dasappandoddi

786

Goninayakandoddi

787

Bommandhalli

788

Konasandra

789

Harapanhalli

790

Kuppasiddaiandoddi

791

Jigani

792

Bandenallasandra

793

Kyalasanhalli

794

[Srirampura]

795

Hennagara

796

Hennagara Amanikere

797

Yarandahalli

798

H.Hosahalli

799

Kachanayakanahalli

800

Mastenahalli

801

Hinnakki

802

Rajapura

803

Ramakrishnapura

804

Hulimangala

805

Maragondanahalli

806

S.Bingipura

Bangalore

Urban

Anekal

Jigani

807

Podu

CSR2, CSR2x

CSR4,FC1, FC2,

NB4D2

808

Kempapura

809

Vabasandra

810

Nanjapura

811

Koppa

812

Koppagate

813

Shikaripalya

814

Ragihalli

815

[Madayandoddi]

816

[Koratageredoddi]

817

[Annayandoddi]

818

[Sevanayakandoddi]

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4787

819

[Ramanayakandoddi]

820

[Basavandoddi]

821

Shivanhalli

822

[Vantemaranhalli]

823

[Muninanjappandoddi]

824

[Sollepuradoddi]

825

[Puttegowdandoddi]

826

Subbegowdandoddi]

827

Jaipurdoddi

828

[Kariyappandoddi]

829

[Ujinappandoddi]

830

[Kateridoddi]

831

[Gundayandoddi]

832

Mudlyandoddi

833

Mantapa

834

Kaleswari

835

Jangalpalya

836

[Vajarahalli[

837

Hullahalli

838

[Chattekerepalya]

839

[Chinnayanpalya]

840

Laxmipura

841

[Sampangiramanagar]

842

Halesampigehalli

843

Malenallasandra

844

Rayasandra

845

Sakalavara

846

Hulkasavanhalli

Attibele

847

Vaderhalli

848

Begihalli

849

Amani Bidarkere

850

Bujangdasankere

851

Bannerughatta

852

Bannerughattakaval

853

[Kempanayakanhalli]

854

Sampigehalli

855

Butanhalli

856

[Hakkipikki colony]

857

Shilindradoddi

858

[Byatarayandoddi]

859

[Bylamaradoddi]

860

Byarappanhalli

861

Kannanayakanagrahara

862

[Kuluvepalya]

863

Amruthnagar

864

[Munimarandoddi]

865

Bilvaradahalli

866

{Shanubhoganhalli[

867

[Kenchayandoddi]

868

[Kysaraguppe]

869

Gollahalli

870

Attibele

871

Ballur

872

Dasanpura

CSR2, CSR2x

CSR4,FC1, FC2,

NB4D2

873

Kodlipura

874

Arehalli

875

Halehalli

876

Mayasandra

877

Mutasandra

878

Kamblipura

4788

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

879

[Harohalli]

880

M.Medihalli

881

Baktipura

882

Bidaraguppe

883

[Malenhalli]

884

Narasapura

885

Indlabele

886

Chikkanhalli

887

Jigala

888

Arenuru

889

Chandapura

890

Laxmisagara

891

Chandapura Chatrakane

892

Ramasagar

893

Andapura

894

Heelalage

895

Iggalur

896

Neraluru

897

Thirumagondanahalli

898

Balagaranahalli

899

Yadavanhalli

900

Adigondanahalli

901

Bendiganahalli

902

Guddahatti

903

Krishnasagar

904

Giddenhalli

905

Ichanguru

906

[Ichanguru

Vaddarpalya

907

Hebbagodi

908

Thirupalya

909

Veerasandra

910

Gollahalli

911

Kammasandra

912

Vaddarapalya

913

Bommasandra

914

Kithaganhalli

Anekal

Sarjapura

915

Banahalli

CSR2, CSR2x

CSR4,FC1, FC2,

NB4D2

915

Banglapete

916

Sarjapura

917

Mugalur

918

Kutaganhalli

919

[Bhovipalya]

920

Panditan Agrahara

921

Mattnahalli

922

Gudigattanhalli

923

Doddathimmasandra

924

Mahalchoudenhalli

925

Kuguru

926

Banahalli

927

Thindlu

928

Madappanhalli

929

Deshapandegattahalli

930

Seeganayakanahalli

931

Chikkanahalli

932

Kamanhalli

[Rajivgandhinagar]

933

Neriga

934

Chikkanekkundi

935

Nekundidommasandra

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4789

936

Jantagondanhalli

937

Gonigatapura

938

Katariguppe

939

Heggondhalli

940

Halasahallitippasandra

941

Ramanayakanhalli

942

Chikkadasarahalli

943

Nagengrahara

944

Chikkavadenur

945

Handenahalli

946

Kotaganhalli

947

Sollepura

948

Bikanhalli

949

S.Medihalli

950

Billapura

951

Buregunte

952

Adigarkallahalli

953

[Sultanpalya]

954

Tyvakanahalli

955

Byalhalli

956

Bilchikkanhalli

957

Yamare

958

Sompura

959

Kadagrahara

960

Chambenhalli

961

T.C.halli

962

B.Hosahalli

963

V.Kallahalli

964

Ittanguru

965

Dommasandra

966

Muthanalluru

967

Narayanghatta

968

Alibommasandra

969

Samanhalli

970

Gopasandra

971

Kommasandra

972

Chikkathimmasandra

973

Singenagrahara

974

Muthanalluru

Amanikere

975

Chikkadonnasandra

976

Huskur

977

Gulimangala

978

Avalhalli

979

Chokkasandra

980

Harohalli

981

Chintalmadivala

982

Kaggalipura

983

Kudlu

984

Gattahalli

985

Choodasandra

986

Rayasandra

987

Chikkanagamangala

988

Shantipura

989

Vaddarpalya

Kodagu

Madikeri

Baghamandala

990

Cherangala

CSR2

991

Sannaduliketu

992

Korangala

993

Koppatty

4790

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Kodagu

994

Bettageri

CSR2

995

Tavuru

Sampage

996

Hapatturu

997

Biligeri

Virajapete

998

Bellumadu

Somavara pete

Kushalanagar

999

Bhuvanagiri

CSR2 , CSR4

1000

Hudugooru

1001

Chikkatturu

1002

Doddatturu

1003

Heruru

1004

Balluru

1005

Manajuru

1006

Basavanahalli

1007

Basavanaturu

Somavarapete

1008

Abburu Katte

1009

Beluru

1010

Kusaburu

1011

Tanniruhalla

1012

masagodu

ShanivaraSante

1013

Kugekodi

1014

Hosagutti

CSR Hybrid

Kodalipete

1015

Chikkakunda

1016

Nirugunda

1017

Janardhanahalli

1018

Shirangala

1019

Kitturu

1020

Koneganahalli

1021

Maagadahalli

1022

Hosagutti

Uttar Kannada

Ankola

1. Belale

1023

Thogase

CSR pure races & CSR

Hybrids

1024

Beerala bail

1025

Hilluru

1026

Karikal

1027

Sunkasala

1028

Achave

1029

Mabagi

1030

Kuntakani

2. Belekeri

1031

Haravada

Bhatkal

3 Susudi

1032

Agga

1033

Antravalli

4 Mavalli

1034

Shirali

1035

Koppa

Haliyala

5 Murkavada

1036

Hullati

1037

Chatranala

1038

B.K. Halli

1039

Kavalavada

1040

Nandigadda

1041

Murkavada

1042

Golehalli

1043

Thegnalli

1044

Alolli

1045

Havagi

1046

Gutthigeri

1047

Satnalli

1048

Hunasavada

1049

Mundakki

1050

Madnalli

6 Dandeli

1051

Yadoga

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4791

1052

Ramapura

1053

Aalura

7 Sambrani

1054

Kurigadda

Uttar Kannada

Haliyala

1055

Agasalakatta

CSR Pure aces and

CSR Hybrids

1056

Ajagava

Honnavara

8 Mavinakurva

1057

Hukkalli

1058

Kolagadde

9 Manki

1059

Kuchcholi

1060

Mundaru

1061

Magodu

10 Honnavara

1062

Kadniru

1063

Hodikeshirooru

1064

Chandavara

Karwara

11 Kinnara

1065

Bargal

1066

Beluru

1067

Nagekove

Kumata

12 Mirjana

1068

Betkuli

1069

Mulekeri

1070

Hebail

1071

Horemaski

1072

Shrigunji

1073

Marakal

1074

Hunsekoppa

1075

Halagadde

13 Koojalli

1076

Mundgejaddi

1077

Diwalli

1078

Kojalli

1079

Ulluru

1080

Kallabbe

Mundagoda

14 Mundagoda

1081

Thattihalla

1082

Shidlagundi

1083

Induru

1084

Attabail

1085

Basavanajaddi

1086

Bekkoda

Siddapura

15 Kondli

1087

Bikkalase

1088

Chanamaov

1089

Hanchinachappara

1090

Hakkalakeri

1091

Thyarsi

1092

Golagoda

16 Umbalemane

1093

Ganadamane

1094

Arishinagoda

1095

Attisavala

1096

Heggarabail

1097

Thalagara

1098

Kulle

1099

Kesarala

1100

Thandagundi

17 Kodkani

1101

Admane

1102

Shiroru

1103

Gunavaththe

1104

Vandaane

1105

Birlamakki

1106

Bailalli

1107

Alavalli

1108

Lakkijaddi

1109

Nellikoppa

1110

Puradamatha

1111

Malavalli

4792

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1112

Igalikoppa

1113

Manamane

1114

Arenduru

1115

Arasibail

1116

Keelara

1117

Kotekoppa

1118

Jikkinamadaki

1119

Thenginamakki

Siddapura

17 Kodkani

1120

Konanathale

CSR Pure aces and

CSR Hybrids

1121

Basavanabail

1122

Maragadde

Uttar Kannada

1123

Benanagundi

1124

Mastane

1125

Halagadde

1126

Hosuru

1127

Chandragatagi

Shirasi

18 Banavasi

1128

Danaganahalli

1129

Kotekoppa

1130

Malalagava

1131

Gharsi

19 Sampakhanda

1132

Kibbali

1133

Neggu

1134

Banatkodlu

1135

Korse

1136

Hanikeri

1137

Bandala

1138

Keregani

1139

Kolagibees

1140

Devanalli

1141

Koddagadde

1142

Hukkalebail

1143

Hallikeri

1144

Kanamane

1145

Bikkigadde

1146

Saraguppa

1147

Hasanagi

1148

Sawale

20 Hulekal

1149

Lmalenalli

1150

Bommanalli

Joyada

21 Joyada

1151

Bamanagi

1152

Nagari

Yellapura

22 Manchikeri

1153

Keshinakodlu

1154

Bharani

1155

Vanakemane

1156

Ummachagi

1157

Thuduguni

1158

Kangoda

1159

Tharimakki

1160

Gudanduru

1161

Jambesala

1162

Bailandoora

1163

Onithota

1164

Gerala

1165

Donagara

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4793

KARNATAKA

PURE MYSORE SEED AREA -

ADDITIONAL

District

Taluk

Hobali- Panchayat

SL.

No.

Name of Village

Tumkur

Hebbur - Hebbur

Hebbur

Girinayakanapalya

Maradigarapalya

Siddanayakanapalya

Gaddenarasainapalya

Kalkere

Kalkere palya

Saggaihnapalya

Shanegowdanapalya

Narasapura

Siddannanapalya

Sangalapura colony

Hebbur -

Gangonapalya

Mahimanapalya

Gollarahatty

G.H. Risala

Nagenahally

Kumbipalya

Seenappanahally

colony

Kodumuddanahally

Kuntarayanapalya

Hunasemaradapalya

Hebbur - Kanakuppe

Manikasabarapalya

Lingapura

kachenahally

kanakuppe

Bovipalya

Byatarayanapura

Mariyammanapalya

Bychenahally

Garagadakuppe

Rayavara

Thimmasandra

Chikkannadevarahatty

Marichikkaiahnapalya

Hebbur - Ballagere

Ballagerekaval

kalyanapura

Hanumantanagara

Doddaiahnakattepalya

Vakkodaiahnapalya

Dassegowdanapalya

Dasarahally

Mayammanapalya

Kunigal

Huliyurdurga -

Nidasale

Chalamanasandra

Shivanahally

Hutridurga

Naganahally

Sondalagere

Ramanagaram

Magadi

Solur

Ombathanakere

Ombathanakunte palya

Arasinakunte

TMG Palya

Cholapalya

4794

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Thimmasandra

Siddaihanapalya

Bylakere

Hakkinal

Hosapalya

Ankanapalya

M.R.Palya

Bhadrapalya

Rangenahally

Bittasandra

Hemapura

Gangenapura

Hudakunte

Kudur

Aladakatte

A.M.palya

Vajarahalli

Kempohalli

Bestarapalya

Yessapanpalya

Kansandra

Arepalya

Cheeloor

Theranahalli

Hanumapura

Madabal

Joodoghatta

kavalpalya

Polohalli

T.G. Palya

TAMIL NADU STATE

Bivoltine Seed Area

District

Taluk

Hobali/ Block

SL.

No.

Name of Village

Silk worm Variety

Dharmapuri

Pappireddipatti

Morappur

Jaliyur

CSR2 , CSR4, FC1 &

FC2

Harur

Chinnakuppam

Namakkal

Rasipuram

Vennandur

Kalankulam

Thiruppur

Dharapuram

Kanakayampalayam

Thiruvvannamalai

Vanthavasal

Kottupakkam

Pudukottai

Kulathur

Kannanthakoil

Nallathangalpatti

Viralimalai

Thennathirayanpatti

Alankudi

Thiruvarankulam

Thadiyamanai

Venkatakulam

Pudukkottai

Kantharvakottai

Kuppaiyanpatti

Karambakudi

Theethanipatti

CHHATISGARH STATE

Tasar Seed Area

District

Taluk

Hobli/Block

SL.

Name of Village

Silk worm Variety

No.

Jangir

Bhamnidih

Saragaon

Trivoltine

Baloda

Rampur

Mahuda

Karhidi

Kanker

Charama

Trivoltine

Narharpur

Kanker

Navagaon

Raigarh

Gharghoda

Bivoltine

Gharghoda

Tamnar

Gare budiya Kasdol

Lailunga

Katkaliya

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4795

Dharamjaigarh

Hati

Kharsiya

Barra

Sarangarh

Kanakbira

Baramkela

Kandola

Baramkela

Sariya

Gharghoda

Kudumkela

Trivoltine

Gharghoda

Tamnar

Tamnagar

Dharamjaigarh

Dharam-

jaigarh

Sisringa

Sarangarh

Kanakbira

Baramkela

Torna

Singharee

Dongripalee

ASSAM STATE

Muga Seed Area

District

Taluk/Hobli/Block

SL.

Name of Village

Silk worm Variety

No.

Dibrugarh

Tingkhong

1 No. Gandhia

Antheraea assama

2 No. Gandhia

1 No. Betoni

Raidongia

Nachani

Kekuri Sonowal

Ouphulia Sonowal

2 No. Thengal

Khowang

Nahorani

Hunghungia

Kordoiguri

Napathar

Natun Bharali

Kathalguri

Tengakhat

Tamulikhat

Borbam

Joypur

1 No.Dolamuri

Sukani

Nigam

Komargaon

Kenduguri

Cachar

Amri

Thaligram

Chungoorbond

Tilanagar

Jibangram

Kumacherra

Doloicherra

Joypura

Mohankhal

Sonitpur

Balipara

Ulubaru

Tarabari

Balipara

Udmari

Bhalukpung

Rangapara

Upar Kacharigaon

2 No. Naharanigrant

Borsola

Borosla

Borbhogia

Natun Borjhar

Pub Borjhar

Pachim Borjhar

4796

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Kamrup

Bongaon

Dolathowa

Santaikona

Batakuchi

Mekamadal

Majailari Mowdongop

Lalmati

Boko

Kompaduli

Bangjeng

Walkmegadrop

Noapara

Dronpara

Megadop

Samarang

Hahim

Daini Tarabari

Bakrapara

Sakhati

Ranikhat

Antheraea assama

Uppertarabari

Tangkhula

Gihanimara

Namtarabari

Doini

Daini Tarabari

Gohalkona

Goalpara

Rangjuli

Sal para

Malangkona

Choraibaha

Buraburi

Bakrapara

Garopara

SonaliparaNowapara

Patpara

Ouguri

Kahibarigaropara

Madang

Tilapara

Chechajhora

Dhanubhanga

Bamunpara

Jolapara

Dakuakata

Aoimari

Duramari

Batabari

Deodhavita

Fakirpara

Palsa

Kathalmuri

Dhontola

Gathiapara

Gohailbori

Piplibari

Puthimari

Sawlibori

Baghdoba

Balijana

Bhalukdubi

Kuruwabhasha

100

Bhoishkhuli

101

Dosorapara

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4797

102

Alangpara

103

kalyanpur

104

Budhipara

105

Kochpara

106

Solmari

107

Hatigaon

108

Bodahapur

109

Baijuri

110

Bordak

111

Dalok

112

Rpkhapara

Balijana

113

Dorapara

Antheraea assama

114

Chowkapara

115

Pakharpara

Lakhipur

116

Mogho

117

Hatisila

118

Jongpara

119

Tisimkali

120

Balasari

121

Nehalivita

122

Baida

Jorhat

Chipahikhula

123

Kakojan

124

Pirakota

125

Hollongpara

126

Mabkukurachowa

127

Morangaon

128

Bailung gaon

Kaliapani

129

Jogduar

130

Kaliapani gohain gaon

131

Simoliguri

132

Balama

133

Hanchara

134

Bamunpukhuri

Titabar

135

Rangajan

136

Bibijan

137

Borhula

138

Rajabahar

139

Kharkhowa

140

Bebejia

141

Deoghoria

142

Kachukhat

143

Tokoubari

Selenghat

144

Hemlai

145

Nakachari

146

Bolimora

147

Eragaon Borngaya

148

Chungi Lahing

149

Morongial

Golaghat

Padumoni

150

Kabarugaon

151

Bogorijeng

152

Chelengi

Kathalguri

153

No. 1 Senchowa

154

No. 2 Senchowa

155

Dakhin Mowkhuwa

156

Akagaon

157

Dulakhoria

Bokakhat

158

Thangal faon

Morong

159

Ponka

160

Borchapori

Kakadunga

161

Batiporia

4798

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

162

Kachugaon

163

Sumoni

Sarupathar

164

Jaljori

165

Langtha

166

Bilpathar

167

Nawjan

Lakhimpur

Narayanpur

168

Ghagara

169

Sondhara

170

Kesseruguri

171

Dhemagarh

172

1 No.Rongato

Antheraea assama

173

Tiniali Handique

174

3 No. Nimuri

175

4 No. Nimuri

176

Balipukhuri

177

Jutulibari

178

Bahupathar

179

Batiparia

180

Nawghuli

181

Panigaon

182

Khalihamari

183

Jorhatia

184

Bezarchuk

185

Bhitardoloni

186

Geleki

187

Dibarua

Sivasagar

Chapangani

188

Hudu para Abhaipuria

Khangia gaon

Kheluwa

189

Banmukh Dehingia

190

Barhoiting

191

Bogidal Bharaligaon

Demow

192

Boiraghibar

193

Kacharipather

194

Patsaku

Amguri

195

Dulia gaon

Sonari

196

Sepon Tiphok gaon

Paschim Abhoripur

197

Mathurapur Bhakot

gaon

Eri Seed Area

District

Taluk/Hobli/Block

SL.

Name of Village

Silk worm Variety

No.

Dibrugarh

Barbaruah

Madhupur Deori Gaon

Philosomia ricini -

White variety, Plain &

dotted

Paroliguri

Gohaigaon

Tinsukia Gaon

1 no. Sessakosh

Mankota

Hatimora

Khowang

2 no. Charaihabi

Gondhoiguri

Gajpuria Konwar gaon

Gajpuria Nepali gaon

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4799

Joypur

Kacharipathar

Philosomia ricini -

Diphu variety

Karbi Anglong

Lumbajong

Enghi gaon

Sarthe Terongaon

Hidi Sajir gaon

Zirla gaon

Taralangso gaon

Ramsing Terongaon

Samelangso

Rongmiran Beygaon

Dingso Terang gaon

Bhalukjan gaon

Chinthong Hansegaon

Meshpara gaon

Palam Engti gaon

Hawraghat

Lancleng terongaon

Amri

Umsuwai model vilage

Ramphan gaon

Umsalan gaon

Hiundu Bosti

Mallang gaon

Bormarijan gaon

Kalyanpur

Philosomia ricini -

White variety, Plain &

dotted

Daruikhal

Jibangram

Cachar

Prenchnagar

Taifunagar

Guabari

Khaspur

Sonitpur

Sootea

Charengia

Na-pam

Bara bhuyan

Nalbari Borbheti

Joysidhi

Balijuri

Nizarpar

Na-Duar

Talakabari

Borpukhuripar

Dikaraiguri

Kusumtola

Rihabari

Gohai chuk

Tupia

Betguri

Hatinga

Nabill

Toubhanga

Naharbari

Balipara

Sirangjuli

Dalangbasti

Morisuti

Amloga

Batabari

Chapaguri

Dhekidol

Borpukhuripar

Rangapara

Upar Kacharigaon

2 No. Naharanigrant

2 No. Namanigaon

Borsola

Natun Borjhar

4800

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Pub-Borjhar

Dalbari

Bihaguri

Ghatuwa

Niraioti

Barauadoloni

Puthimari

Bapubheti

Borgaon Chapari

Ponjari

Ulubari

1 No. Barphukuri

Dhekiajuli

Sirajuli Satra

Bondaijarani

Pirakata

Bagaribari

Singri

Naharbari

Maz-Rowmari

Balisuti

Panch-noi

Nagaon

Kathiatoli

Chota Kondoli

Udali

Long Mailu

Binakandi

Modartoli

Hojai

Udali

Long Mailu

Binakandi

Modartoli

Kamrup

Chayani Borduar

Khokhapara

Philosomia ricini-

Borduar Bagan vatriety

plain dotted & Zebra

Manikpur

Borduar

Tengakhal

100

Hatibandha

101

Ghilabari

102

Uijula

Rani

103

Umsore

104

Hanapara

105

Rajapara

106

Nagaon

107

Patgaon

108

Salser

109

Batabari

110

Milanpur

111

Bilpara

112

Ranibari

113

Zimputa

114

2 No. Japangpuri

115

Mairapur

116

Ganeshpara

117

Punampur

118

Borjuli

119

Herkajuli

120

Pakkaline

121

Sampur

Chayagaon

122

Narayanpur

123

Simian

124

Rangamati

125

Jogibari

126

Patgaon

127

Ouguri

128

2 No. Ratanpur

129

Bherbheri

130

Dakuapara

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4801

131

Kardeguri

132

Ratanpur

133

Borjhar

134

Jalukabari

Bongaon

135

Nichinpur

136

Lamgaon

137

Lampara

138

Choudhuripara

139

Phalapung

140

Santipur

141

Borkhal

142

1 No. Borkhal

143

Larubama

Luki Bekeli

144

Hatipara

145

Mouchowa

146

Garoghuli

147

Longkona

148

Namberjuli

149

Sukunipara

150

Girima

151

Boripara

152

Bhalapara

153

Ulipara

154

Garbandha

155

Dawgaon

Dimoria

156

Kalangpur

157

Magursila

158

Talani

Goalpara

Rangjuli

159

Sal para

Philosomia ricini -

white variety, Plain &

dotted

160

Malangkona

161

Choraibaha

162

Buraburi

163

Bakhrapara

164

Garopara

165

Sonalipara

166

Nowapara

167

Patpara

168

Ouguri

169

Hadipara

170

Garovita

171

Garopara

172

Sarapara

173

Mahajonpara

174

Rowmari

175

Sutarpara

176

Sardarpara

177

Simlitola

178

Doctopara

179

Dewanpara

Kuchdhowa

180

Kumarpara

181

Bangalpara

182

Bechimari

183

Sadrapara

184

Hatkholabori

Balijana

185

Hatigaon

186

Bodahapur

187

Baijuri

188

Bordak

189

Dalok

190

Rokhapara

4802

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

191

Dorapara

Philosomia ricini -

white variety, Plain &

dotted

192

Chwokapara

193

Pakharpara

194

Saplekanta

195

Katapara

196

Puthimari

197

Primary

198

Ketkibari

199

Dwarka

200

Dewli

201

Koslotpara

Dhemaji(Jonai

Sub.divn.)

Markongselek Tribal Dev. Block

202

Kemi Jelum

203

Leku Jelum

204

Ujoini Bijoypur

205

Udapur debe chapori

206

Majulipur No.1 + No.2

207

Jamjing

208

Handique Milon

209

No.3 Murkong selek

210

Simen chapori

211

Hangma Chapori

212

Barubali

213

Koroibari

Darrang

Paschim Magnaldoi

214

Kabikara

215

Dahiganakpara

216

Dahi Baniapara

217

Sotanagar

Pub Mangaldoi

218

Bandia

219

K. Bandia

220

Bandia Chapori

221

Algachar

Bechimari

222

Hirapara

223

Baruahjhar

224

Baruapara

Bechimari

225

Batabari

Sipajhar

226

Satgharia

227

Kabeichuba

228

Chengapara

229

Bordoulguri

230

Nagaon

231

Gorukhuti

232

Samala

233

Raikabari

234

Jhakuapara

235

Mahaliapara

236

Nankara

Kalaigaon

237

Kacharipara

238

Charandhra

239

Bagharbari

Jorhat

Bagchung

240

Jalukoni

241

Tamulbari

242

Khorikotia

243

Nagadholi Adholkotia

244

Khermia

245

Namrupia

Dhekorgorah

246

Bahfola

247

Kalbari

248

Namdeuri

249

Kokilamukh

250

Lolitimukh

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4803

251

Boarahom

Philosomia ricini-

white variety, Plain &

Dotted

252

Khutiaputa

Selenghat

253

Hemlai

254

Nakachari

255

Bolimora

256

Eragaon Bornagaya

257

Chungi Lahing

258

Morongial

Majuli

259

Ratanpur

260

Raunapara

261

Bongaon

262

Bengenati

263

Kanijan

264

Doriagaon

Golaghat

Padumoni

265

Mokrong

266

Balijan

Kathalguri Padumoni

267

Borting Senchowa

268

Kabaru

Gomari

269

Garigaon

270

Morachuk

Kathalguri

271

Moidamoni

272

Akagaon

273

Nathgaon

274

Sautoli

Morongi

275

Penkagaon

276

Kanaighat

Deragaon

277

Sawguri

278

Natunchapori

279

Daniachapori

280

Na-Bhonga

281

Khakandguri

282

Kacharipam

Golaghat

Deragaon

283

Dakhin Dolijola

Philosomia ricini -

white, plain dotted

Bokakhat

284

Dusutimukh

285

Alami

Bokakhat

286

Rajbari

287

Bosagaon

Sarupathar

288

Joljori

289

Gelabil

290

Bil gaon

291

Bilpathar

292

Nawjan

Kakadunga

293

Batiparia

Morigaon

Bhurbandha

294

Oujari

295

Manipur

296

Gasarguri

Mayong

297

Bakharabari

298

Garmari

299

Ghaghwa

300

Tikhabari

301

Kumarkuchi

302

Bangfor

303

Behitha

Philosomia ricini -

white, plain dotted

304

Khindehar

305

Senaikuchi

306

Santipur

307

Behubari

308

Darepanigaon

Kapili

309

Mikirgaon

310

Lukakuchi

4804

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

311

Patrabari

312

Banpara

Tinsukia

Kakapather

313

Kakapather

314

Philobari

315

Dangari

316

Maithang

Itakhooli

317

Matiakhana

Guijan

318

Na-sarai

319

Barguri

Margherita

320

Namsal

321

Jagun

322

Makumpathar

323

Makumkilla

Lakhimpur

North Lakhimpur

324

Korchan

Philosomia ricini -

white, plain dotted &

Zebra

325

Bhogmon

326

Knowar gaon

327

Charaimari

328

Bakal gaon

329

Borkamalabaria

330

Borchapari

331

Ghunasuti

332

Gharmara

Telahi

333

Gohain Tekela

334

Bahpati Nath gaon

335

Modarguri

336

Da-gati

337

Rongpuria

338

Borsoria

339

Jorhatia

Boginadi

340

Gagaldubi Borkhelia

341

Gagaldubi Baligaon

Philosomia ricini -

white, plain dotted &

Zebra

342

Gagaldubi Majgaon

343

1 No. Lalpani

344

2 No. Lalpani

345

Boginadi Nagar Nagaon

346

Boginadi Kachari gaon

347

Jaradhara

348

Kadam Bagan gaon

349

Rajgarh

350

Bodhkara Majgaon

Sivasagar

Chapangani

351

Na-pam Baruwati

352

Dulakakhoria

353

Chanbesha

354

Rebati Kapahuwa

355

Baulimoidam

Philosomia ricini -

white, plain dotted &

Zebra

Gaurisagar

356

Laichapori

357

Chipahi

Kheluwa

358

Banmukh Nagaon

359

Kalugaon

Demow

360

Kacharipather

361

Dhuramukh

362

Bam Rajabari

363

Na-hat

N.C. Hills

(Dimahasao)

Maibong

364

Dehar Phonglo

365

Longkhar

366

Kalachand

367

Khejurbong

368

Damadi Hower

369

Purna Maibong

370

Giding par

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4805

371

Hari chandrapur

372

Basabari

373

Dimalikpur

Haflong

374

Dikrik

375

Dibarai

376

Dimalik raji

377

Tularam raji

378

Topodisha

379

Bolidura

380

Surajnagar

381

Amrudisha

382

Borowashilling

383

Langri

ASSAM STATE

Mulberry Seed Area

District

Taluk/Hobli/Block

SL.

Name of Village

Silk worm Variety

No.

Cachar

Kamranga

Multivoltine - Sarupat

Nagaon

Kathiatoli

Paschim Senchowa

Multivoltine - Sarupat & Nistari

Kamrup

Chayagaon

Jogirbari, Ratanpur

Multivoltine - Sarupat & Nistari

Goalpara

Balijana

Budhipara

MV - Sarupat

Dorapara

Bivoltine - NB4D2, CSR1, CSR2

Chowkapara

Darrang

Paschim

Mangaldoi

Kabikara

Multivoltine - Sarupat, Nistari

Bivoltine - CSR1, CSR2, CSR4

Sotangaon

Bornagaon

Niz Dahi

Baniapara

Gosaigaon

Pub Mangaldoi

Chenialpara

Khataniapara (Dhula)

Sipajhar

Satgharia

Balipara

Batabari

Gabhara

Halda

Niz-sipajhar

Harimuria

Satkhali

Kalaigaon

Hirapara

Bagharbari

Dalanghat

Goriapara

Charandhara

Hapamara

Balipota

Bahjani

Jorhat

Bagchung

Jalukoni

Multivoltine - Sarupat, Nistari

Bivoltine - CSR1, CSR2, CSR4

Tamulbari

Khorikotia

Nagadholi Adholkotia

Khermia

Namrupia

Dhekorgorah

Bahfola

Kalbari

4806

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Jorhat

Namdeuri

Potia gaon

Lolitimukh

Borahom

Nimati Goriabhoga

Upper Bahfola

Namoni Bahfola

Saguri

Kareng Chapori

Upper Deuri

Nam Deuri

Charighoria

Dhekorgorah

Borkhu

Multivoltine - Sarupat, Nistari

Bivoltine - CSR1, CSR2, CSR4

Titabar

Rangajan

Bibijan

Borhula

Rajabahar

Kharkhowa

Berbejia

Deoghoria

Kachukhat

Tokoubari

Majauli

Ratanpur

Raunapara

Bongaon

Bengenati

Kanijan

Doraigaon

Rangachahi

Luitpara

Salmora

Birinabari

Goul gaon

Lakhimpur

Ghilmara

Borpatia

Bivoltine - NB4D2, NB18,

CSR2XCSR4

Sarupatia

Dhulpeta

Matanibari

Kekuri

Sapekhati

1 No. Ghilamara

Koroiguri

Balionoi

Sonari sapari

Charikuria

Mornoi Bebejia

Patir Chuk

North Lakhmipur

Ujjalpur

Kachipathar

Janakpur

Satakpur

Siabari

Na-pam

Sivasagar

Gaurisagar

Mathiachiga Dehingia gaon

Bivoltine - CSR1, CSR2 , CSR4

Kheluwa

Kukurachuwa

Demow

Dhundarmukh

Palangi

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4807

BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL (BTC), KOKRAJHAR

Eri Seed Area

District

Taluk/Hobli/Block

SL.

Name of Village

Silk Worm Variety

No.

Kokrajhar

Taluk- Parbatjhora

Block- Devitola

Dolanjhora

Eri

Molandubi

Bongshijhora

Taluk-Kokrajhar

Block-Titaguri

Bethagaon

Bamunpara

Boro Kursakati

Nayakgaon

Baksa

Taluk-Mushalpur

Block- Mushalpur

Narayanpur

Daragaon

Uzirbari

Jalah

Taluk- Tamulpur

Block - Nagrijuli

Nagrijuli

Taluk-Salbari Blk

Salbari

Hasora

Udalguri

Taluk- Udalguri

Block-Udalguri

Dhansirikhti

Bargain

Hajojuli

Daifangkhuti

Swrang

Habwe

Burachuburi

Alikaguri

Boskobari

Taluk-Udalguri

Block-Rowta

Balisahabi

Dahigola

Batabari

Taluk- Udalguri

Block-Mazbat

Nalbari

Kalbari

Kathpuri

Balisiha

Muga Seed Area

District

Taluk/Hobli/Block SL. No.

Name of Village

Silk Worm Variety

Kokrijhar

Taluk- Kokrajhar

Block-Titaguri

Bessargaon

Muga

Boro Kursakati

Baksa

Taluk-Mushalpur

Block- Jalah

Jalah

Uzirbari

Bathoupuri

Taluk- Tamulpur

Block - Tamulpur

Kumarikata

Taluk-Salbari

Block- Salbari

Salbatri

Majormakha

Udalguri

Taluk- Bhergaon

Block- Bhergaon

Nalbari

Simlibari

4808

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Taluk- Bhergaon

Block- Khairabari

Kuhiarkuchi

Bagaribari

Jhargaon

Arengapara

Taluk- Bhergaon

Block-Kalaigaon

Barjhar

Niz-Dola

MANIPUR STATE

Bivoltine Seed Area

District

Taluk/Hobli/Block

SL.

Name of Village

Silk Worm Variety

No.

Imphal East

Sawombung

Seijang

C102 and J101

Achanbigei

C102 and J101

Keirao

Bamon Kampu

C102 and J101

Imphal West

Haorang Sabal

Phumlou

C004 and J003

Taothang

C004 and J003

Thoubal

Kakching

C102 and J101

Thoubal

Leirongthel

C102 and J101

Ulyal

C102 and J101

Bishnupur

Moirang

Wangoo

C004 and J003

Kumbi

C004 and J003

Nambol

Waroiching

C004 and J003

Ukhrul

Hundung

C102 and J101

Senapati

C102 X C004 and J101 X J003

Tadubi

Karong

C102 X C004 and J101 X J003

Chandel

Pallel

C004 X C102 and J003 X J101

Chakpikarong

C004 X C102 and J003 X J101

Kangpokpi

Molsang

C102 X C004 and J101 X J003

Saitu

Motbung

C102 X C004 and J101 X J003

Tamenglong

Nungba

Noney

C004 X C102 and J003 X J101

Tupul

C004 X C102 and J003 X J101

C C pur

T.D. Block

Pengzawl

C004 X C102 and J003 X J101

Saipum

C004 X C102 and J003 X J101

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause – (a) of sub-sec.(2) of Section-8 C of the said Act, the

Central Govt. on the recommendations of the said committee also specifies the minimum quality standards for the

following notified kinds or varieties of silkworm seed.

AN (I) - Authorized New Bivoltine hybrids of Mulberry Silkworm

(Authorized by HAC on 30.07.2013)

Sl.

No.

Hybrid

States/ Regions/ zones

Rearing data

Fecundity

(No)

Hatchability

(%)

Survival

Cocoon

yield/

100 dfls (kg)

Pupation

rate (%)

No of

cocoons/kg

CSR50x

CSR51

Southren

Zone

viz.,

Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh,

Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra

≥480

≥90

≥67

≥90

≥550

AP71 x

AP72

Southren

Zone

viz.,

Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh,

Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra

≥500

≥ 95

≥ 90

≥ 66

≥ 90

≥ 570

(CSR52x

CSR50) x

(CSR51x

CSR53)

All sericulture zones of India

≥500

≥90

≥68

≥90

≥540

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4809

AN (II) - Authorized New Multivoltine x Bivoltine mulberry silkworm hybrid

(Authorized by HAC on 4.03.2013 and 30.07.2013)

Sl.

No.

Hybrid

States/ Regions/ zones

Rearing data

Fecundity

Hatchability

(%)

Survival

Cocoon

yield/

100 dfls

(kg)

Pupation

rate (%)

No of

cocoons/Kg

NxNB4D2

West Bengal, Jharkhand,

Odisha, Assam, Manipur,

Meghalaya, Nagaland.

≥ 400

≥ 90

≥ 45

≥ 90

≥ 650

N(M)

x(SK6xSK7)

Eastern and North-Eastern

regions

≥ 400

≥ 90

≥ 47

≥ 90

≥ 750

M6DP(C)x

SK4C

Eastern and North-Eastern

regions

≥ 450

≥ 90

≥ 50

≥ 90

≥ 700

AN (III) - Authorized New Bivoltine Mulberry Silkworm Parent Seed for Notification

Sl.

No.

Race

Fecundity

Hatchability

(%)

Survival %

Cocoon yield/

100 dfls (kg)

Pupation

rate (%)

No of

cocoons/Kg

NB4D2

≥475

≥90

≥45

≥90

≥800

AP71

≥500

≥95

≥89

≥60

≥90

≥640

AP72

≥480

≥95

≥91

≥63

≥91

≥625

CSR50

≥475

≥90

≥62

≥90

≥530

CSR51

≥500

≥90

≥92

≥60

≥92

≥550

CSR52

≥480

≥90

≥61

≥90

≥540

CSR53

≥465

≥90

≥91

≥60

≥91

≥545

SK4C

≥510

≥90

≥52

≥90

≥680

SK6

≥505

≥90

≥48

≥90

≥660

SK7

≥500

≥90

≥47

≥90

≥650

AN (IV) - Authorized New Multivoltine Mulberry Silkworm Parent Seed for Notification

Sl.

No.

Race

Fecundity

Hatchability

(%)

Survival %

Cocoon yield/

100 dfls (kg.)

Pupation rate

No of cocoons/

Kg.

M6DP(C)

≥ 450

≥ 90

≥ 36

≥ 90

≥ 850

[F. No. 25017/12/2015-Silk(i)]

SITARAM GUPTA, Under Secy.

Je ,oa jkstxkj ea=ky;

ubZ fnYyh] 16 fnlEcj] 2015

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 2337

2337

2337-&vkS?kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj rduhdh

f”k{kd izf”k{k.k vuqla/kku ds jk’Vªh; laLFkku ds izca/kr= ds lac) fu;kstdks vkSj muds deZdkj ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ’V

vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k ,o Je U;k;ky; psUuS

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k ,o Je U;k;ky; psUuS

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k ,o Je U;k;ky; psUuS ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la

¼lanHkZ la

¼lanHkZ la- 124/2015) dks izdkf”kr

djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 11/12/2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42012@155@2015&vkbZvkj¼Mh;w½]

ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/kdkjh

4810

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

New Delhi, the 16^th December, 2015

S.O. 2337.—in pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D No.124/2015) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour

Court No.1, Chennai now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the

management of the National Institute of Technical Teachers Training and Research, Chennai and their workman,

which was received by the Central Government on 11/12/2015.

[No. L-42012/155/2015-IR(DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHENNAI

Friday, the 20th November, 2015

Present :

K.P. PRASANNA KUMARI

Presiding Officer

Industrial Dispute No. 124/2015

(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 National Institute of Technical Teachers

Training and Research, Chennai and Two Others and their workman)

BETWEEN

Shri M. Rajakumar

1^st Party/Petitioner Union

C/o S. Bhakthavatsalam

President, Footwear Workers Union

No. 29-4, K.M.P. Koil Street, Ayanavaram

Chennai-600023

AND

1. The Director

2^nd Party/1^st Respondent

National Institute of Technical Teachers

Training and Research

Taramani

Chennai-600113

The Secretary

2^nd Party/2^nd Respondent

Ministry of Human Resource Development

Government of India

New Delhi-110001

Sri S.R.K. Prasad

2^nd Party/3^rd Respondent

Chairman, Board of Governors

National Institute of Technical Teachers Training

& Research Chennai Society, Taramani

Chennai-600113

Appearance:

For the 1^st Party/Petitioner Union

Absent

For the 2^nd Party/1^st Respondent

M/s. Sai Raaj Associates, Advocate

For the 2^nd Party/2^nd Respondent

Absent

For the 2^nd Party/3^nd Respondent

M/s. Sai Raaj Associates, Advocates

AWARD

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour & Employment vide its Order No. L-42012/155/2015-IR (DU)

dated 29.09.2015 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4811

The schedule mentioned in that order is :

“Whether the action carried out by the Management of National Institute of Technical Teachers Training and Research,

Chennai Society in respect of transfer of the Union members to various states and not allowing the union representative

to run the union, etc. amount to unfair labour practice as per Section-2(ra), 5^th Schedule of ID Act, 1947 or not? If not to

what relief the petitioner union is entitled to?

On receipt of Industrial Dispute this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 124/2015 and issued notices to both sides.

The Respondents have entered appearance through their counsel on receipt of notice.

Notice was sent to the petitioner in the address given in the order of reference twice. On both occasions notice was

returned with the endorsement “there is no such name or address”. There is no way to find out the correct address of the

petitioner. If he was interested in pursuing the matter he would have furnished correct address to the Tribunal or even

to the Ministry before the matter was referred to this Tribunal. The assumption to be made is that the petitioner is not

interested in pursuing the matter. So the reference is to be answered against the petitioner.

In the result the reference is answered against the petitioner. 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

20^th November, 2015)

K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined:

For the 1^stParty/Petitioner Union

None

For the 2^nd Party/1^st, 2^nd & 3^rd Management :

None

Documents Marked:

On the petitioner’s side

Ex. No.

Date

Description

______________Nil_______________________________

On the Management’s side

Ex. No.

Date

Description

______________Nil_______________________________

ubZ fnYyh] 16 fnlEcj] 2015

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 2338

2338

2338-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj nwjlapkj

foHkkx] Hkksiky ds izca/kr= ds lac) fu;kstdks vkSj muds deZdkj ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ’V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;

dsUnzh;

ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k ,o Je U;k;ky;

ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k ,o Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj

] tcyiqj

] tcyiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ

¼lanHkZ

¼lanHkZ Case No. CGIT/LC/R/116/2005) dh izdkf”kr

djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 15/12/2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&40012/46/2005-vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/kdkjh

New Delhi, the 16^th December, 2015

S.O. 2338.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D Case No.CGIT/LC/R/116/2005) of the Central Government Industrial

Tribunal Cum Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the Department of Telecommunications, Bhopal and their workman, which was

received by the Central Government on 15/12/2015.

[No. L-40012/46/2005-IR(DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

4812

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/116/2005

Shri Makhanlal Andheshwar,

Sahastra Dhara Road,

Near Govt. Milk Scheme,

Opp Shukla Parisar,

Rampura,

Mandla (MP)

…Workman

Versus

Chief General Manager,

Telecom, Telecom Bhawan,

Hoshangabad Road,

Bhopal

Telecom District Manager,

Mandla

...Management

AWARD

Passed on this 4^th day of December 2015

1. As per letter dated 18-10-05 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-40012/46/2005-IR(DU).The dispute under reference relates to:

“Whether the action of the SDO/TDE Telecom, Mandla in terminating the services of Shri Makhanlal

Andheshwar instead of regularizing him (as he completed 240 days) and not complying provisions of Industrial

Dispute Act, 1947 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled?”

2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. Workman submitted statement of claim at page 6/1

to 6/4. Case of Ist party workman is that he was appointed as casual labour in office of Sub Divisional Office

Mandla DTO from 25-9-89. He worked without any complaints. He completed more than 240 days continuous

service. He claims to be entitled for regularization in service as per circular dated 17-12-90 providing

regularization of casual employees. The work for which he was engaged from June 1992 is still available.

There is no reason to discontinue his services. Suddenly his services were terminated without giving

retrenchment compensation. Order of termination was not issued to him. He claims to be continued in service.

That department issued Attendance Certificate for period 1992 to 1999. The workman reiterates that he worked

continuously more than 240 days during each of the calendar year. His services were terminated without

notice. Retrenchment compensation not paid. Termination of his service is illegal. Workman further claims that

since he is out of employment from 1999, he has no other source of livelihood. He and his family are unable to

maintain themselves.

3. 2^nd party filed Written Statement at Page 7/1 to 7/2 opposing claim of workman. 2^nd party denies that workman

was appointed as casual labour from 25-9-89. 2^nd party contends that workman was engaged for casual work as

per exigencies. There was no question of his satisfactory service. Workman was engaged intermittently. He had

not completed 240 days continuous service. As workman was not in service of the management, there was no

question of terminating his services. The documents referred by workman were not issued by the department.

Workman is not entitled to showcause notice or retrenchment compensation. Workman is not entitled to any

relief.

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 SDO/TDE Telecom, Mandla in

terminating the services of Shri Makhanlal Andheshwar

instead of regularizing him (as he completed 240 days)

and not complying provisions of Industrial Dispute Act,

1947 is legal and justified?

Termination of workman is illegal for

violation of Section 25-F of ID Act.

(ii) If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?”

As per final order.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4813

REASONS

5. The terms of reference pertains to denial of regularisation of workman and terminating his services violating

provisions of ID Act. Claim of workman is denied by 2^nd party. Workman filed affidavit of his evidence

supporting his contentions in statement of claim that he was engaged as casual labour from 25-9-89 by Sub

Divisional Officer, Mandla. He completed more than 240 days continuous service during each of the year

during 1989 to 1999. That circular dated 17-12-90 for regularisation of casual employees was issued. That his

services were terminated without notice, retrenchment compensation was not paid to him. In his cross-

examination, workman says he had not submitted application for obtaining copies of Exhibit W-1 to W-3.

Zerox copy of those documents were not obtained on the same day. The post on which he was working was not

advertised. His name was not sponsored through Employment Exchange. He submitted application for job but

Written test was not conducted. He was called by Shri J.P.Parwar and immediately engaged him in the work.

Appointment letter was not given to him. He was paid wages for his working days. He denies that he not

completed 240 days continuous service during any of the year.

6. Management’s witness Shri Ashok Kumar Sahu supported contentions of 2^nd party in Written Statement that

workman was never engaged by the management of BSNL Mandla. Workman not rendered services in the

department on casual basis or otherwise. He not completed 240 days continuous service during any of the year.

There was no question of his termination. In his cross-examination, management’s witness says he was not

posted in Mandla office during 1992 to 1999. The record of engagement of casual labours for the period 92 to

99 was not found by him. His affidavit is prepared as per the legal file of the case. The documents on which his

affidavit is based are not produced. He had seen Written Statement filed by management in the matter. He

admits that the documents he had seen may disclose whether workman had worked in the department or not. It

is clear that workman has no personal knowledge of the matter. He was not working in Mandla office during

the relevant period.

7. Workman has produced documents Exhibit W-1 copies of vouchers, those vouchers are carefully seen working

days of workman during the year 1990 to 1999 comes 216 days. Exhibit W-2, W-3 produced by workman

shows name of workman about payment of wages. He was engaged for the work. Ist party had filed application

for production of documents on 8-4-08. The application was opposed by 2^nd party filing reply on 27-9-12. Shri

A.K.Shashi for workman pointed out my attention to reply. Management had contented workman had not

worked for more than 240 days. He was engaged for casual work in the department.

8. Management’s witness in his affidavit however contented that workman never worked with the management.

The inconsistency in reply filed to the application for production of documents and evidence of management’s

witness is apparent. When workman was engaged for casual work, management’s witness had totally denied his

engagement. The evidence of management’s witness cannot be believed. Workman produced documents

Exhibit W-1 to W-3 regarding his engagement. Management has not produced documents despite application

for production of documents filed.

9. Shri M.P.Kapoor Advocate for management during course of argument submitted that the documents produced

by management are denied by Ist party. The documents produced along with list by management on 17-11-07

are denied by Ist party. Those documents were not requested by Ist party workman. As per application dated

8-4-08, Ist party had requested production of vacancy position from 1989 to 1999, attendance particulars of

workman. The particulars of wages paid to him during above period. Muster roll from 1989 to 1999 and

circular dated 17-12-90. Those documents are not produced by management. In affidavit of evidence of

workman, he has stated about circular dated 17-12-90 was issued for regularisation of casual employees is not

challenged in his cross-examination. During course of argument Shri M.P.Kapoor submits that the scheme for

regularisation of casual employees, cut off period is 30-3-85, workman was not working during said period.

Workman claims to be engaged from 25-9-89. Consequently Ist party workman cannot get benefit of

regularisation under the scheme.

10. The evidence of workman about his continuous working is supported by documents Exhibit W-1 to W-3. He

could not produce all documents. 2^nd party has not produced documents despite application is filed. The

management’s witness in cross-examination says his affidavit is filed as per documents. Those documents are

not produced on record. Adverse inference deserves to be drawn. If documents would have produced, it would

have supported claim of workman. Therefore I accept evidence of workman that he completed 240 days

continuous service preceding his date of termination. His services are terminated without notice, retrenchment

compensation is not paid to him. Therefore termination of service of workman is illegal for violation of Section

25-F of ID Act. For above reasons, I record my finding in Point No.1 in Negative.

11. Point No.2- In view of my finding in Point No.1 that termination of services of workman is illegal, question

arises whether Ist party is entitled for reinstatement with backwages. Shri A.K.Shashi submitted copy of order

passed by CAT in 411/90 and others. In para-11 it is clear that cut off date was changed from 30-3-85 to

22-6-88. Workman was not working during said period. As per pleading in statement of claim, he was engaged

from 25-9-89 therefore the claim of Ist party workman for regularisation cannot be upheld.

4814

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

12. Shri A.K. Shashi on the point relies on ratio held in case of

Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education, Amravati versus Sanjay Krishnarao

Shrungare, Amravati reported in 2008-II-CLR-301. Their Lordship held that the best possible evidence with

the appellant on the point of total service put in by the respondents not brought on record by the appellant.

Appellant has to blame itself for this failure on its part. The order passed by Labour Court was upheld.

13. Shri M.P.Kapoor in support of his argument relies on ratio held in case of

Tapash Kumar Paul versus BSNL and another reported in 2014AIR-SCW 5816. In Para-14 of the judgment,

their Lordship held it would be thus seen that by a catena of decisions in recent time, this Court has clearly laid

down that an award of reinstatement should not however be automatically passed. The award of reinstatement

with full back wages in a case where the workman completed 240 days of work in a year preceding the date of

termination, particularly, daily wagers has not been found to be proper by this Court and instead compensation

has been awarded. This court has distinguished between a daily wager who doesnot hold a post and a

permanent employee.

Their Lordship further observed in the very nature of things, there cannot be a straitjacket formula for awarding

relief of backwages. All relevant considerations will enter the verdict. More or less, it would be a motion

addressed to the discretion of the Tribunal. Full backwages would be the normal rule and the party objecting to

it must establish the circumstances necessitating departure. At that stage, the Tribunal will exercise its

discretion keeping in view all the relevant circumstances. But the discretion must be exercised in a judicial and

judicious manner.

Ist party in his cross-examination says the post was not advertised. His name was not sponsored through

Employment Exchange. Written test was not conducted. Appointment letter was not issued to him. He was paid

wages for his working days. Reinstatement with backwages would not be justified.

14. Considering the period of working, workman was engaged as casual employee, compensation Rs. One Lakh

would be appropriate. Accordingly I record my finding in Point No.2.

15. In the result, award is passed as under:-

(1) Termination of services of workman is illegal for violation of Section 25-F of ID Act.

(2) 2^nd party is directed to pay compensation Rs.One Lakh to the workman.

Amount as per above order shall be paid to workman within 30 days from the date of notification of award. In

case of default, amount shall carry 9 % interest per annum from the date of award till its realization.

16. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment as per rules.

R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 16 fnlEcj] 2015

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 2339

2339

2339-&vkS?kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj nwjlapkj

foHkkx] Hkksiky ds izca/kr= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkj ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ’V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;

dsUnzh;

ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k ,o Je U;k;ky;

ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k ,o Je U;k;ky;] tcyiq

] tcyiq

] tcyiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ

¼lanHkZ

¼lanHkZ Case No.CGIT/LC/R/332/99) dks izdkf”kr djrh

gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 15-12-2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&40012/266/99-vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/kdkjh

New Delhi, the 16^th December, 2015

S.O. 2339.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D Case No.CGIT/LC/R/332/99) of the Central Government Industrial

Tribunal Cum Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the Department of Telecommunications, Bhopal and their workman, which was

received by the Central Government on 15-12-2015.

[No.L-40012/266/99-IR(DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4815

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/332/99

Shri Santosh Sharma

R/o Vohra Baakhal,

Hadiyali Mohalla,

Shajapur

…..Workman

Versus

Chief General Manager,

Deptt. of Telecommunication,

Hoshangabad Road,

MP circle,

Bhopal

…Management

AWARD

Passed on this 4th day of December 2015

1. As per letter dated 18-11-99 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-40012/266/99/IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:

“Whether the action of the management of Chief General Manager, Telecom in terminating the services of Shri

Santosh Sharma w.e.f. 26-3-99 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?”

2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. Workman submitted statement of claim at Page 2/1

to 2/4. The case of Ist party workman is that since January 1989, he is working under Sub Divisional Office of

Telecom Shajapur 2^nd party No.4. 2^nd party No.3 is Competent authority. 2^nd party No.2 is Administrative

Authority. engagement of casual labours was approved by the Administration AGM. He was engaged as casual

employees. The casual labours were not regularised. The Indian Postal Mazdoor Union filed petition before

Hon’ble Apex Court. The judgment reported in AIR-1987-SC-342, department was directed to frame scheme

for regularization of casual employees. That the scheme for regularization of casual employees was framed by

Telecom Deptt. on 7-11-89. The employees working till 30-3-85 were to be regularised in Original

application 1476/90 CAT Delhi declared cut off date illegal. Consequently all casual employees were entitled to

regularisation.

3. That as per directions issued by 2^nd party No. 2,3, services of Ist party workman were terminated from 31-3-99.

The services were terminated without issuing chargesheet or conducting enquiry. Termination of his service is

in violation of Section 25-F of ID Act. the casual employees engaged after workman are retained. Ist party

workman further submits that he worked more than 240 days during each of the year. He was not paid

retrenchment compensation. His services were not regularised. He was not paid pay scale of regular employee.

He was paid Rs.1200/- per month. On such contentions, workman prays for regularization of his services.

4. 2^nd party filed Written Statement at Page 4/1 to 4/2 opposing claim of workman. 2^nd party contends that Ist

party workman never worked with the Division. He was not appointed as casual labour from November 1989.

There is no question of payment of allowances to the workman. Workman was not engaged in Sub Division.

There is no question of his regularization. 2^nd party denies that workman rendered satisfactory service. As

workman did not work in Sub Division, there is no question of his termination. Violation of Section 25-F of ID

Act doesnot arise. Workman not worked more than 240 days in a calendar year. There was no question of

payment of retrenchment compensation to him. 2^nd party denies claim of workman on ground that he was never

engaged in the Sub Division. Workman was not terminated. 2^nd party prays reference be answered in its favour.

Workman is not entitled to any relief.

5. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under.

My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below:-

(i) Whether the action of the management of Chief

General Manager, Telecom in terminating the services of

Shri Santosh Sharma w.e.f. 26-3-99 is legal and justified?

In Negative

(ii) If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?”

As per final order.

4816

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

REASONS

6. The term of reference pertains to illegality of the termination of services of Ist party workman. However in

statement of claim, workman is claiming regularization in service. It is beyond the terms of reference.

7. Workman filed affidavit of his evidence supporting his claim that management framed scheme for giving

temporary status to casual employees to persons engaged after 30-3-85 to 22-6-88. That he worked in the

department since January 88 to 20-2-99 under JTO Shajapur. He completed more than 240 days in a year. He

was not given temporary status as per the scheme instead he was terminated in February 1999. In his cross-

examination, workman says he has passed HSc Exam. The scheme referred in his affidavit is known to him. the

scheme was introduced in 1988. He had submitted application for the post advertised in newspaper. He was

unable to tell name of newspaper. His name was sponsored through Employment Exchange. Any document

about the same is not produced. Appointment letter was given to him. It is not produced on record. workman

explains that officer had got back the appointment letter. He denies that he never worked in department. He

denies that he has wrongly stated in affidavit that he worked more than 240 days.

8. Management’s evidence was closed on 25-5-15. No evidence is adduced on behalf of management.

9. During course of argument, learned counsel for Ist party Shri R.C. Shrivastava pointed out my attention that the

application for production of documents was given on 26-6-03. The application was opposed on the ground that

workman was never engaged by the management. when management has failed to produce documents, no

evidence is adduced by management, the dispute is referred after failure of conciliation proceeding. The

evidence of workman cannot be rejected outright. The evidence of workman is clear that he was working with

2^nd party continuously. The scheme rendered by workman in his statement of claim and evidence is not

produced on record. as per his own pleadings and evidence, workman is working with the 2^nd party after cut off

date 30-3-85. Workman cannot be allowed benefit of scheme. Rather the terms of reference pertains to legality

of termination and not denial of regularization of workman. the termination of services of workman is illegal

for violation of section 25-F of ID Act. Therefore I record my finding in Pont No.1 in Negative.

10. Point No.2- In view of my finding in Point No.1 that services of workman were terminated illegally in violation

of Section 25-F of ID Act. Shri R.C.Shrivastava Advocate for workman relies on ratio held in case between

Tamil Nadu Terminated full time Temporary LIC employees Association versus LIC reported in

2015(145)FLR-761. The facts of above cited case are not available. The workman were appointed as badly and

part time workman followed by awards passed by National Industrial Tribunal passed by Justice R.D.Tulpule

dated 17-4-86 clarified by Justice S.M. Jamdar dated 26-8-88 affirming award passed by Justice R.D.Tulpule.

Shri M.P.Kapoor for management produced copy of award in R/59/04. The evidence adduced in said reference

is not comparable with evidence in present case.

The workman has not produced appointment letter, there is no evidence that he was appointed following

recruitment process. claim for reinstatement with backwages would not be justified. Considering the working

period of Ist party workman, compensation Rs. One Lakh would be appropriate.

11. In the result, award is passed as under:-

(1) The action of the management of Chief General Manager, Telecom in terminating the services of Shri

Santosh Sharma w.e.f. 26-3-99 is not proper and legal.

(2) 2^nd party is directed to pay compensation Rs. One Lakh to the workman.

Amount as per above order shall be paid to workman within 30 days from the date of notification of award. In

case of default, amount shall carry 9 % interest per annum from the date of award till its realization.

12. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment as per rules.

R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 16 fnlEcj] 2015

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 2340

2340

2340-&vkS?kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj nwjlapkj

foHkkx] jk;x<+] ds izca/kr= ds lac) fu;kstdks vkSj muds deZdkj ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ’V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;

dsUnzh;

ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k ,o

vf/kdj.k ,o

vf/kdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;

Je U;k;ky;

Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj

] tcyiqj

] tcyiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ

¼lanHkZ

¼lanHkZ Case No. CGIT/LC/R/128/00) dks izdkf”kr djrh

gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 15/12/2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&40012/145/2000-IR(DU)]

ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/kdkjh

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4817

New Delhi, the 16th December, 2015

S.O. 2340.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D Case No. CGIT/LC/R/128/00) of the Central Government Industrial

Tribunal Cum Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the Department of Telecommunications, Bhopal and their workman, which was

received by the Central Government on 15/12/2015.

[No. 40012/145/2000-IR (DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/128/00

Shri Bhim Bahadur Kshatriya,

C/o R.P. Choubey, Civil Lines,

Near Raigarh Sandesh,

Raigarh

….Workman

Versus

Telecom District Engineer,

Raigarh

….Management

AWARD

Passed on this 7th day of December, 2015

1. As per letter dated 30-6-00 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-40012/145/2000/IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:

“Whether the action of the Telecom District engineer, Raigarh (MP) in terminating the services of Shri Bhim

Bahadur Kshatriya, ex-worker w.e.f. 1-12-95 is justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?”

2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. Ist party workman submitted statement of claim at

Page 2/1 to 2/2. Case of Ist party workman is that he was engaged in service by 2^nd party as casual mazdoor

(typing work) in TDE Rajgarh on 12-9-89. He served with 2^nd party. The details of his working days are given

in para-2 of the statement of claim. 319 days during 12-9-89 to 24-12-90, 283 days during 1-1-91 to 28-12-91,

293 days during 1-1-1991 to 2-1-1993, 281 days during 1-1-1993 to 1-1-1994, 251 days during the period

3-1-94 to 20-11-94, 246 days during 2-1-95 to November 95- total 1673 days. He was employed for typing

work in Rajgarh office. After November 1995, his services were terminated. However he was continued to be

employed for same work through contractor. His work was controlled and directed by the officers. His

attendance was controlled by the department. He was paid according to the Government rates of wages. He was

terminated without notice. He was not paid compensation for services rendered by him. The Telecom

department introduced scheme for regularisation of casual labour in 1989, he was not given its benefit. That

termination of his service is illegal. On such ground, workman prays for according temporary status to him.

3. 2^nd party filed Written Statement at Page 7/1 to 7/3 opposing claim of workman. 2^nd party contents that claim of

Ist party workman for according temporary status is not legal. That the department engaged casual workers for

targeted works at various places in Rajgarh Telecom District on daily wages. The workers were not engaged on

regular basis. the casual labours are automatically terminated on expiry of the time stipulated in the work order.

For next month, such labour is again deployed if he desires to work under the officer. No question of

termination arise. Telecom department framed policy for temporary status of casual worker as per

regularisation scheme of 1989. The conditions required that the labour should have been engaged prior to

30-3-85 and continued as casual worker since 7-11-89. He must have completed 240 days continuous service in

a year. The casual employee engaged in electrification work vide circular dated 25-6-93 and order dated

17-12-93. The conditions required for the engagement should be between 30-3-85 to 22-6-88 still continuing

on the date of respective orders etc. 2^nd party further submits that workman was engaged on daily wages as

typist and not as casual labour on muster roll. Scheme introduced by department doesnot provide direct

regularisation of casual workers. Workman himself failed to report for work. There was no question of

termination of his service. The engagement of workman was subject to availability of work. Workman was

engaged on daily wages intermittently for typing work. Workman never worked on muster roll as casual labour.

Workman tried to mislead the court. The department is covered by rules. No regular appointment can be made

dehors the rules. As workman himself left the work as per his will, he was not terminated, there is no question

4818

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

of issuing notice of termination or payment of compensation to the workman. 2^nd party prays for rejection of

claim.

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 Telecom District engineer, Raigarh

(MP) in terminating the services of Shri Bhim Bahadur Kshatriya,

ex-worker w.e.f. 1-12-95 is justified?

In Negative

(ii) If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?”

As per final order.

REASONS

5. The term of reference pertains to legality of termination of services of Ist party workman from 1-12-95, the

denial of temporary status is not included. The claim of workman w.r.t. temporary status is beyond terms of

reference.

6. Workman filed affidavit of his evidence. Workman says he was engaged on daily wages from 12-9-89. He has

given details of his working days as shown in his statement of claim. He worked for total 1673 days. His

services were terminated in 1995. After termination of his services, he was engaged through contractor for

same work. He was continuously working. Wages were paid at Government rate. He was not granted benefit of

temporary status as per Government scheme. In his cross-examination, workman says appointment letter in

writing was not given to him as daily wage labour. He was doing typing work. He was also required to work in

the office. He produced copy of order Form SG-17. He denies that he himself left the job.

7. Management’s witness Basant Xylo filed affidavit of his evidence supporting contentions of management. In

his affidavit of evidence, management’s witness says in 1982 Government of India sanction project for

expansion of telephone network. The project work was available at TDM, Raipur in MP, CG. To meet

targetted work, such as cable laying, erection of cable line, restoration of breakdown, there was necessity of

employees, manpower on contract basis. Management employed regular manpower of workers on daily wages

purely on contract nature. The required workers were taken from open market on daily need basis, that there

was no relationship of master and servant as the employment was not on regular basis on sanctioned post. That

Ist party workman Bhim Bahadur was not employed for any project on muster roll. He was engaged for typing

work in office on daily wage basis. Management’s witness has not disclosed working days of workman though

he denied that workman had not completed 240 days continuous service. That his employment was not against

project work. He was not employed prior to 1988. Therefore workman is not covered under regularisation

scheme. In his cross-examination, management’s witness claims ignorance whether workman was working in

Rajgarh Telecom office from 12-9-89. He also claims ignorance about the working days during 1989 to 1992,

93, 94, suggested to him. He claims ignorance whether Attendance Register was maintained. Workman was not

terminated. Workman was not on duty, typing work was obtained from him. The attendance registers of

workman is not produced, the witness claims ignorance about the attendance register.

8. The evidence of workman about his working days is not challenged in his cross-examination. The working

days shown in statement of claim are not specifically denied in the Written Statement and cross-examination of

workman. Therefore I find no reason to disbelieve evidence of workman about his working days shown in

Para-2 of statement of claim and para-2 of his affidavit of evidence. The evidence of workman is cogent that he

completed more than 240 days continuous service during 12 calendar months prior to his termination in

November 1995. His services are terminated without notice. The casual employees engaged by department

cannot be denied protection of Section 25-F of ID Act on the reasons he was not appointed on sanctioned post.

The evidence is clear that termination of workman is illegal for violation of section 25-F of ID Act. Therefore I

record my finding in Point No.1 in Negative.

9. Point No.2- In view of my finding in Point No.1 termination of workman is illegal for violation of Section 25-F

of ID Act, question arises whether workman is entitled for reinstatement with backwages. Shri M.P.Kapoor

relies on ratio held in case of

Senior Supdt. Telegraph Traffic Bhopal versus Santosh Kumar Seal and others reported in 2010(6)SCC-773.

Their Lordship considering facts as workman were engaged as daily wagers about 25 years back and they

worked hardly for 2 or 3 years, relief of reinstatement with backwages would not be justified, compensation

Rs.40,000 was awarded to each of the workmen.

In present case, workman was engaged from 12-9-89 to November 1995 for more than 5 years. Appointment

order in writing was not given to him. Compensation Rs. One Lakh would be appropriate. Accordingly I record

my finding in Point No. 2.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4819

10. In the result, award is passed as under:-

(1) The action of the Telecom District engineer, Raigarh (MP) in terminating the services of Shri Bhim

Bahadur Kshatriya, ex-worker w.e.f. 1-12-95 is not proper and legal.

(2) 2^nd party is directed to pay compensation Rs. One Lakh to the workman.

Amount as per above order shall be paid to workman within 30 days from the date of notification of award. In

case of default, amount shall carry 9 % interest per annum from the date of award till its realization.

R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 16 fnlEcj] 2015

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 2341

2341

2341.—vkS?kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj nwj

lapkj foHkkx] Hkksiky ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdkas vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ’V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;

dsUnzh;

ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k ,o

ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj

Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj

Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ

lanHkZ

lanHkZ Case No.CGIT/LC/R/67/96) dks izdkf”kr djrh

gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 15/12/2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&40012/241/94-vkbZ vkj ¼Mh;w½]

ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/kdkjh

New Delhi, the 16th December, 2015

S.O. 2341.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D Case No. CGIT/LC/R/67/96) of the Central Government Industrial

Tribunal Cum Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the Department of Telecommunications, Bhopal and their workman, which was

received by the Central Government on 15/12/2015.

[No. L-40012/241/94-IR (DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/67/96

Shri Ramdayal Rahangdale,

s/o Jeevan Lal,

C/o Bhim Chandr Patel,

Gangu Shahu Tej Chowk,

Telibandh, Raipur.

……Workman

Versus

Director,

Telecom Project (West MP),

T.T.Nagar,

Bhopal (MP)

…..Management

AWARD

Passed on this 7th day of December 2015

1. As per letter dated 26-2-96 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-

40012/241/94-IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:

4820

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

“Whether the action of the management of Coaxial Cable Project of Department of Telecommunication through

the Divisional Engineer, Coaxial Cable Project, shankarnagar, Raipur in terminating the services of Shri

Ramdayal Rahangdale is lawful and justified? If not, to what relief the workman concerned is entitled to?”

2. After receiving reference, notices were issued to the parties. Ist party workman submitted statement of claim at

Page 5/5 to 5/9. The case of Ist party workman is that he was appointed on 1-7-87 by 2^nd party No.3 Divisional

Engineer, Coaxial Project, Shanker Nagar, Raipur. He was continuously working from 1-7-87 to 31-12-90. He

was dong work of digging ditches, laying cables etc. on 1-1-1990, he was orally terminated without notice. He

was not paid retrenchment compensation. When he repeatedly approached 2^nd party, he was assured to

continue in service after approval of his superior officers. That dispute was raised before ALC on behalf of 5

persons including Ist party workman Ramesh Awsare, bhimchand and others. 3 persons were not absorbed in

employment, Daut Khan and Tej Ram were retained in service. His service record was excellent. Services were

terminated without notice from 11-1990. That after termination of his service, he is unemployed. On such

ground, workman prays for his reinstatement with backwages.

3. 2^nd party filed Written Statement at Page 17 - 19 opposing claim of Ist party workman. 2^nd party denied

appointment of workman from 1-6-87. It is contented that workman was engaged purely on temporary basis by

DOT Raipur. Workman was engaged on muster roll, he was paid for work done by him. 2^nd party denies that

workman was not paid retrenchment compensation. Workman was served with notice of retrenchment

compensation was paid to workman. Management submits that absorption of two labours was as per order

passed by CAT Jabalpur in Case No. OA.71/91 & OA.196/90. Workman had not approached CAT Jabalpur

rather he approached ALC in 1996 after disposal of the original application before CAT, Jabalpur. 2^nd party

reiterates that workman was served with retrenchment notice and compensation was paid to him. It is prayed

that reference be answered in favour of management.

4. Workman filed rejoinder at Page 39 - 41 reiterating his contentions in statement of claim. Workman denies

retrenchment notice and payment for retrenchment compensation. He reiterates that he worked more than 240

days continuous service during each of the year.

5. Considering pleadings on record, the points which arise for my consideration and determination are as under.

My findings are recorded against each of them for the reasons as below:-

(i) Whether the action of the management of Coaxial Cable Project of

Department of Telecommunication through the Divisional

Engineer, Coaxial Cable Project, shankarnagar, Raipur in

terminating the services of Shri Ramdayal Rahangdale is lawful and

justified?

In Affirmative

(ii) If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?”

Workman is not entitled to

any relief.

REASONS

6. Ist party workman is challenging termination of his service for violation of Section 25-F of ID Act. His claim is

denied by 2^nd party. Workman filed affidavit of his evidence at Page 46/1 to 46/3. As per ordersheet dated

26-10-10, as workman remained absent for his cross-examination, his evidence was closed. His evidence would

not be considered in the case. Management failed to adduce evidence. The evidence of management was closed

on 10-6-14. The parties donot punctually participate in the proceeding. As workman failed to appear for cross-

examination, his evidence could not be considered. There is no evidence to support claim of workman.

Therefore I record my finding in Point No.1 in Affirmative.

7. In the result, award is passed as under:-

(1) The Whether the action of the management of Coaxial Cable Project of Department of Telecommunication

through the Divisional Engineer, Coaxial Cable Project, Shankarnagar, Raipur in terminating the services

of Shri Ramdayal Rahangdale is proper and legal.

(2) Workman is not entitled to any relief.

R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4821

ubZ fnYyh] 16 fnlEcj] 2015

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 2342

2342

2342.—vkS?kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj lqj{kk

fizafVax izsl] gSnjkckn ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdkas vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ’V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k ,o Je U;k;ky;] gSnjkckn

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k ,o Je U;k;ky;] gSnjkckn ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la- 7/2012) dks izdkf”kr djrh gS tks

dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 11/12/2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&16011/01/2011-vkbZ vkj ¼Mh;w½]

ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/kdkjh

New Delhi, the 16th December, 2015

S.O. 2342.—in pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D No.7/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour

Court, Hyderabad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the

management of the Security Printing Press, Hyderabad and their workmen, which was received by the Central

Government on 11/12/2015.

[No. L-16011/01/2011-IR(DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

Present: - Sri Kishori Ram

Presiding Officer Incharge

(Authorized for adjudication)

Dated the 24th day of September, 2015

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 7/2012

Between:

Sri M.A. Wahid & 32 others,

Group ‘C’, Non-Gazetted Non Ministerial

(Industrial) shop floor Staff,

Security Printing Press, Mint Compound,

Saifabad, Hyderabad.

….Petitioner

AND

The General Manager,

Security Printing Press,

Mint Compound,

Saifabad,

Hyderabad.

….Respondents

Appearances:

For the Petitioner : M/s. Siva, Parvathi & Goda Ramalakshmi, Advocates

For the Respondent :

Sri P. Bhakthavatsal, Advocate

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour by its order No. L-16011/01/2011-IR(DU) dated 6.2.2012

referred the following dispute under section 10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 requiring this forum to decide the question:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the management of Security Printing Press, Hyderabad in denying the Over time

Allowance under Section 59 of Factories Act to the workers defined under Section 2(1) of the Press and in lieu

giving Special Allowance to them is justified? What relief these workmen are entitled to?”

4822

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

On receipt of the reference this Tribunal has registered and numbered the reference as I.D. No.7/2012 and notices were

issued to both the workman and the management.

Brief averments of the Claim Statement filed by the workmen/Petitioners are as follows:

The case of the petitioner Sri M.A. Wahid and 32 others as Group C, Non-Gazetted, non-Ministerial as represented in

their claim statement in the industrial dispute is that the postal stationery (post cards, Inland letter cards, Embossed

Envelopes etc.,), non-judicial, stamp papers and Central Excise stamps which were formerly catered all over India

through the India Security Press, Nasik Road, Maharastra. As the demand for these products was on high increase, it led

to the creation of the Security Printing Press at Hyderabad by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance . Like

Ministry of the Coin Currency was handed by the three different mints one each at Bombay, Calcutta and Hyderabad.

All these units are under the Administrative control of the Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance,

Government of India.

The Respondent is a Factory under the Factories Act. All the benefits under the Act were extended to each

workman. In view of the demand of various Presses for the products, workers were working in certain cases for 10 to

11 hours beyond their 8 hour shift duty in a day. Majority of the staff are connected with production, so their work was

incidental to the production. Hence, they are “workmen” as defined under the Factories Act. Wherever a workman

works beyond 54 hours a week and 9 hours a day, he is entitled to overtime allowance at double the normal rate under

the provisions of the Factory Act in general and u/s 59 in particular. The Respondent is bound to pay it as long as the

employees continue to work as workman.

Further alleged that the Petitioner holding various designations do not hold either managerial or supervisory

duties. They were also paid overtime allowance in accordance with the provisions of the Factories Act. But the

Government as the memorandum declare that the Petitioners on reaching a particular stage in the pay scale attached to

the post held by them would cease to get the benefit of Sec.59 of the said Act. Accordingly, the management of the

Security Printing Press issued the Petitioners individual orders as per the Ministry order dated 21.12.1968 that as they

reached a particular stage in the pay scale, they would not get overtime allowance double the normal rate, rather

instead, the benefit would be restricted to a special allowance. The order of the Ministry of Finance was communicated

to the individuals who had crossed the said stage in their pay scale working as the employees in the other sister

organizations i.e., Indian Security Press, Currency Note Press, Bank Note Press, India Government Mints and the

Security Paper Mill, Hoshangabad. On the challenge of the workman to the action before the various Tribunals, Hon’ble

High Court and even the Hon’ble Supreme Court, all the legal fora held that the workmen would have to be entitled to,

and, paid double the normal rate of overtime allowance, by interfering with the orders of the Mints and presses

based on the Memorandum of Ministry of Finance. The same has been implemented in the Mints and the Presses at

the loss of the Management at the hands of the highest Judicial Authority.

Further stated is that when parity of treatment was not meted out to the Petitioners, the Petitioners filed their

Original Application No.963/1994 before the Administrative Tribunal, but the same was dismissed for default as per

order dt. 19.8.1996 with the remedy for the applicants to approach the Industrial Tribunal. When the Petitioners

raised the dispute, the Central Government referred it under Sec.10 of the Industrial Disputes Act on 1.4.1994. But by

proceeding on the wrong premise whether the Petitioners were workmen and whether they were discharging their duties

as Supervisory, the Tribunal dismissed the ID No.35/1998 as per the order dt. 16.4.1998. The correctness and legality

of the award passed on 28.12.1998 in the aforesaid ID was challenged in the Writ Petition No.18351/1999, wherein the

Learned Single Judge as per order and judgement dt. 1.4.2003 upheld the award of the Tribunal. Against it, the Writ

Appeal No.152/2004 was filed before the Division Bench, which was pleased to dismiss it as withdrawn, granting

permission to approach the appropriate Authority under the Factories Act.

Lastly on failure of the conciliation, the Central Government as per the order dated 6.2.2012 referred for an

adjudication over the issue as per the schedule to it. The Petitioners are entitled to the overtime allowance as per the

Sec.59 of the Factories Act for the reasons mentioned in their claim statement.

As the award passed by the industrial Tribunal, Hyderabad in ID No.5/2001, the General Secretary, Hyderabad

Mint Staff Association Vs. The G.M., India Govt. Mint, over the issue of the validity of the Ministry of Finance Office

Memorandum, the base for denying the OTA of the Petitioners, was implemented by the India Government Mint as per

the office Memo dt. 20.12.2004/ 1.1.2005, just as other awards of the CGIT, Jabalpur and of the CAT, Bombay in the

O.A. No.761/1988 as also affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as per the order dt. 7.11.1993 in the SLP(Civil)

18444/1993.

Brief averments of the Respondent in their statement of Counter:-

Whereas categorically denying all the allegations of the Petitioners, the contra pleaded case of the Respondent as per the

reply counter statement of Mr. N. Sidhan, the Dy. Manager (H.R.) is that the case relates to the restriction of Overtime

Allowance for the Supervisors under Group C to their basic pay while the Security Printing Press (SPP for short) was

functioning in the Government set up. This unit has got status of corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi, since the

Corporatization of the SPP and other industrial units working under Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic

Affairs w.e.f. 10.2.2006. Some Petitioners opted for the Corporation service and some for the Government service. All

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4823

the Group C employees are being paid overtime allowance for their working over and above their normal working of

44 hours per week, as some of them are attached to the Factory by virtue of their duty. The Group ‘C’ staff and the

industrial workmen are though working in the same premises of the SPP, Hyderabad, yet having different set of rules

for their service and leave. Hence, the Ministry of Finance, Economics Affairs, have time to time issued the orders

mainly for stipulating the ceiling limit for the overtime allowance (OTA for shot) as such:

“The prime object of imposition of ceiling limits for O. T. A. is that the supervisory cadre employees will have

promotional avenues to the next higher cadres as per the notified recruitment rules. In case the supervisory

category employees refuse promotions to the higher posts on the pretext that they will not get the benefit of

overtime allowance in the elevated cadres, the purpose of avenues provided to the higher posts will be

jeopardized and working of the organization will come to standstill without experienced manpower in higher

grades.”

In such situation, the supervisors can not claim for their categorization as workman under Sec.59 of the Factories Act,

and for overtime allowance without any ceiling restrictions.

The present industrial dispute is not tenable and liable to be rejected as neither it has espoused by any

Registered Trade Union nor the Petitioners/employees can individually raise any industrial dispute, as they are not

workmen under the Labour Laws, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the Factories Act, 1948. Moreover, the SPP,

Hyderabad, is carrying out the Sovereign functions of the State. So the unit can not be termed as an “Industry” under

the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

10.

The OTA ceiling restriction slabs stipulated by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Economics Affairs

time to time are as under:

Central Pay Commission

The limit of pay stipulated for drawl

of total overtime allowance during a

month

The upper pay limit beyond which

overtime allowance will not be

admissible

3^rdCPC

Rs.650/- per month

Rs.750/- per month

4^thCPC

Rs.1900/- per month

Rs.2200/- per month

5^thCPC

Rs.5900/- per month

Rs.6800/- per month

6^thCPC

----------

Rs.16850/- per month including G.P.

The above ceiling slabs are in force in the SPP, Hyderabad since its inception in the year 1982. The employees who are

not categorized as Supervisors as per their assigned duties are being paid overtime allowance. Whereas, the employees

under the cadres of (A) Asst. Technical Officer, (b) Dy. Technical Officer, (c) Asstt. Works Engineer & (d) Dy.

Inspector Control and Inspector Control, Sanitary Supervisor (L) Canteen and (e) Store Keeper and (h) Canteen &

Sanitary Supervisor come under their band with G.P. in 6^th CPP – Rs. 9300-34860 with the G.P. Rs. 4200/- except the

G.R. of Rs.4600/- for (b) Dy. Technical Officer. Like-wise those rest employees under the cadres of (f) Dy. Stores

Keeper and (g) Pharmacist come under their pay band of Rs.5200-20200 with G.P. of Rs. 2800/-. The employees

under the said cadres are attached to the shop-floor as per their general duties, responsibilities and incumbents assigned

to each of the cadres shown in the Annexure A. They are called as Supervisors (on Group ‘C’ and non-Gazetted

establishment). The nature of their duties assigned to each of the said cadres denotes them their no categorization as

workmen by virtue of discharging the duties of higher liabilities. All the above cadre practically fall under the Rule 81

(a)(b)(c) of the Factories Rule. All the incumbents holding their own cadres are being paid the Special Allowance of

Rs.3000/- per month in lieu of the over time Allowance for their extended working hours on par with the industrial

workmen just the Night Duty Allowance as per the without any ceiling restriction. Their special allowance has been

enhanced by the Respondent/SPP and Minting Corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi as the order No. CHO/

HR/IR/8/20/2011/4642 dt. 29.8.2011. Each supervisor gets his monthly emoluments of Rs. 8000-9000/- including

Special Allowance in addition to his monthly salary of Rs.40 to 45 thousands.

11.

Further alleged on behalf of the Respondent is that the same case as raised by Mr. M.A. Wahid and others in the

ID No. 35/98 before the Industrial Tribunal, Hyderabad which was awarded therein on 28.12.1998 against the

Petitioners (Annex.D). Its award was also published in the Gazettee of India as per its Notification dt. 14.1.1999

(Annex.E). The Writ Petition No.18351/1999 was filed by the Petitioners M.A. Wahid & ors., the Hon’ble High Court

of A.P., Hyderabad in challenge to the aforesaid award. But the aforesaid award passed by this Tribunal was upheld by

the Hon’ble High Court. Later on, the Petitioners filed the Writ Appeal No.152/2004 before the Hon’ble High Court,

but the same appeal was withdrawn by them as per the order dt. 11.11.2009 of the Hon’ble High Court on their plea to

approach the appropriate Authority under the Factories Act (Annex-G). Then Shri G. Ganesh & 21 others filed

individual petitions (under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936) in Nos.01 to 27/2010 in the office of the Authority

concerned ie., the R.L.C.(Central), Hyderabad. The Respondent upon the notice dt. 08.12.2010 (Annex.H) submitted its

reply to it through the Asst. Manager (H.R.) of the Respondent as per his letter dt. 3.4.2010(Annex.I). Then the R.L.C.

4824

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

held therein that the Petitioners are not entitled to seek overtime allowance without any ceiling restriction, as they being

supervisors are not to be categorized as workman as per the award dt. 28.12.1998 passed by the C.G.I.T. When the

protracted deliberated proceedings at the R.L.C. office ended in failure, it resulted in the reference as per the order dt.

6.2.2012 of the Central Government of India to the Tribunal for the adjudication in the terms of its reference.

12.

The OP/Respondent simultaneously in its rejoinder categorically denied the allegations of the Petitioners,

further stating as such:

The actual printing of the security products, maintenance of the machines and Central Operations (Viz., Checking,

packing and dispatch) are performed by the Industrial workmen up to the level of the Foremen in the Printing &

Maintenance Sections and Head Checker in Central Section under the supervision and guidance of the Group ‘C’ staff

who are the applicants in the industrial dispute deployment of the work force for working on extended hours is in

exigency of the production targets. The workman as defined under the Factories Act, 1948, means any person employed

in an industry to do any manual, unskilled, skilled, technical, operational, electrical and supervisory work for hire or

reward. But this does not apply to the persons just as the Petitioners employed mainly in managerial or administrative

capacity or for the person in supervisory capacity drawing wages exceeding Rs.1600/- per month as provided under

Sec.64(i) of the Factories Act, 1948 which makes the Sec. 59(1) of the said Act inapplicable to the supervisors. The

Respondent office has been paying over time allowance to all the workmen and other Group ‘C’ supporter staff. But it

is restricted to the basic pay of the employees between Rs.1900/- and Rs.2200/- as the OTA ceiling stipulated in the

4^th CPC. Since the Petitioner had voluntarily applied for the government posts on their own in 1982/1983 while the SPP

being established at Hyderabad and they joined the SPP, Hyderabad in various cadres. The service rules, orders and

instructions issued by the employer i.e., Government of India are binding on them. The Government policy aims at

compensating lower paid employees to a greater extent as entrusted with higher paid ones. In fact the Petitioners are

being compensated by way of payment of special allowance of Rs.7-8 thousands.

13.

Lastly alleged on behalf of the Respondent is that the Petitioners have cited and relied upon the judgement of

the Hon’ble High Court of A.P. delivered in W.P.No. 7020/1985 in support of their claim for payment of over time

allowance. The issue in the afore-said case is that the Group C employees had filed a case before the Hon’ble High

Court for payment of overtime allowance for the work attended by them above the normal working hours. In view of

the above said facts and circumstances, it is alleged that the instant case of the Petitioners being devoid of merits is

liable to be dismissed, or an order as deemed fit be passed.

FINDING WITH REASONS

14.

In the instant case, only the evidence affidavit of the WW1 Sri M.A. Wahid in lieu of Examination-in-Chief

filed under his signature dated 2.12.13 on behalf of the workmen Sri Wahid but the same in lack of cross examination

on behalf of the O.P./Respondent is not admissible in eye of law. It is an un-affidavited chief after the both the parties

have filed as relied on their self marked documents/materials in support of their case which is perhaps the usual practice

based on the implied consensus of both the parties in the region over their respective materials. In such state of affairs,

it came up for an adjudication. Accordingly, both the parties have filed their own written arguments.

15.

The adjudication in the terms of the schedule to the Reference needs determination of the two main points as

under:

Point No.1: Whether these Sri M.A. Wahid and 32 others in the case are workmen under the Industrial Disputes Act,

1947 or the Factories Act.

The plea of the workmen is that the Respondent management is the Security Printing Press (SPP for short)

working under the Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance. It primarily manufactures Post Cards, Inland

Letter Cards, Envelopes and Non-Judicial Stamps—all are security material, as the Government of India had exclusive

right of printing and distribution. Out of seven organizations, India Security Press, Nasik, caters the needs of the

Northern States, the SPP meets the similar needs of the Southern States, the Currency Notes Press, Nasik, prints

currency upto a certain denomination, the Bank Note Press prints notes of higher denomination, India Government

Mints at Bombay, Kolkata and Hyderabad mint coins and Security Paper Mill supplies raw materials to all the Presses.

All the sister organizations follow the same rules and regulations as applicable time to time. The Respondent like the

said organizations indulge in manufacturing, so it is admittedly also a factory. The provisions of the Factories Act are

applicable to the workmen. Section 59 of the Factories Act provides that a worker is allowed to work beyond 9 hours

per day or 54 hours per week, he is entitled to double the normal wages as overtime allowances. It is also contended on

behalf of the workman that when the Government introduced the financial plan that if a worker comes to a particular

stage in a pay scale, he would be given only a consolidated remuneration initially restricted to one basic pay and

subsequently a consolidated amount, but not overtime allowance. The subject matter of the challenge to it has been all

along by the employees of the seven organizations initially before the Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal, then

before the Tribunal, the ID No.35/1998. The reference was answered against the workers as confirmed by the Learned

Single Bench in the Writ Petition concerned, against which the Writ Appeal and the Writ Petition were permitted to be

withdrawn with a liberty to approach the Authorities under the Act for redressal of their grievance as per the writ appeal

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4825

order (Ex.W6). Hence, the instant reference by the Central Government on 6.2.2012 (Ex.W9) following the failure of

the conciliation on the applications of the workmen before the conciliation authorities.

16.

Further, emphatic contention of the Petitioners is that their main claim is for their status as worker as defined

under Sec.59 of the Factories Act, so their sustainable entitlement accordingly as workers can not be denied; and since it

is an Industrial Dispute as defined u/s 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, so the dispute referred by the Central

Government under Sec.10 of the Act is sustainable. It is also further contended on their behalf that the theory of the

management the Asst. Technical Officer (A.T.O. for short) having the tag of ‘Officer’ whose initial pay scale in the pre-

revised scale of Rs.425 to 640 then on his pay scale till Rs.600/-, will be paid overtime allowance equal to the Basic

Pay, but on his pay upto Rs.650/- after further increment, he as supervisor, not a workman, would be paid only a

special allowance is totally absurd. The duty chart as alleged by the management, as contended by the Petitioners,

shows the person after Rs.620/- as supervisor over 10 of his peer/subordinates as entrusted with a person of lesser than

Rs.650/- basic has no use as distinguishing factor, for an attendar called as supervisor does not become supervisor for

depriving him of the benefits due to the workman under the Labour Legislation. Further emphatically submitted on

behalf of the Petitioners is that overtime payment is made to those employees whose basic pay is exceeding Rs.2200/- in

the pre-revised scale as per the directions of the Ministry of Finance. In the ID No.5/2001 raised by the Hyderabad Mint

Staff Association, following its reference under Sec.10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Tribunal passed an

award dated 19.7.2004 declaring stoppage of OTA as illegal, and after examining it, the Ministry of Finance in

consultation with the Ministry of Labour and Employment instructed to implement it in accordance with the advice of

the Ministry of Labour and Employment. It is also alleged on their behalf that the similar relief granted by the

Industrial Tribunal in an award in the case of Hoshagabad Paper Mill, as also affirmed by Bombay Central

Administrative Tribunal and by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. Lastly, submitted on behalf of the Petitioners is

that admitted by the SPP is a factory and Petitioners are workers under Sec. 2(m) and (l) of the Factories Act

respectively, their duties are different from the industrial workers and they are not directly related to manufacturing

process; a classified/Ministry and employee was also held to be a worker, though their duties are different from

industrial workers and they are not directly connected with the manufacturing process; so both the facts had been

admitted by the management of SPP in counter affidavit in the WP No.7020(Ex.W10), as such, the Petitioners are

entitled to their overtime allowance under Sec.59 of the Factories Act on account of their being as workers under

Sec.2(A) of the said Act.

17.

Whereas the argument of the O.P./ Management is that the instant reference relates neither to the beneficiaries

nor to their names in the case; the Respondent’s office is a corporation established and entirely owned and controlled by

the Government of India. It has industrial units and Security Printing Press throughout the country. The Respondent

i.e., the Security Printing Press (SPP for short) at Hyderabad is a Factory as defined under Sec.2(m) of the Factories

Act, 1948. The provisions of Factories Act are made applicable to the employees working in the factory and the rules

framed under the A.P. Factories Rules, 1940, as well, for the Factory is situated at Hyderabad. It is submitted that

Chapter VI of the Factories Act deals with the working hours of the adults and Sec.59 of the Act deals with extra

wages for overtime. Sec.64(1) of the Act empowers the State Government to make exempting rules. Rules 81 to 84A

of the A.P. Factories Rules, 1950 have been incorporated as per the G.O.Ms. No.26 dated 7.6.1999 related to Labour,

Employment, Training and Factories. As per the said Rules, certain categories of employees are exempted from the

provisions of Chapter-VI of the Act. But, I find these Rules of the A.P. State being neither pleaded nor filed, hence are

unconsiderable.

18.

Further submission of the Respondent is that the Petitioners who are supervisors in Group C are exempted

under said provision of Sec.64 of the Factories Act; though they are attached to the Factory by virtue of their duties,

they are not liable to be classified as workmen under Sec.59 of the said Act, as the Group C staff, Industrial workmen

are governed by different service rules, leave rules etc.; they have been put under the stipulated ceiling limit over the

overtime allowance (OTA) in view of their promotional avenues to the next higher cadres as per the orders issued by the

Ministry of Finance; hence they are given the special allowance in lieu of it to the tune of Rs.3000/- now enhanced one

between Rs.8000/- to 9000/- dependent upon their monthly working hours.

19.

In view of the arguments as advanced by both the parties and on perusal of the materials brought on the record,

I find that the Petitioners have represented themselves as workers in the case in order to claim for the over time

allowance. It is an acknowledged fact that Sec.64(1) of the Factories Act, 1948 empowers the State to make

exempting rules as such:

“The State Government may make rules defining the person who hold positions of supervisions …and

the provisions of this chapter, other than them the provisions of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Sec.66

and of the proviso to that sub-section shall not apply to any person so defined (or declared):

[Provided that any person so defined or declared shall, where the ordinary rate of wages of such person

(does not exceed the wage limit specified in sub-section (6) of Section 1 of the Payment of Wages Act,

1936 (4 of 1935), as amended from time to time), be entitled to extra wages in respect of overtime

work under Section 59] as substituted by the Factories (Amendment) Act, 1987 w.e.f. 1987 for “does

not exceed rupees seven hundred and fifty per month.”

4826

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

The proviso clearly but negatively implies that where the ordinary rate of wages of such person exceeds the wage limit

as specified in sub-section (6) of Section 1 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, the person so defined or declared shall

not be entitled to extra wages in respect of overtime work under Section 59 of the Act. The definition of the word

‘Wages’ is quite comprehensive and it takes within its ambit, the allowances as well [1993 (3) ALT 55 (NRC)].

20.

In the instant case, it appears to be undisputed that though the Petitioners have not disclosed their status, it

amounts to their admission that they are virtually employees of the Respondent. All the Petitioners as employees of the

Respondents being under the cadres of the Asst. Technical Officer, Technical Officer, Asstt. Works Engineer, Dy.

Inspector Central and Inspector Control, Store Keeper and Sanitary Supervisor, Canteen, under their specified Band with

G.P. in the 6^th CPC – Rs.9300-34860 with G.P. of Rs.4200/- except the G.P. of Rs.4600/- for(b) Dy. Technical Officer,

just as the rest employees come under the cadres of Dy. Stores Keeper and Pharmascist under their Pay Band of

Rs.5200-20200 with G.P. of Rs.2800/-. The employees under the said cadres are attached to the shop floor of the

Management as per their general duties, responsibilities and incumbents assigned to each of the cadres (Annexure A).

They are called as Supervisor (Group C and non-gazetted establishment). The very nature of their duties assigned to

each of the said cadres as per the Annexure A indicates them their no categorization as workmen by virtue of

discharging the duties of their higher liabilities. At present, the Petitioners are the employees of the Respondent Factory

who have, after coming under the aforesaid cadres (Annexure A), got their status as Supervisor (Group C and non-

gazetted Establishment), and the nature of their job attached to their post even incidentally to the manufacturing

process of the factory of the SPP Respondent does not qualify them as workers, as it is hit by the proviso to the

Sec.64(1) of the Factories Act, 1948. The Petitioners may not be called as workmen as defined under Sec.2(s) of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as there is no industrial dispute as defined under Sec.2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act,

1947, because the instant case related to the claim for the overtime allowance does not come under category of the

industrial dispute mainly related to even any difference between the employer and the employees over the point of their

employment.

21.

Point No. II: Whether the Petitioner workers are entitled to any relief: At this point, it is observed that the

Petitioners have represented themselves as workers in the sense and meaning of the term “workers” as defined u/s 2(1)

of the Factories Act, 1948. The term of the word ‘worker’ at its plain reading denotes its meaning in context of

manufacturing process, cleaning, any part of the machinery or premises used for a manufacturing process, or in any

other kind of work incidental to, or connected with the manufacturing process or the subject of the manufacturing

process. It is reasonable to note that none of the Petitioners or workers in that sense discloses their real status under the

Respondent Management nor they specified their own extra working period for extra overtime, nor any cause of the

reference. In such circumstances, it stands clear that the case of the Petitioners is too vague and unreasonable. Hence,

the Petitioners are not entitled to any relief.

22.

In result, it is in the terms of the reference, hereby responded and accordingly awarded that the action of the

management of Security Printing Press, Hyderabad in denying the Over Time Allowance under Sec.59 of the Factories

Act to the alleged workers as defined under Sec.2(1) of the Act in lieu of giving Special Allowance to them is quite

justified. Therefore, these alleged workmen are not entitled to any relief.

Award is passed accordingly. Transmit.

Typed to my dictation by Smt. P. Phani Gowri, Personal Assistant transcribed by her and corrected by me on

this the 24^th day of September, 2015.

KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the

Petitioner

Respondent

WW1: Sri M.A. Wahid

NIL

(eschewed)

Documents marked for the Petitioner

Ex.W1: Photostat copy of lr. from M/o Finance dt.8.3.1968

Ex.W2: Photostat copy of order in OA No.963/1994 dt. 19.8.1996

Ex.W3: Photostat copy of ID ref. lr. dt. 1.4.1998

Ex.W4: Photostat copy of award of CGIT in ID No.35/1998 dt.28.12.1998

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4827

Ex.W5: Photostat copy of order in WP NO.18351/1999 dt. 1.4.2003

Ex.W6: Photostat copy of orer in WA No.152/2004 dt. 11.11.09

Ex.W7: Photostat copy of representation to RLC (C), by SPP workman dt. 14.12.1999

Ex.W8: Photostat copy of failure report dt. 19.4.2011

Ex.W9: Photostat copy of ID ref. lr. dt.6.2.2012

Ex.W10: Photostat copy of order in WP 7020 of 1985 dt. 21.7.1988

Ex.W11: Photostat copy of order in SLP No.15813/1988 dt. 24.1.1989

Ex.W12: Photostat copy of office memo of Ministry of Labour dt. 20.12.04

Ex.W13: Photostat copy of notice to MOF dt.31.12.2004

Ex.W14: Photostat copy of lr. from M/o Finance to IG Mint The General Manager, dt. 11.3.2000

Ex.W15: Photostat copy of memo and ID order dt. 24.9.2004

Ex.W16: Photostat copy of order of Hon’ble High Court of M.P., in WP No.3089/1995 dt. 20.8.1996

Ex.W17: Photostat copy of order in SLP dt. 15.11.1993

Ex.W18: Photostat copy of office memo from Director to MOL dt. 20.12.2004

Ex.W19: Photostat copy of organization chart dt. 5.7.1998

Documents marked for the Respondent

Ex.M1: Recruitment Rules for Group C corrected up to 31.8.1997

Ex.M2: Photostat copy of pay slip of WW1

Ex.M3: Photostat copy of pay slip of Matta Nageswara Rao

Ex.M4: Photostat copy of pay slip of Tetala Kamaraja Reddy

Ex.M5: Photostat copy of pay slip of Perumalla Venu Gopal Setty

Ex.M6: Photostat copy of orders issued by the Government of India, D/o Economic Affairs, New Delhi (5 pages)

ubZ fnYyh] 16 fnlEcj] 2015

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 2343

2343

2343.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vUnzso

;qys ,.M dEiuh fyfeVsM ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ’V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ks

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k ,o Je U;k;ky;] psUuS

fxd vf/kdj.k ,o Je U;k;ky;] psUuS

fxd vf/kdj.k ,o Je U;k;ky;] psUuS ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ

¼lanHkZ

¼lanHkZ lalalala- 33/2014) izdkf”kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh;

ljdkj dks 11/12/2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42025/03/2015-vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

ih- ds- os.kqxksiky] MsLd vf/kdkjh

New Delhi, the 16th December, 2015

S.O. 2343.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D No. 33/2014) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour

Court, No.1, Chennai now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the

management of the Andrew Yule and Company Ltd., Chennai, and their workman, which was received by the Central

Government on 11/12/2015.

[No. L-42025/03/2015-IR(DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

4828

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT

CHENNAI

Friday, the 27^th November, 2015

Present : K.P. PRASANNA KUMARI

Presiding Officer

Industrial Dispute No. 33/2014

(In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of

the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), between the Management of Andrew Yule & Co. Ltd. and their

workman)

BETWEEN

Sri K. Ramesh

1^st Party/Petitioner

AND

The General Manager (CO)

2^nd Party/Respondent

Andrew Yule and Company Ltd.

(Electrical Division), Chennai Operation

No. 5/346, Old Mahabalipuram Road

Perungudi

Chennai-600096

Appearance

For the 1^st Party/Petitioner

M/s Ajoy Khose & S. Manoharan, Advocates

For the 2^nd Party/Respondent

M/s T.S. Gopalan & Co., Advocates

AWARD

This is an Industrial Dispute taken on file under 2(A)(2)(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (as amended by

Act-24 of 2010 w.e.f. 15.09.2010).

The averments in the Claim Statement filed by the petitioner in brief are these:

The petitioner joined the service of the Respondent as a Hammerman in 1990 and was made permanent in 1991.

Originally the petitioner was a member of the Union affiliated to CITU. Later he became a member of Andrew Yule and

Co. Staff Workers Union affiliated to LPF. At the time of the alleged incident, the petitioner was working in the Core

Assembly Section as a Fitter. During March 2009 the workman including the petitioner had demanded payment of salary

after merging the DA. The Management who did not like this issued Charge Memo to the petitioner and two other

workmen and conducted an enquiry. However, the Enquiry Officer filed report holding that the charge against the

petitioner is not proved. Since the Management was not able to punish the petitioner on the above allegation the

petitioner was put under suspension by order dated 18.12.2010 alleging that the petitioner had manhandled the Security

Supervisor on duty on 17.12.2010. Thereafter the Second Respondent issued a Charge Memo to the petitioner alleging

that on 17.12.2010, by about 0245 PM, he intruded through the wicked gate and proceeded towards the shop floor

without heeding to the instruction of the Assistant Security Officer and by 0315 PM he abused and assaulted the

Company Security Supervisor, Ravikumar. The petitioner is alleged to have thus committed misconduct under Clauses-

21(11)(12)&(26) of the Certified Standing Orders. Another Charge Memo was issued to the petitioner on 03.01.2011

alleging that though he was supposed to remain only in the security area he proceeded towards the dining hall in spite of

instruction and efforts to prevent him failed and he has committed misconduct under Clauses-1, 8, 11, 12 and 26 of

Clause-21 of Certified Standing Orders. The petitioner had submitted explanation to both Charge Memos and had

denied charges leveled against him. The Respondent ordered an enquiry and appointed Enquiry Officer. The Enquiry

Officer, after enquiry submitted his findings holding that the petitioner is guilty of the charges leveled against him under

both Charge Memos. On the basis of the enquiry report the Respondent imposed punishment of dismissal from service

on the petitioner. The entire disciplinary action against the petitioner lacks bonafides. It is a case of malafide action and

victimization. The petitioner was not paid subsistence allowance in accordance with Tamil Nadu Payment of

Subsistence Allowance Act. The report of the enquiry and dismissal order are liable to be set aside. The petitioner has

raised Industrial Dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central). He has not received any order of

reference from the Government. The petitioner is filed accordingly. An order may be passed directing the Respondent to

reinstate the petitioner in service with continuity of service and other attendant benefits.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4829

The Respondent has filed Counter Statement contending as below:

In the year 1990 the petitioner was taken as Hammerman (Trainee) to work in the Fabrication Department in the

Adyar Factory. After fabrication of tanks was discontinued the workman including the petitioner who were engaged in

the fabrication of tanks were shifted to Perungudi factory. The petitioner was addicted to alcoholism and was always

prone to indiscipline. He always exhibited a high handed behavior towards his superiors and defied their orders. Even

after reporting for duty he would not remain in the work spot for allocation of work. Perungudi factory works in two

shifts, one from 0600 AM to 0200 PM and another from 0200 PM to 1000 PM. The petitioner usually was seen moving

about in an around the factory even before and after his shift hours because of alcoholism. On 17.04.1997 the petitioner

had entered into an altercation with a co-workman and had abused and manhandled him. After enquiry he was awarded

punishment of suspension for 4 days. On 17.12.2010 the petitioner had left the factory on completion of his shift. On the

same day, by 0245 PM he unauthorizedly entered through the wicked gate and proceeded towards the shop floor without

heeding to the instruction of the security agency not to enter. After 30 minutes he came to the main gate and abused the

security supervisor Ravikumar, calling him Bhadu stating that he is responsible for creating a scene for the incident. He

also hit him on his chin. On 18.12.2010 he was placed under suspension and a charge sheet was issued to him on

21.12.2010 asking him to show cause why disciplinary action shall not be taken against him. When he was under

suspension, on 31.12.2010 by 1140 AM the petitioner came to the main gate security post and wanted to meet one

Soundararajan. The Assistant Security Officer sent for Soundararajan and directed the petitioner to meet Soundararajan

in the security area. The Security Officer also told him that he cannot be allowed to go in the factory. Soundararajan told

the Security Officer that he had taken permission from the General Manager and took the petitioner inside the factory.

They remained in the Dining Hall for half an hour and then the petitioner left the factory. A charge sheet was issued to

the petitioner regarding the incident on 31.12.2010 also and his explanation was called for. A common enquiry was

conducted in respect of the two charges. The Enquiry officer submitted report holding that both charges are proved.

After considering the representation given by the petitioner to the Show Cause Notice the Disciplinary Authority passed

orders dismissing the petitioner from service. It is denied that the action against the petitioner is a vindictive measure.

The allegation that the petitioner was victimized also is denied. So also the allegation that the petitioner was not paid

subsistence allowance as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishment (Payment of Subsistence

Allowance) Act also is not correct. There is no necessity to interfere with the punishment awarded to the petitioner. The

petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

The evidence in the case consists of oral evidence of WW1 and documents marked as Ext.W1 to Ext.W17 and

Ext.M1 to Ext.M14.

The points for consideration are:

(i)

Whether the action of the Respondent in dismissing the petitioner from service is justified?

(ii)

What, if any is the relief to which the petitioner is entitled?

The Points

The petitioner who had entered services of the Respondent as Hammerman in 1990 was working as a Fitter in the

Core Assembly Section of the Company at the time when proceedings was initiated against him alleging misconduct for

two separate incidents.

The Respondent had put the petitioner under suspension consequent to the incident of misconduct that had

allegedly taken place on 17.12.2010. This was followed by charge sheet regarding the incident of 21.12.2010. It is

alleged in this that the petitioner who had already completed his shift on 17.12.2010 and had left the premises came back

and got inside the factory premises defying the instruction given by the Security Officer, remained at the premises for

half an hour and abused and assaulted Ravikumar, the Security Officer. By the second charge sheet it was alleged that

while the petitioner was under suspension, in spite of instruction not to go beyond the security area he went inside the

factory premises and remained at the dining hall for half an hour before he came out. In the enquiry conducted the

Management had examined three witnesses and the petitioner, seven witnesses. After considering evidence, the Enquiry

Officer found that both charges are established.

The counsel for the petitioner has raised some preliminary objection regarding the enquiry. He has referred to

Ext.W1-the Suspension Order and has argued that even before charge sheet was issued and explanation of the petitioner

was obtained, the Respondent has decided to conduct an enquiry. This argument is advanced based on the wording in the

Suspension Order that the suspension of the petitioner is “pending issue of Charge Sheet-cum-Show Cause Notice and

enquiry to be conducted”. It could be seen from the subsequent act of the Respondent that after issuing charge memo

opportunity was given to the petitioner to submit his explanation. So merely because Ext.W1 refers to an enquiry to be

conducted the enquiry which was done in accordance with the procedure will not become vitiated.

The counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that punishment has been imposed on the petitioner taking into

consideration his past conduct also. It could be seen from the Ext.W11-the Second Show Cause Notice issued to the

petitioner that the Management has decided to impose the punishment of dismissal from service on the petitioner

4830

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

considering the past record of the petitioner also. It is pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner that the Respondent

had not given any notice to the petitioner regarding taking his past conduct into account for imposing punishment on

him. During the enquiry proceedings, before issuing the Second Show Cause Notice which has already decided to take

past record into account, notice regarding the same was not given to the petitioner. When the petitioner was examined

before this Court, Ext.M9 to Ext.M14 was marked through the petitioner. These are the documents showing that the

petitioner was given punishment of four days suspension on the charge that he had refused to carry out the instruction of

his superior in his work. However, bringing out these facts at the time of examination of the petitioner before this

Tribunal is not sufficient. The past incident was taken into account by the Disciplinary Authority without giving any

notice to the petitioner regarding the same. The counsel for the petitioner has referred to the decision of the Madras High

Court in SRI BHARTI MILLS VS. N.S. MOHAN reported in 1991 2 LLN 565 where it was held that if objectionable

past conduct was not made a part of Charge Memo principles of natural justice will be violated. So the attempt of the

Respondent before this Tribunal to prove the past conduct is not of any consequence. The petitioner was not allowed to

meet the case regarding his past conduct in the enquiry proceedings. So the past conduct cannot be considered in the

matter of imposing punishment on the petitioner even if the charges alleged against him are found proved.

Now it is to be considered whether the charges alleged are proved. The counsel for the petitioner has advanced an

argument that two charge memos having been served on the petitioner, they are two independent proceedings and two

separate enquiries should have been conducted. The two incidents referred to in the two charge memos had occurred on

close-by dates and the Management has decided to conduct enquiry regarding the two charges by the same Enquiry

Officer. I do not think this decision of the Managements has caused any prejudice to the petitioner. The conduct of the

enquiry of both charges together could not be said to be to the detriment of the petitioner in any way.

10.

Now the charges can be examined one by one. In the first charge which is marked as Ext.W2, it is alleged that

on 17.12.2010, while the petitioner was not on duty, by 0245 PM he intruded through the wicked gate, adjacent to the

main gate and proceeded towards the shop floor without heeding to the instructions of agency Assistant Security Officer

on duty and the repeated attempts of the Assistant Security Officer to stop him was of no avail. It is further alleged that

by around 0315 PM the petitioner came towards the main gate in an agitated manner and started abusing the Company

Security Supervisor, Ravikumar in most vulgar and defamatory language and called him Bhadu and told him that all this

has been caused because of him. It is further stated that the petitioner hit Ravikumar with his right elbow thrice on the

chin and consequently Ravikumar was about to fall but was rescued by Pughazhendi, the Production Manager who was

witnessing the incident.

11.

Ext.W4 is the explanation submitted by the petitioner to Ext.W2-Charge Memo. A translation of the

explanation which is in Tamil has been submitted. In the explanation the petitioner has stated that on 17.12.2010 he had

completed his first shift and had got into the bus by about 0210 PM to return home but he realized from the bus that his

money purse, pocket diary, etc. were left in the Canteen of the Company while changing his dress. He immediately went

back and told the security that he had forgotten his things at the dining hall. However, the Security who was available

there prevented him from going inside and held his hand. He told the security that he has no right to do this and also told

him that it is the usual practice to collect the belongings, if any left after informing the Security and so he is going inside

and he can inform his superior regarding the same. He also told the security that he will inform the Office Bearers of the

Association regarding the same. He went inside and collected his belongings that were retained by a colleague and told

them about the “disgrace” he had to meet at the hands of the security. Then he called the Office Bearers of the Union to

the main gate. By then Ravikumar, the Security Officer came out of the Office and enquired the Office Bearers of the

Union and while they were telling him about the incident they were told that it was wrong of the petitioner to come

inside that he is to be caught hold off by the neck and is to be sent out. It is further stated that the Office Bearers had

warned Ravikumar not to create any problem and had sent the petitioner from there. The petitioner has denied the case

that he has beaten Ravikumar, the Security Officer.

12.

Ravikumar was examined as Management witness in the enquiry proceedings. He has stated that the petitioner had

entered the factory premises through the wicket gate even though he was prevented by the security guard from doing so.

According to this witness, by 0315 PM the petitioner went to him and stated that this “Bhadu” is the cause for

everything and then hit on his chin thrice with his elbow. He lost balance and was about to fall, but Pughazhendi, the

Production Manager who was available there came running and saved him.

13.

There is also the evidence by Pughazhendi that on the day in question by 0315 PM when he was going from the

office to the shop floor, the petitioner had come from the shop floor shouting at Ravikumar and assaulted him. He had

intervened and had separated them.

14.

The petitioner had examined three witnesses, all his colleagues and Office Bearers of the Union, regarding the

incident. The first witness Ashok Kumar had stated that a colleague of his had told him about the incident in which the

petitioner was not permitted to come to the Dining Hall. According to him, on receiving this information, he took the

Office Bearers of his Union Lingesan, Yesupadam, etc. and proceeded to the petitioner and the petitioner and others also

joined him. The petitioner again told him of what had transpired. At that time they found Ravikumar coming from the

Administrative Office to the place where they were talking. He informed Ravikumar of what had happened but

Ravikumar was supporting the security and was telling that the petitioner had acted wrongly. According to Ashok

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4831

Kumar himself and others warned Ravikumar that such acts are wrong. They have decided to talk to the Management on

the matter. There is also the evidence by Lingesan that while all of them were talking about the incident Ravikumar

came out of the Administrative Office but he did not bother about it. This witness also has stated that they had warned

Ravikumar. This is the evidence given by Yesupadam also. He has also stated that Ravikumar was supporting the

Security and they have decided to discuss the same with the Secretary of the Union.

15.

It is beyond doubt from the explanation given by the petitioner itself that he had gone inside the factory premises

defying the instruction given by the Security Guard, not to enter without permission. Admittedly, the shift time of the

petitioner was over and it was at the time of the second shift he was trying to enter the premises. The justification

attempted on behalf of the petitioner is that he had left some of his belongings at the dining hall and wanted to collect

them and that is why he had gone there. It is also attempted to be brought out that there is no practice of getting

permission for such entry. The fact remains that the Security Officer who was on duty at the gate had prevented the

petitioner from entering inside and it was in defiance to this he had gone inside. The petitioner seems to have been

agitated over the fact that the security at the gate tried to prevent him at all. He had told the Security Officer that in spite

of his being prevented he is going inside and he can inform the superior officers about it. The petitioner himself has

stated that he told the Security that he has no right to prevent him as it is the usual practice to go in and collect the

belongings, if any left inside. It is revealed from the explanation of the petitioner itself that he was very much agitated

over the incident. He had told his colleagues that he was disgraced by the security. He had even informed the Union

authorities about the incident and they have decided to discuss the matter with the Secretary of the Union and then talk

to the Management. So it is clear that the petitioner made the incident an issue in spite of not heeding to the instruction

of the Security Guard.

16.

It is also not in dispute that while the petitioner and others were discussing the matter inside the premises,

Ravikumar had reached there and he was told of the incident. Ravikumar seems to have tried to tell them that what the

petitioner had done is not right. It is evident from what is stated by the witnesses on behalf of the petitioner that they

even warned Ravikumar since he has taken a stand against the petitioner. Of course, none of the witnesses on behalf of

the petitioner would state that the petitioner abused Ravikumar in filthy language and accused him as the one who is the

cause for the incident. Ravikumar had only then reached the place and had come to know about the incident only then.

The case is that apart from abusing Ravikumar in filthy language the petitioner also hit him thrice with the elbow on his

chin. This is spoken to by Pughazhendi, the Production Manager who reached the spot at the time also. It is apparent that

Pughazhendi had reached the place of the incident only at the last moment when the petitioner was allegedly hitting

Ravikumar with his elbow. He does not seem to have witnessed what happened prior to that. What Pughazhendi has

stated during his examination is not that he removed Ravikumar from the place of incident and saved him from further

assault by the petitioner but that he separated petitioner and Ravikumar. This presupposes that it was not a unilateral

action on the part of the petitioner. The allegation of Ravikumar is that he was hit at chin by the petitioner with his

elbow thrice. If the petitioner had deliberately hit at Ravikumar with the intention to cause harm, he need not have used

his elbow rather than his hand. So this also would show that it could not have been a unilateral act on the part of the

petitioner. Probably, after the petitioner had abused Ravikumar some untoward incident might have occurred between

the two resulting in the alleged incident of physical assault. There might have had some provocation from the other side

also. In any case it is clear that the petitioner had got inside the factory premises in spite of his having been prevented

from doing so and he has abused Ravikumar in filthy language and had even raised his elbow against Ravikumar.

17.

The charge in Ext.W3-Charge Memo is that on 31.12.2010 by 1140 AM the petitioner came to the main gate

security post and wanted to meet Soundararajan, Soundararajan came to the security area and wanted to take him to the

dining hall and in spite of agency Assistant Security Officer telling the petitioner that he is not allowed to go in the area

inside the factory, he did not heed to the instruction and proceeded towards the dining hall and the efforts of the

Assistant Security Officer to prevent him from going to the dining hall was of no avail.

18.

Ext.W8 is the explanation given by the petitioner regarding the Second Charge. What he has stated in this is that

he had come to the factory as usual at 0955 AM. The Watch and Ward who was on duty had told him that there is a

letter for the petitioner and he was asked to get the same. The petitioner told him that he wanted to get the advice of the

Secretary of the Union before collecting the letter. In the meanwhile he met Kamaraj, a Co-Worker and they

together went and received the letter. He had asked for Vijay Kumar and Soundararajan, two Office Bearers of the

Union and they had come to the main gate. After some time Vijayakumar informed the Security on Duty and took him to

the Dining Hall. He was sitting in the Dining Hall. By 1040 AM Vijaya Kumar took him to main gate and sent him out.

19.

What could be seen from the above explanation of the petitioner is that he had entered inside the factory premises

and had been in the Dining Hall on the particular day. However, according to him he had reached the main gate at

0955 AM, gone inside with the permission of the security alongwith Vijayakumar and had left the Dining Hall by

1040 AM itself. Thus the stand of the petitioner is that incident as referred to in the charge had not taken place at

1140 AM on 31.12.2010.

20.

Venkatasubban, the Security Guard on Duty on 31.12.2010 had been examined by the Management. According to

this witness, the petitioner reached the gate at 1140 AM and wanted to go to the Dining Hall and he was told that he has

4832

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

no permission to go inside, Soundararajan who reached there told him that permission is not needed and the petitioner

will be taken inside. During cross-examination this witness has stated the occurrence was at 1140 AM and the petitioner

had reached the place even before that.

21.

Kamaraj referred to in the explanation of the petitioner has been examined on his behalf. This witness has given

evidence in tune with the explanation given by the petitioner. He has referred to receipt of two letters by the petitioner.

However, this witness did not state at which time he found the petitioner at the premises. But he has stated that the

petitioner did not come inside at 1140 AM. He has referred to the petitioner having been in the Dining Hall prior to that.

There is also the evidence of Vijayakumar. He has also stated that it was before 1140 AM the petitioner has come to the

place, had been at the Canteen, etc.

22.

When the evidence regarding the incident is assessed it could be seen that the case of the Management that the

petitioner had entered the Dining Hall inside the factory premises is admitted. The only difference is that according to

the petitioner this was before 1140 AM which is the time given in the charge and it was with the permission of the

Security Guard. However, Venkatasubban the Security Guard has categorically stated that the petitioner went inside the

factory premises by 1140 AM. It is clear from Ext.W4, the explanation given by the petitioner that even on 17.12.2010

when the petitioner was still working his attempt to enter the factory premises after his duty time was objected to by the

Security Guard. It was after the incident of 17.12.2010 that he was suspended and a charge memo was issued to him for

the misconduct including entering the factory premises without permission while he was not on duty. So there could be

no doubt that he would not have obtained permission from the Security Guard for entering the factory premises, even if

it is the Dining Hall, after he was suspended. What the Security Guard has stated is that when he objected to the

petitioner going inside Vijayakumar who is a leader of the Union took the petitioner inside defying the objection raised

by the Security Guard. When the fact that the petitioner had entered the factory premises is taken into account, it is only

to be deciphered that this was without the permission of the Security Guard. The case that the petitioner was not in the

premises at all at 1140 AM could not be believed. What seems probable is that he entered the Security Gate as usual and

when he was told about the letters awaiting him, he contacted the Union Leaders and with their support, he went inside

the premises defying the objection raised by the Security Guard. The Enquiry Officer had all justification in entering a

finding against the petitioner.

23.

Now the question is whether the punishment that has been awarded to the petitioner is in proportion to the gravity

of the offences charged against him. The counsel for the Respondent has referred to a catena of decisions to advance his

argument that the punishment that is imposed on the petitioner is in proportion to the offences proved. In the decision of

the Apex Court in NEW SHORROCK MILLS VS. MAHESHBHAI RAO reported in 1996 6 SCC 590 referred to by the

counsel, it has been held that abusing the Deputy Manager and threatening the Officers of the management that they

would not be safe outside the institution is a misconduct which calls for discharge from service. The punishment was

found to be not disproportionate. In the decision in DEVENDRA SWAMI VS. KARNATAKA STATE ROAD

TRANSPORT CORPORATION reported in 2002 9 SCC 644 it has been held that the discharge from service is a proper

punishment for the bus conductor who failed to issue tickets to some passengers in spite of collecting fare from them. In

the decision in BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD. VS. M. CHANDRASEKARA REDDY AND OTHERS

reported in 2005 2 SCC 481 it has been held that illegal removal of mortgaged documents and trying to justify the

removal by producing fabricated documents is a serious misconduct and the punishment of termination from service is a

proper one. In the decision in DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, KSRTC VS. A.P. MANE reported in 2005 3 SCC 254 it

has been held that the punishment of dismissal is proper in a case of misappropriation of funds. In the decision in

MAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA LTD. VS. N.B. NARAWADE reported in 2005 3 SCC 134 it has been held that use

of abusive language on several occasions is sufficient to invite punishment of dismissal from service. In the case M.P.

ELECTRICITY BOARD VS. JAGDISH CHANDRA SHARMA reported in 2005 3 SCC 401 it was held that blow on

the nose of an engineer and causing fracture is an offence which invites the punishment of termination from service.

Unauthorized withdrawal of money by the Branch Manager even though the amount was subsequently deposited and

there was no loss to the Bank was found to be an offence inviting removal from service in the decision in DAMOH

PANNA SAGAR RURAL REGIONAL BANK AND ANOTHER VS. MUNNA LAL JAIN reported in

2005 10 SCC 84.

24.

On going through the punishment in the above cases it could be seen that the workmen in all those cases were

involved in major offences like misappropriation, previous physical assault, etc. In one case where use of abusive

language invited punishment of termination from service, it was a case where the delinquent was continuously resorting

to such practice.

25.

Can a misconduct proved against the petitioner be compared to those offences referred to earlier? The counsel for

the petitioner has referred to two decisions of the Apex Court in which punishment other dismissal or discharge from

service had been given considering the lesser gravity of the act. In the decision in ANIL KUMAR VS. PRESIDING

OFFICER AND OTHERS reported in 1985 1 LLJ 101 the punishment of termination from service was found

unsustainable for the offence of neglect from duty and refusal of local orders. In the decision in NICHOLAS PIRAMAL

INDIA LTD. VS. HARI SINGH reported in 2015 2 LLJ 20 (SC) the misconduct of go slow work was found to be not an

offence inviting dismissal from service.

26.

When the circumstances are considered, it could be seen that the petitioner does not deserve the punishment of

termination from service. Even according to the Management, the only punishment he had met earlier was a suspension

for 4 days. So far as the first charge is concerned, I have found that even though there was assault of the Security

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4833

Supervisor it could not have been done with any intention to cause harm or hurt to him. The second charge is only that

he entered the premises without permission. When the entire circumstances are taken into account I do not think the

offences proved are too grave as to invite punishment of dismissal from service. The petitioner in fact deserves a better

treatment by way of punishment. Because of the order of dismissal the petitioner had to remain without job for 4 years.

The petitioner is entitled to be reinstated in service with some lesser punishment.

27.

On going through the Certified Standing Orders of the Respondent it is seen that the punishments provided are

Warning or Censure, Suspension for a period not exceeding 4 days, action as permitted in the Payment of Wages Act

and Dismissal without Notice. The punishment that can be imposed is Warning or Censure but this would be too lenient

a punishment when the nature of offences are taken into account. So the petitioner can be brought down to the next

lower scale of pay.

Accordingly, the Respondent is directed to reinstate the petitioner in service without backwages and impose the

punishment referred to above. The reference is answered accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the

27^th November, 2015)

K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined:

For the 1^st Party/Petitioner

WW1, Sri K. Ramesh

For the 2^nd Party/Management

None

Documents Marked :

On the petitioner’s side

Ex.No.

Date

Description

Ext.W1

18.12.2010

Suspension Order issued by the 2^nd Party to 1^st Party

Ext.W2

21.12.2010

Charge Memo issued to the 1^st Party

Ext.W3

30.12.2010

Letter of the 1^st Party

Ext.W4

03.01.2011

Charge Memo issued by the 2^nd Party to the 1^st Party

Ext.W5

12.01.2011

Explanation submitted by the 1^st Party to the Charge

Memo dated 21.12.2010

Ext.W6

12.01.2011

Explanation submitted by the 1^st Party to the Charge

Memo dated 03.01.2011

Ext.W7

19.01.2011

Enquiry Notice

Ext.W8

20.04.2011

Enquiry Findings

Ext.W9

26.04.2011

Memo given by the 2^nd Party to the 1^st Party

Ext.W10

30.04.2011

Letter given by the 1^st Party

Ext.W11

04.05.2011

Second Show Cause Notice

Ext.W12

06.05.2011

Explanation submitted by the 1^st Party to the Enquiry

Officer’s Report

Ext.W13

10.05.2011

Explanation submitted by the 1^st Party to the Second

Show Cause

Ext.W14

10.10.2011

Dismissal Order

Ext.W15

20.02.2012

2(A)(1) Petition

Ext.W16

10.06.2012

Remarks filed by the 2^nd Party

Ext.W17

24.01.2013

Failure Report

4834

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

On the Management’s side

Ex.No.

Date

Description

Ext.M1

27.04.1990

Application of K. Ramesh for Employment

Ext.M2

14.06.1990

Appointment Order Hammerman Trainee

Ext.M3

01.10.1994

Order transferring the petitioner from Adayar to

Perungudi factory, Insulation Section – w.e.f. 24.10.1994

Ext.M4

28.01.2011

Proceedings of Enquiry – in respect of charge sheet

04.02.2011

dated 21.12.2010 and 03.01.2011

12.02.2011

02.03.2011

19.03.2011

02.04.2011

09.04.2011

Ext.M5

17.12.2010

Complaint of Mr. Ravikumar

Ext.M6

31.12.2010

Complaint of Mr. T. Venkatesubramani

Ext.M7

20.02.2012

2A filed before ALC (C)

Ext.M8

11.06.2012

Reply filed by Respondent Management to ALC (C)

Ext.M9

21.05.1996

Letter informing, “Not Earned Wages for the Period Not

Worked” between 10.45 and 12.15 Hrs. on 18.03.1996

for deserting the place of work and indulged in shouting

slogans in D.G.M’s Office

Ext.M10

17.05.1996

Letter from Petitioner to General Manager

Ext.M11

21.04.1997

Charge Sheet – cum – Show Cause Notice for

attempting to attack Harry Devapriyan with Iron Roll, etc.

Ext.M12

21.11.1997

Suspension for four days as punishment from

24.11.1997 to 27.11.1997 in respect of proven charges

as stated in charge sheet dated 21.04.1997

Ext.M13

14.07.1997

Charge Sheet dated 14.07.2007 in respect of the

complaint dated 13.07.2007 for disobedience/acts

subversive of discipline and notified that he will not earn

wages for the period not worked between 10.30 to 14.00 hrs.

Ext.M14

25.07.2007

Explanation of Mr. K. Ramesh for the charge sheet

dated 14.07.2007

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(i)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4835

ubZ fnYyh] 16 fnlEcj] 2015

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 2344

2344

2344.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj

,llh

,llhlh,y

lh,y

lh,y ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/k esa fufnZ’V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

dsUnzh; ljdkj

vkS|ks

vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@ Je U;k;ky;

fxd vf/kdj.k@ Je U;k;ky;

fxd vf/kdj.k@ Je U;k;ky;] gSnjkckn

gSnjkckn

gSnjkckn ds iapkV lanHkZ la[;k 136@2007

@2007

@2007 dks izdkf”kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj

dks 16@12@2015

@12@2015

@12@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y-&22013/1/2015–vkbZvkj (lh-2)]

jktsUnz flag] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh

New Delhi, the 16th December, 2015

S.O. 2344.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award Ref.136/2007 of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Hyderabad

as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of SCCL and their workmen, received by

the Central Government on 16/12/2015.

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

RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD

Present: - Sri Kishori Ram,

Presiding Officer Incharge

(Authorized for adjudication)

Dated the 21^st day of July, 2015

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C. No. 136/2007

Between:

Sri Jeedula Bhaskar

S/o Ramulu,

C/o A. Sarojana,

Flat No.G7,

Rajeshwari Gayatri Sadan,

Opp: Badruka Jr. College for Girls,

Kachiguda, Hyderabad.

..….Petitioner

AND

The General Manager,

M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,

Srirampur area, Srirampur,

Adilabad district.

The Colliery Manager/Superintendent of Mines,

M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,

SRP-2 incline, Srirampur Area, Srirampur.

Adilabad district.

….Respondents

Appearances:

For the Petitioner:

M/s. A. Sarojana & K. Vasudeva Reddy, Advocates

For the Respondent: Sri M.V. Hanumanth Rao, Advocate

4836

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

AWARD

This is a case taken under Sec. 2 A (2) of the I.D. Act, by the Petitioner Sri Jeedula Bhaskar against the

management of M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., and numbered in this Court as L.C.I.D.No. 136/2007 and

notices were issued to the parties concerned.

Petitioner Sri Jeedula Bhaskar with his Learned Counsel Sri K. Vasudeva Reddy is present but none of the

Respondent present. By filing a petition on behalf of Petitioner and its copy of duly received by the Learned Counsel for

the Respondent, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the instant L.C. case was filed against the action of

the Respondent for the dismissal of the Petitioner from the service. It is also submitted that during the pendency of the

case, the Respondent/management has offered an employment to the Petitioner but subject to the withdrawal of this case,

only then the employment of the Petitioner could be considerable. Therefore, the case may be withdrawn with a liberty

to raise a fresh dispute, if any arises. Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner. The petition is allowed to withdraw

the case and the same is accordingly disposed as no ID existing.

Award is passed accordingly. Transmit.

Dictated to LDC, transcribed by him and corrected by me on this the 21^st day of July, 2015.

KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the

Petitioner

Respondent

NIL

Documents marked for the Petitioner

NIL

Documents marked for the Respondent

NIL

ubZ fnYyh] 16 fnlEcj] 2015

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 2345

2345

2345.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj

,QlhvkbZ ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/k esa fufnZ’V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;( y[kuÅ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 06@2009½ dks izdkf”kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks

16@12@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y-&22011/65/2008–vkbZ vkj (lh,e-II)]

jktsUnz flag] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh

New Delhi, the 16th December, 2015

S.O.2345.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No.06/2009) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour

Court, Lucknow as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of FCI Regional Office.

UP Khadya Sadan Vibhuti FCI, Distt. Office Chhatra Sangh Chauraha and their workmen, received by the Central

Government on 16/12/2015.

[No. L-22011/65/2008 - IR(CM-II)]

RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4837

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW

PRESENT

RAKESH KUMAR,

Presiding Officer

I.D. No. 06/2009

Ref.No. L-22011/65/2008-IR(CM-II) dated 06.04.2009

BETWEEN

The President

FCI(Handling) Workers Union

8654 Arakashan Road, Pahar Ganj

New Delhi-110055

AND

1. The Area Manager

FCI, Distt. Office Chhatra Sangh Chauraha

87A, Kalenpur Gorakhpur-273001

Lucknow

The General Manager (Region)

FCI Regional Office, UP Khadya Sadan

Vibhuti TC/37, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow

AWARD

By order No. L-22011/65/2008-IR(CM-II) dated 06.04.2009 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 President, FCI

(Handling) Workers Union 8654 Arakashan Road, Pahar Ganj, New Delhi and the Area Manager, FCI, Distt.

Office, Chhatra Sangh Chauraha Gorakhpur-273001 and the General Manager (Region) FCI Regional Office, UP

Khadya Sadan Vibhuti TC/37, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow for adjudication.

The reference under adjudication is:

“WHETHER THE ACTION OF THE GENERAL MANAGER, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA,

LUCKNOW IN PENALIZING AND RECOVERY OF DEMURRAGE CHARES FROM S/SRI

YOGENDRA PRASAD, SARDAR GANG NO.2 AND DILIP RAM PRASAD, SARDAR GANG NO.2 OF

FCI BASTI DEPOT IS LEGAL AND JUSTIFIED? IF NOT, TO WHAT RELIEF ARE THE WORKMEN

IS ENTITLED TO?”

The union as per the claim statement, has stated in brief that it is trade union duly registered under the Trade

Union Act; and it has stated therein that CERTIFIED STANDING ORDERS are provided for the industrial

establishment, and it has been certified vide order dated 27.02.1996 and further modified vide order dated

31.08.00. Different clauses of the standing orders have been mentioned in the claim statement.

The workman union has further stated that the management of FCI in cases of demurrage imposed by the Railway

authorities deal in the matter with Railway authorities and in the event the case is not settled in favour of the

management of FCI, the demurrage amount is paid by them to the concerned authority of the Railway. The Area

Manager, FCI District Office, Gorakhpur vide his letters No. 09/17.01.2006 arbitrarily ordered for recovery of

Rs.18,387.50 from the wages of Sri Yogendra Prasad, Sardar, Gang No. 6 and Sri Dilip Ram Prasad, Sardar

Gang No. 2 of FCI, Basti Depot from each worker as penalty (Total amount of Rs. 36,775.00).

The workmen have emphasized that the management of FCI further imposed the financial penalty and ordered to

recover an amount of Rs.18387.50 from the wages of Sri Yogendra Prasad, Sardar, Gang No. 6 and Sri Dilip

Ram Prasad, Sardar, Gang No. 2 from each worker; that is total amount of Rs. 36775. The above financial penalty

was imposed on the above named worker through the separate office order. The party No. 2 ordered the financial

4838

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

penalty for recovery of the demurrage amount from the above named worker on 9/17.01.2006 and 20.01.2007

respectively but before issue the above orders the party No.2 called the explanation through memo dated

5/6.12.2006 separately from the above named workers which was received to them on 26.12.2006.

The management of FCI further imposed the financial penalty and ordered to recover an amount of Rs.19500 from

the wages of Sri Yogendra Prasad, Sardar, Gang No. 6 and Sri Dilip Ram Prasad, Sardar, Gang no.2 each workers

that is total amount of Rs.39,000. The party No.2 before above recovery had also called earlier explanation for

recovery from the above named workers vide memo dated 21.11.2006 separately. The workmen named above

submitted their explanation, which was called for separately by the party No.2 and denied the allegations for

causing the demurrage because of them.

The union has stated that the FCI Area Manager was well aware with the instructions communicated in January

1984 by the Movement Commercial Department of the FCI vide their circular dated Jan.1984, the relevant clause

has been written therein.

The workmen union further pleaded that the above named workers are the departmental workers of the party No.2

therefore, in accordance with the instructions issued by the Movement Commercial Department of Party No.2

mentioned at para No.15; opposite party was supposed to have taken necessary disciplinary action as provided

under Rules and the disciplinary procedure is elaborately laid down in the Certified Standing Orders which are

applicable to the establishment as explained above. The explanation of the above named workers were called on

06.12.2006 (received to the workmen on 26.12.2006) and explained by them on 04.01.2007; will show that while

imposing the financial punishment as penalty to recover the demurrage amount vide order dated 17.01.2006 and

20.01.2007 respectively for both the recovery from each worker, no Principle of Natural Justice was followed; the

workers have not accepted the allegations, therefore in the circumstances the comprehensive disciplinary

proceeding was mandatory. The party No. 2 otherwise could not impose financial punishment, and to recover the

amount as penalty is otherwise out of their power to impose; as the Certified Standing Orders as well as the

instructions of Movement Commercial Department of party No. 2 mentioned above do not at all permit so.

The workmen have emphasized that the recovery of demurrage amount from the workmen’s wages can not be

effected on part of the workers, if provided in the form of misconduct in the domestic enquiry which have not been

held by the management, consequently the workmen have been totally deprived from availing genuine opportunity.

The act of the management has been alleged to be illegal, unjustified and against the principle of natural justice.

The worker’s union has prayed to quash the order of the management for recovery of demurrage amount of wages

of workers of the mentioned Depot; and has requested for repayment of the amount recovered to the concerned

workmen.

10. Applicant has filed certain documents (photo copies etc.) alongwith with the claim statement.

11. The management has filed written statement M-9 stating therein that the management has got right to recover the

demurrage from those persons responsible for loss as mentioned in the relevant certified standing orders. It has

further been stated in the written statement that in regards to recovery of Rs.18,387/50 and Rs.19,500/- each from

the wages of Sri Yogendra Prasad, Sardar, Gang No. 6 and Sri Dilip Ram Prasad, Sardar, Gang No. 2; orders have

been correctly passed by Area Manager, Food Corporation of India, Gorakhpur within the preview of his powers as

disciplinary authority as mentioned in the Certified Standing Order framed under Industrial Employment Standing

Order Act, 1946 under which departmental workers are governed. The Food Corporation of India has legally and

justifiably passed both the recovery orders of demurrage amount from the concerned workmen. An officer holding

the charge of District/Area Manager is supposed to be a custodian of all the properties moveable or immovable of

his area in his jurisdiction and in case of any loss in the terms of goods or cash, has a right to take appropriate

action to protect the interest of corporation in each and every manner for which District/Area Manager is deployed

for. The management has prayed to dismiss the claim statement along with cost.

12. The relevant clauses of the standing order have been filed by the management. The workers union thereafter filed

rejoinder W-10 with strong denial of the allegations levelled in the written statement.

13. Affidavit of Sri Hari Kant Sharma was filed by the workman along with annexures. The witness was dully cross-

examined on behalf of the management.

14. The opposite party filed affidavit of Sri Ram Agya Satpati, Manager as M-20 alongwith annexures; he was duly

cross-examined on behalf of the workmen. Later on another affidavit of Sri Om Prakash was filed by the

management as ME-28 alongwith annexures. The union duly cross examined this witness as well.

15. Arguments of both the learned A/R of the parties have been heard at length and the record has been perused

thoroughly.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4839

16. The learned authorized representative of the workman has submitted that the action of the management of the FCI

had been arbitrary and voilative of principles of natural justice as it did not serve any notice before imposing

alleged recoveries upon the workmen. It is also the case of the workman that the management did not follow Rules

and Regulations given in the Certified Standing Orders.

17. In rebuttal, the authorized representative of the management has contended that with regard to payment of

demurrage charges by FCI to Railways in case of non settlements in favour of FCI, the FCI management has right

to recover from those person responsible for losses as mentioned in the Certified Standing Order in Clause 15 (i) &

(ii). He has further argued that the recoveries have correctly been passed by the Disciplinary Authority under

Rules as the workmen have been given notice of demurrages and the penalty was imposed after considering their

respective replies; hence there stands no violation of the principles of natural justice, more so as the penalty

imposed comes within the purview of minor penalty.

19.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions of the learned authorized representatives of the

parties and scanned documentary evidence available on record.

20. The case of the workman is that the management of FCI imposed the alleged recoveries without issuing any notice

to them; whereas the management has specifically pleaded that the workmen had been issued show cause notice

and recoveries have been imposed after considering their respective replies. The workman have filed order dated

17.01.2006, 20.01.2007, paper No. 4/44 to 4/49, which clearly reveals that the workmen have been issued separate

memorandums and were imposed above noted orders of recoveries after taking into consideration their respective

replies, thus, the stand of the workman’s union falls that the management did not inform them before imposing

penalty. Moreover, it is also the stand of the FCI that the penalty imposed is minor one and the disciplinary

authority after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case decided not to take formal disciplinary

action. Also, it is not the case of the workman’s union that the demurrages were not casued.

21. Now it comes to the question whether court can exercise its powers under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes

Act, 1947, which empower the Labour Court to interfere with the punishment imposed upon the workman.

Hon’ble Apex Court in B.C. Chayurvedi v. Union of India, (1995) 6 SCC 749 while discussing about the scope of

judicial review, in disciplinary matters, has observed as under:

“The High Court/Tribunal, while exercising the power of judicial review, cannot normally substitute its own

conclusion on penalty and impose some other penalty. If the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority

or the appellate authority shocks the conscience of the High Court/Tribunal, it would appropriately mould the

relief, either directing the disciplinary/appellate authority to reconsider the penalty imposed, or to shorten the

litigation, it may itself, in exceptional and rare cases, imposed appropriate punishment with cogent reasons in

support thereof.”

In DG, RPF vs. Sai Babu (2003) 4 SCC 331, Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that:

“6…………. Normally, the punishment imposed by a disciplinary authority should not be disturbed by the High

Court or a tribunal except in appropriate cases that too only after reaching a conclusion that the punishment

imposed is grossly or shockingly disproportionate, after examining all the relevant factors including the nature

of charges proved against, the past conduct, penalty imposed earlier, the nature of duties assigned having due

regard to their sensitiveness, exactness expected of an discipline required to be maintained, and the

department/establishment which the delinquent person concerned works.”

22.

Section 11 A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 reads as under:

“11A. Powers of Labour Courts, Tribunal and National Tribunals to give appropriate relief in case of discharge

or dismissal of workmen. – Where an industrial dispute relating to the discharge or dismissal of a workman has

been referred to a Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal for adjudication and, in the course of the

adjudication proceedings, the Labour Court, Tribunal of National Tribunal, as the case may be, is satisfied that

the order of discharge or dismissal was not justified, it may, be its award, set aside the order of discharge or

dismissal and direct re-instatement of the workman on such terms and conditions, if any, as it thinks fit, or give

such other relief to the workman including the award of any lesser punishment in lieu of discharge or dismissal

as the circumstances of the case may require:

Provided that in any proceeding under this section the Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal, as the

case may be, shall rely only on the materials on record and shall not take any fresh evidence in relation to the

matter.”

A bare reading of the section makes it clear that Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act has been enacted to

empower the Labour Court to interfere with that management’s decision to dismiss, discharge or terminate the

services of a workman in such cases. In respect of other punishments, it has been observed and consistently held

by the Courts that the tribunal does not have power to substitute its own judgment for that of the management.

Hon’ble Apex Court in South Indian Cashew Factories Workers’ Union vs. Kerala State Cashew Development

Corpn. Ltd (2006) 5 SCC 201 made the following observations:

4840

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

“Section 11-A of the Act gives ample power to the Labour Court to re-appraise the evidence adduced in the

enquiry and also sit in appeal over the decision of the employer in imposing punishment. Section 11-A of the

Industrial Disputes Act is only applicable in the case of dismissal or discharge of a workman as clearly

mentioned in the section itself.”

23.

Whether similar power can be exercised by the Labour Court where the punishment award is neither dismissal,

punishment nor retrenchment? This issue has been considered by Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Allahabad

Bank vs. Presiding Officer, Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Kanpur & Others 2012 (133)

FLR 1098; where it has been observed that:

“Section 11-A empowers the Labour Court to re-appreciate the evidence and correct the judgment, in case of

discharge, dismissal and termination, while in case of other punishments, no such power is vested with the

Labour Court”.

24.

In the instant case the workmen have been issued separate memorandums for alleged demurrages; and after

considering their respective replies, the order for recoveries were issued by the Competent Authority which

amounted to minor penalty. There is no reliable material for recording findings that the alleged action of the

management of FCI in recovering of demurrage charges from workmen, was excessively harsh or disproportionate

one.

25.

Accordingly, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, I am of

opinion that the recovery orders need not to be interfered by this Tribunal. Hence, the reference is adjudicated

against the workman’s union; and as such, I come to the conclusion that the workmen viz. Sri Yogendra Prasad

and Dilip Ram Prasad are not entitled to the relief claimed.

26.

Award as above.

LUCKNOW.

RAKESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer

30^th October, 2015.

ubZ fnYyh] 16 fnlEcj] 2015

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 2346

2346

2346.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj

,QlhvkbZ ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/k esa fufnZ’V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@ Je U;k;ky;] y[kuÅ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 07@2009½ dks izdkf”kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj

dks 16@12@2015 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y-&22011/76/2008–vkbZ vkj (lh,e-II)]

jktsUnz flag] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh

New Delhi, the 16th December, 2015

S.O.2346.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 07/2009) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour

Court, Lucknow as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Food Corporation of

India, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16/12/2015

[No. L-22011/76/2008 - IR(CM-II)]

RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW

PRESENT: RAKESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer

I.D. No. 07/2009

Ref.No. L-22011/76/2008-IR(CM-II) dated 08.04.20009

BETWEEN

The State Secretary,

Bharatiya Khadya Nigam Karamchari Sangh

TC/3V, Vibhuti Khand

Gomti Nagar,

Lucknow(U.P.)

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4841

AND

The Regional Manager,

Food Corpn. Of India,

Elite Building, Civil Lines,

Jhansi (U.P.)

The Executive Director (North),

Food Corporation of India

Plot No. 2A, 2B

Sector 24, Gautam Budh Nagar

Noida (U.P.)

AWARD

By order No. L-22011/76/2008-IR(CM-II) dated 08.04.2009 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 State Secretary, Bharatiya

Khadya Nigam Karmchari Sangh, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow and the Executive Director (North) FCI Noida, Regional

Manager,FCI, Jhansi for adjudication.

The reference under adjudication is:

“WHETHER THE ACTION OF THE MANAGEMENT OF FCI IMPOSING PENALTIES ON

SHRI SHAMBHU DAYAL VIDE THEIR ORDERS DATED 12.05.2008, 30.05.2008, 09.04.2008, 31.05.2008

AND 23.05.2007 IS LEGAL AND JUSTIFIED? TO WHAT RELIEF IS THE CLAIMANT WORKMAN

ENTITLED FOR?”

As per the claim statement, the workman through union has stated in brief that 5 identical charge sheets dated

05.05.05, 11.06.2006, 02.06.2007, 13.08.2007 and 26.03.2008 have been issued by the opposite party under

Regulation 60 of Staff Regulations 1971. The list of minor penalties has been given in the claim statement; the

charge sheets were regarding alleged unjustified storage losses. The workman stated that there was no list of

documents on the basis of which the alleged chargesheets framed , nor any document have been mentioned therein,

nor any documents have been provided to the workman for effective reply. Detailed reply of the aforesaid charge

have been submitted by the workman.

The workman has further stated that the Disciplinary Authority has been casted two responsibilities by Regulation

60(1)(C) and 60 (1) (d) of Regulations which have been reproduced as under:

“………………

……………….

Taking the representation of any submitted by the employee under clause (a) and the record of enquiry, if

any, held under clause (b) into consideration.

Recording a finding on each imputation or misbehavior.”

It has been pleaded in the claim statement that the opposite party no.1 and 2 have passed the following penalties

upon workman illegally, arbitrarily and without compliance of regulation 60 (1) (C) and regulation 60 (1) (d) of

the Regulations:

Sl. Penalty order Passed by Penalty of recovery

No. dated Imposed

1. 12.05.2008 OP No.2 Rs. 3,495.63

2. 30.05.2008 OP No.1 Rs. 25,312.00

3. 09.04.2008 OP No.1 Rs.4,244.00

4. 23.05.2007 OP No.1 Rs.88,365.00

5. 31.05.2008 OP No.1 Rs.3,780.00

The claim statement further points out that documents not mentioned in the charge cannot be referred by the

disciplinary authority in the penalty order but valid action was not taken by the opposite party is against the

principle of natural justice. Penalty for recovery of Rs.1, 25,196.63 was imposed, no reason to disagree with the

reply of the workman was provided by the authority.

4842

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 26, 2015/PAUSA 5, 1937

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

The workman further stated that opposite party no.2 has stated in impugned order dated 12.5.2008 that he had

examined other records and documents including DSLC report dated 21.2.2008 and found workman guilty of

charge leveled and imposed recovery of unjustified losses amounting to Rs.3495.63. The impugned order is illegal

and violative of principles of natural justice as it has failed to disclose which document was considered and how

such document was relevant and against workman. The opposite party no.2 has neither given any reason to

disagree with the reply of workman nor given any finding on each imputation or misbehavior as such impugned

order is violative of regulation 60(1) (C) and 60 (1) (d) of Regulations. There was alleged storage loss of

Rs.14,983.30 and penalty has been imposed for unjustified losses of Rs.3493.63 and balance loss was found to be

justified. The opposite party no.2 has failed to give any reason as to how it has found part of the loss justified and

part as unjustified. The charge sheet dated 5.5.07 issued by the opposite party no.1 is in respect of alleged

unjustified storage losses for the period 1/06, 2/06 and 3/06. It has been mentioned in the charge sheet that 7-9

officials were responsible alleged losses.

8. The workman further stated that opposite party no.1 has failed to specify the role of each official including

workman and also failed to quantify the alleged loss attributed with the workman and as such the charge is vague

and no finding of guilt can be fixed on that basis. The opposite party no.2 has failed to consider this legal position.

There were two wings in depots, that is, QC wing and depot wing and both are separate and independent. The

depot staff acts under the supervision and control of Manager (Depot) while QC Staff under Manager (QC). The

staff of QC wing checks the moisture by moisture meter provided by the Food Corporation of India. The moisture

of food grains varies from time to time. Hence, there is no basis of allegation that moisture recorded at the time of

receipt/issue of stock was not correct/reasonable. There is no allegation that moisture was re-checked by higher

authority just after checked by QC Staff and found the moisture as incorrect. The charge sheet is basically based

upon no evidence. The workman has specifically stated in reply dated 23.05.2007 that alleged quantity of loss is for

whole depot while the workman was in charge of one unit. There was only 30.31.835 qlts of storage loss in his unit

which is below 0.5% in wheat while there was no loss in rice and almost similar is the position of 21/06 and 3/06.

These aspects have not been considered by opposite party no.1 in impugned order dated 30.5.2008. Similarly none

of the issue raised by the workman in his reply has been considered nor referred in the impugned order. The

opposite party no.1 has also failed to give any finding on the imputation of misconduct.

9. The workman has stated that the findings of the opposite party is based on assumption, presumption and suspicious

without any concrete evidence. Regulations were not followed by the management and reply given by the workman

is also not considered. The workman has prayed to set aside the impugned 5 penalty order and Appellate order

dated 30.10.2007 and 12.09.2008 and review order dated 19.2.2008. Request for refund of the amount recovered

along with interest has also been made in the claim statement.

10. The management has filed written statement M-7 wherein the main allegation has been denied. The management

has stated that all the charge sheets are based on the Depot record prepared by the workman and his co-workers,

and were available with the applicant. The management has further stated that opportunity was granted to

workman, his representation was given a careful dispassionate examination, but no convincing fact was provided

by the workman. It has been emphasized in the written statement that sufficient advantage of driage, period of

storage and other connected factors was given even then the unjustified loss persisted in the unit; consequently the

penalty was imposed by the disciplinary authority and appellate authority. The management has stated that very

clear, lawful, reasoned and speaking order in accordance with the rules regulations of FCI (Staff) was passed after

consideration of the representation given by the workman. All the relevant facts and documents were considered by

the appellate authority. Thereafter just and fair order was passed.

11. The management has further stated that the workman/applicant was entrusted with the work of receipt/storage

maintenance/preservation and issue/dispatch of food grains at FSD Jhansi where abnormal/unrealistic storage

losses in wheat/rice has been reported, as shown in 29.10 statement, as the applicant failed to maintain absolute

integrity, devotion to duty, discharge his duties effectively, sincerely & honestly. Had he discharged his duties

effectively, there would not have been abnormal/unjustified storage losses for which he was charge sheeted, which

is quite legal and is based on documentary evidences. All the charge sheets have been issued for storage losses,

which are unjustified losses and for which applicant is responsible, as he failed to maintain absolute integrity,

devotion to duty and committed irregularities and apparent manipulation of record to justify the shortages and

shown it is storage loss to hid his misconduct, misappropriation of the stocks in connivance with others. The driage

which has taken place does not justify these losses. There is no report of bird/rat trouble and also no down

gradation of the stocks has taken place due to insect/pest. An opportunity was granted to the applicant and after

careful and dispassionate examination of the representation submitted by the applicant, contents of charge sheet,

documents related to the cases including DSLC report disciplinary authority/appellate authority, Review Authority

finds that points of representation submitted by applicant about storage loss are not found convincing satisfactory.

The sufficient advantage of driage, period of storage and other connected factors has already been given even then

the unjustified loss persists in applicants unit as a result of which penalty was imposed by the disciplinary

authority/appellate authority to applicant.

12. The opposite party has emphasized that the applicant has approached this Tribunal without exhausting alternate

remedy of filing appeal and review under FCI (Staff) Regulations. The management has prayed to dismiss this

claim statement, as the workman is not entitled for any relief.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 26] 2015@ikS"k 5] 1937

4843

13. The workman thereafter has filed rejoinder while reiterating the pleas taken in the claim statement and with strong

denial of the facts mentioned in the written statement. The workman has also emphasized that the concerned AGM

is not authorized to sign the written statement and it is not a legal document in the eyes of law.

14. The workman along with list W-5 has filed certain documents. The opposite party has filed documents as per list

M-12. Workman evidence W-10 has been filed as a affidavit of Sri Shambu Dayal. He was duly cross examined by

the management. The management has filed affidavit M-12 of Sri Promod Kumar Awasthi. Sufficient opportunity

was provided to the workman but the management witness was not cross examined. Therefore, the case was fixed

by my learned predecessor for hearing arguments.

15. Arguments of both the parties have been heard at length. Record available before this court have been scanned

thoroughly.

16.

The learned authorized representative of the workman has submitted that the action of the management of the FCI

had been arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice as no list of documents, on the basis of which the

alleged charge sheets have been framed, has been enclosed with nor the workman had been provided with any

documents for effective reply. Further, it has also been contended that the issues raised by the workman in his

reply have neither been considered, nor referred in the impugned orders.

17.

In rebuttal, the authorized representative of the management has contended that all the charge sheets, issued to the

workman, related to unjustified storage losses and the workman was given sufficient opportunity to represent

against charge sheet. It is argued by the representative of the managment that after careful examination of the

representation submitted by the workman, contents of charge sheet and documents related to the case including

DSLC report, the disciplinary authority/appellate authority did not find the points raised by the workman

convincing; hence, the penalty imposed by the management is just and fair, therefore, there stands no violation of

the principles of natural justice, more so as the penalty imposed comes within the purview of minor penalty.

18.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions of the learned authorized representatives of the

parties and scanned documentary evidence available on record.

19.

The case of the workman is that the management of FCI imposed the alleged impugned orders by issuing charge

sheets, which were not supported by the list of documents. Also the workman was not given any document to

frame effective reply. It is also the case of the workman that the Disciplinary Authority issued impugned orders

without considering reply/representation of the workman.

20.

From perusal of the documentary evidence relied upon by the parties, it is evident that the workman had been

issued detailed charge sheet, duly supported with the imputations of charges to facilitate the workman to submit its

reply/representation. There is no iota of evidence to show that the workman ever demanded from the opposite

party any document to help him to file his reply. Then now taking the plea that the workman was not supplied with

documents seems to be after thought. Hence, I find no force in contention of the workman that he was denied

proper defence.

The management defended its domestic inquiry with pleadings that there is no anomaly with the procedure adopted

by it; as the workman had been issued charge sheets and was afforded sufficient opportunity to submit a

representation in reply thereof. Further, the management has also come up with a case that the representations of

the workman were duly considered while delivering the punishment orders. Also, the workman has not disputed

the validity of the inquiry; however it has alleged that the impugned order of punishment is illegal and required this

Tribunal to interfere with the same.

21.

Now it comes to the question as to whether court can exercise its powers under Section 11-A of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947, which empower the Labour Court to interfere with the punishment imposed upon the

workman. Hon’ble Apex Court in B.C. Chayurvedi v. Union of India, (1995) 6 SCC 749 while discussing about

the scope of judicial review, in disciplinary matters, has observed as under:

“The High Court/Tribunal, while exercising the power of judicial review, cannot normally substitute its own

conclusion on penalty and impose some other penalty. If the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority

or the appellate authority shocks the conscience of the High Court/Tribunal, it would appropriately mould the

relief, either directing the disciplinary/appellate authority to reconsider the penalty imposed, or to shorten the

litigation, it may itself, in exceptional and rare cases, imposed appropriate punishment with cogent reasons in

support thereof.”

In DG, RPF vs. Sai Babu (2003) 4 SCC 331, Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that:

“6…………. Normally, the punishment imposed by a disciplinary authority should not be disturbed by the High

Court or a tribunal except in appropriate cases that too only after reaching a conclusion that the punishment

imposed is grossly or shockingly disproportionate, after examining all the relevant factors including the nature

of charges proved against, the past conduct, penalty imposed earlier, the nature of duties assigned having due

4844