2850 GI/2016

(2583)

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

REGD. NO. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05

izkf/dkj ls izdkf'kr

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

lkIrkfgd

WEEKLY

la- 25]

ubZ fnYyh] twu 12—twu 18] 2016] 'kfuokj@T;s"B 22—T;s"B 28] 1938

No. 25]

NEW DELHI, JUNE 12—JUNE 18, 2016, SATURDAY/JYAISTHA 22— JYAISTHA 28, 1938

bl Hkkx esa fHkUu i`"B la[;k nh tkrh gS ftlls fd ;g i`Fkd ladyu ds :i esa j[kk tk lds

Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation

Hkkx II—[k.M 3—mi&[k.M (ii)

PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)

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

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

(Other than the Ministry of Defence)

िव

िव मंालय

मंालय

(राजव

राजव

राजव िवभाग

िवभाग

िवभाग)

(कीय

कीय

कीय य

य

य कर

कर

कर बोड

बोड

बोड)

नई दली, , , , 27 मई, , , , 2016

का

का.आ. 1159

1159

1159.—जनसाधारण क सूचना हेतु एतद् ारा यह अिधसूिचत कया जाता है क मैसस जी बी

पंत िहमालयन पयावरण और िवकास संथान, , , , नई दली (पैन-एएएएजी3515 एफ) ) ) ) को आयकर िनयमावली, , , ,

1962 (उ िनयमावली) के िनयम 5ग एवं 5घ के साथ पठत आयकर अिधिनयम, , , , 1961 (उ अिधिनयम) ) ) ) क

धारा 35 क उपधारा (1) के खंड (ii) के उेय के िलए 'वैािनक अनुसंधान संथान' ' ' ' क !ेणी म" कर िनधारण

वष 2016-2017 के आगे से क"% सरकार ारा िन&िलिखत शत) के अ+यधीन अनुमोदत कया जाता है, , , , यथाः-

(i) अनुमोदत 'वैािनक अनुसंधान संथान' ' ' ' का एकमा उेय वैािनक अनुसंधान करना होगा;

(ii) अनुमोदत संगठन वंय ही वैािनक अनुसंधान करेगा;

(iii) अनुमोदत संगठन वैािनक अनुसंधान के िलए इसके ारा ा रािश के संबंध म अलग बही-लेखा रखेगा तथा

उसम अनुसंधान के िलए उपयोग क गई रािश को द शत करेगा और ऐसी बिहय$ क उ% अिधिनयम क

धारा 288 क उपधारा (2) के अनुसार प'ीकरण म प*रभािषत कए गए अनुसार लेखाकार ारा िविधवत

2584

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

हता-*रत तथा स.यािपत क गई ऐसी लेखा परी-ा *रपोट0 उ% अिधिनयम क धारा 139 क उपधारा (1)

के अंतग0त आयकर िववरणी भेजने क तारीख तक आयकर आयु3 त या आयकर िनदेशक, , , , िजनके पास मामले

का -ेािधकार है, , , , को भेजेगा;

(iv)

अनुमोदत संगठन सामािजक िवान म वैािनक अनुसंधान के िलए ा दान रािश एवं यु% रािश का एक

अलग िववरण रखेगा तथा िविधवत मािणत ऐसे िववरण क एक ित लेखा परी-ा ारा ऊपर संद भत लेखा

परी-ा क *रपोट0 के साथ भेजी जाएगी।

2. क"% सरकार अनुमोदन को वापस लेगा यद अनुमोदत संगठन

(क) पैरा.ाफ 1 के उप-पैरा.ाफ (iii) म" संद0भत एक अलग बही-लेखा नह3 रखताः अथवा

(ख) पैरा.ाफ 1 के उप-पैरा.ाफ (iii) म" संद0भत इस क लेखा-परी4ा रपोट नह3 भेजताः अथवा

(ग) पैरा.ाफ 1 के उप-पैरा.ाफ (iv) म" संद0भत वैािनक अनुसंधान के िलए इसको 6ा7 दान रािश एवं 6यु

रािश का िववरण नह3 भेजता अथवा

(घ) इसके अनुसंधान कायकलाप8 को जारी रखना बंद कर दे अथवा इसक अनुसंधान गितिविधयां उपयु नह3

पायी जाती ह: अथवा

(ड.) उ िनयमावली के िनयम 5ग तथा पठत उ अिधिनयम क धारा 35 क उपधारा 1 के खंड (iiiiiiii) के

6ावधान8 अनु;प काय करना तथा अनुपालन करना बंद कर दे।

[अिधसूचना सं. 36 /2016/फा.सं. 203/19/2015-आईटीए-II]

रोिहत गग,

, उप-सिचव

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department of Revenue)

(CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES)

New Delhi, the 27th May, 2016

S.O.1159.—It is hereby notified for general information that the organization M/s. G.B. Pant Institute of

Himalayan Environment and Development, New Delhi (PAN-AAAAG3515F) has been approved by the Central

Government for the purpose of clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of section 35 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (said Act), read

with Rules 5C and 5D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (said Rules), from Assessment year 2016-2017 onwards in the

category of ‘ Scientific Research Association’ subject to the following conditions, namely:-

(i)

The sole objective of the approved ‘’Scientific Research Association’ shall be to undertake scientific research;

(ii)

The approved organization shall carry out scientific research by itself;

(iii) The approved organization shall maintain separate books of accounts in respect of the sums received by it for

scientific research, reflect therein the amounts used for carrying out research, get such books audited by an

accountant as defined in the explanation to sub-section (2) of section 288 of the said Act and furnish the report of

such audit duly signed and verified by such accountant to the Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of

Income-tax having jurisdiction over the case, by the due date of furnishing the return of income under sub-section

(1) of section 139 of the said Act;

(iv) The approved organization shall maintain a separate statement of donations received and amounts applied for

scientific research in social science and a copy of such statement duly certified by the auditor shall accompany

the report of audit referred to above.

The Central Government shall withdraw the approval if the approved organization:-

(a)

fails to maintain separate books of accounts referred to in sub-paragraph (iii) of paragraph 1; or

(b)

fails to furnish its audit report referred to in sub-paragraph (iii) of paragraph 1; or

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2585

(c)

fails to furnish its statement of the donations received and sums applied for scientific research referred to in

sub-paragraph (iv) of paragraph 1; or

(d)

ceases to carry on its research activities or its research activities are not found to be genuine; or

(e)

ceases to conform to and comply with the provisions of clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of section 35 of the

said Act read with rules 5C and 5D of the said Rules.

[Notification No. 36 /2016/F. No. 203/19/2015/ITA-II]

ROHIT GARG, Dy. Secy.

नई द7 ली, 14 जून, 2016

का.आ.

का.आ.1160

1160

1160.—क 9 सरकार, आयकर अिधिनयम 1961, (1961 का 43) क धारा 56 क उपधारा (2) के खंड

(VII ख) के परंतुक के खंड (ii) के ारा द. त शि3 तय$ का योग करते Eए एतद्ारा उ3 त खंड के आशय से ‘’F यि3 तय$ क

Gेिणय$’’ को उस ‘’F यि3 त के Hप म प*रभािषत करती है जैसा क वह िनवासी होने के नाते उ3 त अिधिनयम क धारा 2 क

उपधारा (31) के अंतग0त प*रभािषत कया गया है तथा जो ‘’ टाट0 अप’’ कंपनी के शेयर$ के इ यू के िलए अंकत मू7 य से

अिधक कोई ितफल करता है।

प

प टी

टी

टीकर

कर

करण – इस अिधसूचना के आशय से, ‘’ टाट0 अप’’ से अिभाय ऐसी कंपनी से है िजसम आम जनता पया0O त Hप से

Hिच नहQ लेती है तथा जो भारत के राजप, असाधारण भाग II, खंड 3, उपखंड (i) के अंतग0त दनांक 18 फरवरी, 2016

को कािशत भारत सरकार, वािणS य और उUोग मंालय, औUोिगक नीित और संवध0न िवभाग क दनांक 17 फरवरी,

2016 क अिधसूचना सं. जीएसआरआई 80 (अ) म िविनXदY ट शतZ को पूरा करती है।

[अिधसूचना सं. 45 /2016/फा. सं. 173/103/2016-आईटीए-I]

रोिहत गग0, उप-सिचव

New Delhi, the 14th June, 2016

S.O. 1160.—In exercise of the powers conferred by the clause (ii) of the proviso to clause (viib) of sub-section

(2) of section 56 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government, hereby notifies the ‘classes of

persons’ for the purposes of the said clause as being the ‘person’ defined under sub-section (31) of section 2 of the said

Act, being resident, who make any consideration exceeding the face value for issues of shares of a ‘startup’ company.

Explanation. - For the purposes of this notification, “startup” shall mean a company in which the public are not

substantially interested and which fulfills the conditions specified in the notification of the Government of India,

Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, number G.S.R.I 80(E), dated the

17th February, 2016, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, part II, section 3, sub-section (i), dated the 18th

February, 2016.

[Notification No. 45/2016/F. No. 173/103/2016-ITA-I]

ROHIT GARG, Dy. Secy.

(िवीय सेवाएं िवभाग

िवीय सेवाएं िवभाग

िवीय सेवाएं िवभाग)

नई द7ली, 16 जून, 2016

का

का.आ.1161

.1161

.1161.—बीमा िविनयामक और िवकास ािधकरण अिधिनयम, 1999 (1999 का 41) क धारा 4 ारा

द[ शि%य$ का योग करते Eए, के\9ीय सरकार, एतद् ारा, Gी आलोक ट]डन के थान पर Gी एन. Gीिनवास राव,

आ थक सलाहकार, िव[ीय सेवाएं िवभाग, िव[ मंालय को त.काल भाव से और अगले आदेश$ तक भारतीय बीमा

िविनयामक और िवकास ािधकरण (आईआरडीएआई) म अंशकािलक सदय के Hप म िनयु% करती है।

[फा. सं. 11/6/2003-बीमा-I]

मुदता िमGा, िनदेशक

2586

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(Department of Financial Services)

New Delhi, the 16th June, 2016

S.O. 1161 .—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 4 of the Insurance Regulatory and Development

Authority Act, 1999 (41 of 1999), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri N. Srinivasa Rao, Economic Advisor,

Department of Financial Services, Ministry of Finance as Part-time Member of the Insurance Regulatory and

Development Authority of India (IRDAI) vice Shri Alok Tandon, with immediate effect and until further orders.

[ F. No.11/6/2003-Ins.I ]

MUDITA MISHRA, Director

नई द7 ली, 16 जून, 2016

का

का.आ.1162

1162

1162.—जीवन बीमा िनगम अिधिनयम, 1956 (1956 का 31) क धारा 4 ारा द[ शि%य$ का योग

करते Eए, के\9ीय सरकार, एत^ारा, Gीमती _ेहलता Gीवातव के थान पर Gी िगरीश च\9 मुमू0, अपर सिचव, िव[ीय

सेवाएं िवभाग को त.काल भाव से और अगले आदेश$ तक उ% िनगम म सदय के Hप म िनयु% करती है।

[फा. सं. 14/3/2003-बीमा-I]

मुदता िमGा, िनदेशक

New Delhi, the 16th June, 2016

S.O. 1162.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 4 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (31

of 1956), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Girish Chandra Murmu, Additional Secretary, Department of

Financial Services as Member of the said Corporation vice Smt. Snehlata Shrivastava, with immediate effect till further

orders.

[ F. No.14/3/2003-Ins.I ]

MUDITA MISHRA, Director

िवदेश

िवदेश मं ा

मं ा

मं ालय

लय

(सी

सी

सी.पी

पी

पी.वी

वी

वी. . . . भाग

भाग

भाग)

नई द7ली, 7 जून, 2016

का

का.आ. 1163

1163

1163.—राजनियक और क$सुलीय अिधकारी (शपथ एवं फस) के अिधिनयम, 1948 (1948 का 41) क

धारा 2 के खंड (क) के अनुसरण म वैधािनक आदेश ।

एतद् ारा, क 9 सरकार भारत के दूतावास म कत म कुमारी अंजना ठाकुर, जूिनयर सिचवालय सहायक को

दनांक 7 जून 2016 से सहायक क$सुलर अिधकारी के तौर पर क$सुलर सेवा` के िनव0हन के िलए ािधकृत करती है।

[सं. टी. 4330/01/2016]

काश च\द, उप सिचव (क$सुलर)

MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

(CPV Division)

New Delhi, the 7th June, 2016

S.O. 1163.—Statutory Order in pursuance of the clause (a) of the Section 2 of the Diplomatic and Consular

Officers (Oaths and fees) Act, 1948 (41 of 1948), the Central Government hereby appoints Ms. Anjana Thakur, Junior

Secretariat Assistant as Assistant Consular Officer in the Embassay of India, Muscat to perform the Consular services

with effect from 7th June 2016.

[No. T. 4330/01/2016]

PRAKASH CHAND, Dy. Secy. (Consular)

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2587

नई द7ली, 8 जून, 2016

का

का.आ.1164

1164

1164.—राजनियक और क$सुलीय अिधकारी (शपथ एवं फस) के अिधिनयम, 1948 (1948 का 41) क

धारा 2 के खंड (क) के अनुसरण म वैधािनक आदेश ।

एतद् ारा, क 9 सरकार भारत के धान क$सलावास, टोर$टो Gी अजय कुमार ठाकुर, सहायक अनुभाग अिधकारी

को दनांक 8 जून, 2016 से सहायक क$सुलर अिधकारी के तौर पर क$सुलर सेवा` के िनव0हन के िलए ािधकृत करती है।

[सं. टी. 4330/01/2016]

काश च\द, उप सिचव (क$सुलर)

New Delhi, the 8th June, 2016

S.O. 1164.—Statutory Order in pursuance of the clause (a) of the Section 2 of the Diplomatic and Consular

Officers (Oaths and fees) Act, 1948 (41 of 1948), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Ajay Kumar Thakur,

Assistant Section Officer as Assistant Consular Officer in the Consulate General of India, Toronto to perform the

Consular services with effect from 8th June 2016.

[No. T. 4330/01/2016]

PRAKASH CHAND, Dy. Secy. (Consular)

नई द7ली, 8 जून, 2016

का

का.आ. 1165

1165

1165.—राजनियक और क$सुलीय अिधकारी (शपथ एवं फस) के अिधिनयम, 1948 (1948 का 41) क

धारा 2 के खंड (क) के अनुसरण म वैधािनक आदेश ।

एतद् ारा, क 9 सरकार भारत के दूतावास, *रयाद म राजू कुमार, सहायक अनुभाग अिधकारी को दनांक 8 जून,

2016 से सहायक क$सुलर अिधकारी के तौर पर क$सुलर सेवा` के िनव0हन के िलए ािधकृत करती है।

[सं. टी. 4330/01/2016]

काश च\द, उप सिचव (क$सुलर)

New Delhi, the 8th June, 2016

S.O. 1165.—Statutory Order in pursuance of the clause (a) of the Section 2 of the Diplomatic and Consular

Officers (Oaths and fees) Act, 1948 (41 of 1948), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Raju Kumar, Assistant

Section Officer as Assistant Consular Officer in the Embassey of India, Riyadh to perform the Consular services with

effect from 8th June, 2016.

[No. T. 4330/01/2016]

PRAKASH CHAND, Dy. Secy. (Consular)

नागर िवमानन मंालय

नई द ली,15 जून, 2016

का

का.आ.

.आ.

.आ.1166

1166

1166.—जबक मेसस अलकेिमट Aकग एयर सी 90 िवमान VT-EQO दनांक 24.05.2016

को पटना से दली के िलए एयर एEFयुलेGस उड़ान का 6चालन करते समय दली म" दुघटना का िशकार हो

गया था ।

और जबक, केG %ीय सरकार को यह उिचत 6तीत होता है क इस दुघटना के कारण और अंशदायी

कारक8 का अG वेषण और िनधारण कया जाना, और भिवL य म" ऐसी दुघटना क पुनरावृित से बचने के िलए

िसफारश" करना समीचीन है।

2588

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

अब, वायुयान (दुघटनाP एवं घटनाP का अGवेषण) िनयमावली, 2012 के िनयम 11 (1) ारा 6दR त

शिय8 का 6योग करते Sए, केG %ीय सरकार एतदारा इस दुघटना क औपचारक जांच का िनदेश देती है।

तदनुसार, केG %ीय सरकार !ी राजे भटनागर, सहायक िनदेशक, एएआईबी, क अ+ य4ता म"

िन&िलिखत सदय8 को शािमल कर जांच सिमित िनयुT त करती है:-

(i)

सु!ी िशपा सेितया, िवमान संर4ा अिधकारी, एएआईबी सदय के ;प म"

(ii) !ी दनेश कुमार, िवमान संर4ा अिधकारी, एएआईबी सदय के ;प म"

सिमित, जब भी अपेि4त होगा, अG य िवशेष8/एज"िसय8 क सहायता भी लेगी।

सिमित का मुW यालय नई द ली म" होगा।

सिमित अिधमानतः छह महीने के भीतर इसक जांच पूरी करके अपनी रपोट केG %ीय सरकार को 6 तुत करेगी।

[सं. एवी-15013/2/2016-डीजी]

बी. एस. भुलर, संयुT त सिचव

MINISTRY OF CIVIL AVIATION

New Delhi, the 15th June, 2016

S.O. 1166. —Whereas an M/s Alchemist King Air C90 aircraft VT-EQO was involved in an accident at Delhi

on 24.05.2016 while operating flight Air Ambulance from Patna to Delhi.

And whereas, it appears to the Central Government that it is expedient to investigate and determine the causes

and contributory factors leading to the said accident and make recommendations to avoid recurrence of such accidents

in future.

Now, in the exercise of the powers conferred by the Rules 11(1) of the Aircraft (Investigation of Accidents

and Incidents) Rules, 2012, the Central Government hereby directs that a formal inquiry in the accident be made.

Accordingly, the Central Government hereby appoints a Committee of Inquiry headed by Sh. Raje Bhatnagar,

Assistant Director, AAIB with following members:

(i) Ms. Shilpy Satiya, Air Safety Officer, AAIB as member

(ii) Sh. Dinesh Kumar, Air Safety Officer, AAIB as member

The committee will also take the assistance of other experts/agencies whenever required.

The headquarters of the Committee will be at New Delhi.

The Committee will complete its inquiry and submit its report to the Central Government preferably within six

months.

[No. AV-15013/2/2016-DG]

B. S. BHULLAR, Jt. Secy.

dkfeZd] yksd f’kdk;r rFkk isa’ku ea=ky;

¼dkfeZd vkSj izf’k{k.k foHkkx½

ubZ fnYyh] 8 twu] 2016

dkdkdkdk-vkvkvkvk- 1167

1167

1167-&&

&&dsUnz ljdkj ,rn}kjk fnYyh fo’ks”k iqfyl LFkkiuk vf/kfu;e 1946] ¼1946 dk vf/kfu;e la[;k 25½ dh /kkjk 6 ds

lkFk ifBr /kkjk 5 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ }kjk iznRr ‘kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, xksok jkT; ljdkj] x`g foHkkx ¼lkekU;½] lfpoky;] iksoksfje] xksok la-

30@01@2015&lhchvkbZ ,pMh¼th½@3088 fnukad 09-10-2015 }kjk izkIr lgefr ls lwpuk izkS|ksfxdh vf/kfu;e] 2000 ¼2000 dk vf/kfu;e la-

21½ dh /kkjk 65,] 66,] 66&ch] 66&lh] 66&Mh] 66&bZ] 66&,Q] 67,] 67&,] 67&ch] 67&lh] 84&ch] 84&lh rFkk 85] ;Fkkla’kksf/kr lwpuk

izkS|ksfxdh ¼la’kks/ku½ vf/kfu;e 2008] ¼2009 dh vf/klwpuk la[;k 10½ ds v/khu naMuh; vijk/k dh tkap djus rFkk mlls lEc) vijk/kksa esa fd,

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2589

x, iz;klksa] nq”izsj.kkvksa vkSj “kM~;a=ksa rFkk mlh laO;ogkj esa fd, x, ;k mUgha rF;ksa ls mRiUu fdlh vU; vijk/k ;k vijk/kksa dh tkap djus ds

fy, fnYyh fo’ks”k iqfyl LFkkiuk ds lnL;ksa dh ‘kfDr;ksa vkSj {ks=kf/kdkj dk foLrkj leLr xksok jkT; esa djrh gSA

[Qk- la- 224@01@2009&,ohMh&II]

eks- unhe] voj lfpo

MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS

(Department of Personnel and Training)

New Delhi, the 8th June, 2016

S.O. 1167 .—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section(1) of section 5 read with section 6 of the

Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946), the Central Government with the consent of the

State Government of Goa, Department of Home (General), Secretariat, Porvorim – Goa, vide Notification

No.30/01/2015-CBI/HD(G)/3088 dated 09.10.2015, hereby extends the powers and Jurisdiction of the members of the

Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State of Goa for the investigation of offences under sections 65,

66, 66-B, 66-C, 66-D, 66-E, 66-F, 67, 67-A, 67-B, 67-C, 84-B, 84-C and 85 of the IT Act, 2000 (Act No. 21 of 2000),

as amended by the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 (Act No. 10 of 2009) and attempts abetment and

conspiracies in relation to or in connection with one or more of the offences mentioned above and any other offence(s)

committed in the course of the same transaction or arising out the same facts.

[F. No. 224/01/2009-AVD-II]

Md. NADEEM, Under Secy.

ubZ fnYyh] 9 twu] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 1168

1168

1168-&&

&&dsUnz ljdkj ,rn}kjk naM izfdz;k lafgrk] 1973 ¼1974 dk vf/kfu;e la- 2½ dh /kkjk 24 dh

mi/kkjk ¼8½ }kjk iznRr 'kfä;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ubZ bykgkckn mPp U;k;ky; esa fnYyh fo'ks’k iqfyl LFkkiuk ¼lhchvkbZ½

}kjk laLFkkfir ekeyksa ds vfHk;kstu rFkk buls mRiUu fnYyh fo'ks’k iqfyl LFkkiuk ¼lhchvkbZ½ }kjk vUosf’kr izklafxd vU;

ekeyksa esa vihy] iqujh{k.k dk lapkyu djus ds fy, Jh vfer feJk vf/koDrk dks mudh fu;qfDr dh rkjh[k ls ,d o’kZ

fy, vFkok vxys vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh igys gks] fo'ks’k yksd vfHk;kstd ds :i esa fu;qDr djrh gSA

[Qk- la- 225@15@2016&,ohMh&II]

eks- unhe] voj lfpo

New Delhi, the 9th June, 2016

S.O. 1168 .—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (8) of section 24 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Amit Misra, Advocate as Special

Public Prosecutor for conducting prosecution of cases instituted by Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI) in the

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad and appeals, revisions or other matters arising out of the cases investigated by the

Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI) for a period of one year from the date of appointment or until further orders,

whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 225/15/2016-AVD-II]

Md. NADEEM, Under Secy.

नई द 7 ली,15 जून, 2016

का.आ.

का.आ. 1169

1169

1169.—क 9 सरकार, एतद् ारा द 7 ली िव शेष पुिल स थापना अिध िन यम, 1946 (1946 का अिध िन यम

संe या 25) क धारा 6 के साथ प*ठ त धारा 5 क उपधारा (1) ारा द[ शि3 त य$ का योग करते Eए गृह िव भाग क

अिध सूचना सं. एफ. 12-80/2015/बी-1/टीडg7यूओ द नांक 14/08/2015 के माi यम से ाO त मi य देश राS य सरकार क

सहमित से भारतीय दंड संिह ता क धारा 120-बी के साथ प*ठ त धारा 420, 467, 468, 471 तथा सूचना ौUोिग क

अिध िन यम, 2000 क धारा 66 डी के अधीन िव िभ \ न भारतीय नाग*र क$ और िव देश$ म िन वास कर रहे अवासी

भारतीय$ के िव lm क ए अपराध, िज सम छल क गई रािश वे टन0 यूिन यन के माi यम से मi य देश के िव िभ \ न थान$ पर

ाO त हो रही है, म षड़यं, छल और धोखाधड़ी का मामला पंजीकृत करने और जांच करने के िल ए द 7 ली िव शेष पुिल स

थापना के सद य$ क शि3 त य$ और -ेािध कार का िव तार सम त मi य देश राS य म करती है।

[सं. 228/79/2014-एवीडी-II]

मो. नदीम, अवर सिच व

2590

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi, the 15th June, 2016

S.O. 1169.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section(1) of section 5 read with section 6 of the

Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946) the Central Government with the consent of the

State Government of Madhya Pradesh vide Home Department Notification No. F.12-80/2015/B-1/Two dtd.

14/08/2015, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment in

the whole of the State of Madhya Pradesh for registering and investigating a case of conspiracy, cheating and forgery

u/s 120-B IPC r/w 420 IPC, 467 IPC, 468 IPC, 471 IPC and Sec.66 D of Information Technology Act, 2000 committed

against various Indian citizens and NRIs staying abroad, in which cheated amounts are being received through Western

Union at various places of Madhya Pradesh.

[No. 228/79/2014-AVD-II]

Md. NADEEM, Under Secy.

नई द 7 ली,15 जून, 2016

का.आ.

का.आ.1170

1170

1170.—क 9 सरकार, द 7 ली िव शेष पुिल स थापना अिध िन यम, 1946 (1946 का अिध िन यम संe या 25)

क धारा 6 के साथ प*ठ त धारा 5 क उपधारा (1) ारा द[ शि3 त य$ का योग करते Eए महाराY p राS य सरकार क

अिध सूचना सं. िम स.-2014/सीआर-93/एसपीएल-3(ए) द नांक 19/11/2014 ारा ाO त सहमित से एक ऑटोमेटेड डेटा

ोसेqसग िस टम को छलपूव0क ए3 सेस करने, झूठे नाम का साव0जिन क उपयोग करने, अनाsहपूण0 संचार करने, तt य िछ पाने

इ. याद जो क एक कार का फोन घोटाला है िज सम संसार के हजार$ कv O यूटर$ को फोन कॉल ारा इनफे3 टेड क या गया

है। ल3 समबग0 भी इस कार के आxमण का िन शाना रहा है िज ससे ल3 समबग0 क आपरािध क संिह ता क धारा 509-1,

509-2 तथा 509-3 का उ7 लंधन Eआ है और उपयु03 त अपराध सूचना ौUोिग क अिध िन यम, 2000 क धारा 43 के साथ

प*ठ त धारा 66 के िव िभ \ न ावधान$ के सदृश है; से संबंm कानूनी सलाह के िल ए (नोट वब0ल सं. 27/2014 द नांक

15.07.2014) szड डची ऑफ ल3 समबग0 के दूतावास, नई द 7 ली से ाO त याचना प (लेटर रोगेटरी) को काया0ि\ व त करने

तथा उपयु03 त अपराध/अपराध$ म क ए गए यास$, दुY ेरणा` और षडयं$ तथा उसी संF यवहार म क ए गए अथवा उ\ हQ

तt य$ से उ. प\ न क सी अ\ य अपराध या अपराध$ म दोषी F यि3 त य$ के िव lm जांच करने तथा आपरािध क अिभ योजन शुH

करने के िल ए द 7 ली िव शेष पुिल स थापना के सद य$ क शि%य$ एवं -ेािध कार का सम त महाराY p राS य म िव तार

करने के िल ए एत^ारा आदेश देती है।

[सं. 228/70/2014-एवीडी-II]

मो. नदीम, अवर सिच व

New Delhi, the 15th June, 2016

S.O. 1170.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section(1) of section 5 read with section 6 of the

Delhi Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946) the Central Government with the consent of the State

Government of Maharashtra communicated vide Notification No.MISC-2014/CR-93/SPL-3(A) dated 19.11.2014 do

hereby order for extending the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment in the

whole of the State of Maharashtra for investigation in respect of execution of Letters Rogatory received from the

Embassy of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, New Delhi for legal assistance (Note Verbale No.27/2014 dated

15.07.2014) relating to fraudulent access to an automated data processing system, public use of a false name,

unsolicited communication, concealment etc. which is a kind of phone scam, wherein thousands of computers

throughout the world are infested by phone call. Luxembourg is also a target of these attacks, which correspond to

violation of article 509-1, 509-2 and 509-3 of the Criminal Code of Luxembourg. The said offences correspond to

various provisions of sections 43 read with 66 of the Information Technology Act (IT Act), 2000 and any other

offences(s), attempt abetment and conspiracies in relation to or in connection with above mentioned offences and any

other offence or offences committed in the course of the same transaction arising out of the same fact and

simultaneously launching or criminal prosecution against the guilty persons.

[No. 228/70/2014-AVD-II]

Md. NADEEM, Under Secy.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2591

वा

वा य

य

य और परवार क या

और परवार क या

और परवार क याण मं ालय

ण मं ालय

( वा

( वा य

य

य और परवार क या

और परवार क या

और परवार क याण िवभाग)

ण िवभाग)

नई द 7 ली, 31 माच0, 2016

का.आ.

का.आ. 1171

1171

1171.—राY pपित डॉ Gीमती गीतांजली को के\ 9ीय खाU योगशाला म सू| मजीव वैािनक के पद पर

तारीख 6.10.2010 से अिधY ठायी Hप म िनयु3 त करते हz।

[सं. पी. 15025/54/2013-डीएफ3 यूसी]

राकेश एस. नयाल, अवर सिच व

MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE

(Department of Health and Family Welfare)

New Delhi, the 31st March, 2016

S.O.1171.—The President is pleased to appoint Dr. (Mrs.) Geetanjali substantively to the post of

Microbiologist, Central Food Laboratory w.e.f. 6.10.2010.

[No. P. 15025/54/2013-DFQC]

RAKESH S. NAYAL, Under Secy.

‘kqf)&i=

kqf)&i=

ubZ fnYyh] 2 ebZ] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 1172

1172

1172-&&bl foHkkx dh vf/klwpuk la- ;w- 12012@736@2015&,ebZ&I fnukad 15-12-2015 ds vuqØe esa

Hkkjrh; vk;qfoZKku ifj"kn~ vf/kfu;e] 1956 ¼1956 dk 102½ dh /kkjk 11 dh mi&/kkjk ¼2½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx

djrs gq,] dsUnz ljdkj] Hkkjrh; vk;qfoZKku ifj"kn~ ls ijke'kZ djds mDr vf/kfu;e dh izFke vuqlwph esa] fuEufyf[kr] vkSj

la'kks/ku djrh gS] vFkkZr~ %&&

mDr vuqlwph esa &&

¼d½ ^^MkW- ,uVhvkj LokLF; foKku fo'ofo|ky;] fot;okM+k] vka/kz izns'k** ds le{k ^iathdj.k ds fy, laf{kfIrdj.k*

dkWye ¼3½ “kh’kZd ds varxZr Mh- vkFkksZ ^ekU;rk izkIr vk;qfoZKku vgZrk gksxh tc ;g th,l,y esfMdy dkWyst

o tujy vLirky] y{ehiqje] jkteqanjh esa 2014 dh ctk, 2013 vFkok mlds i”pkr~ izf”kf{kr fd, x, Nk=ksa

dks MkW- ,uVhvkj LokLF; foKku fo'ofo|ky;] fot;okM+k] vka/kz izns'k }kjk çnÙk gksxh**A

^^MkW- ,uVhvkj LokLF; foKku fo'ofo|ky;] fot;okM+k] vka/kz izns'k** ds le{k ^iathdj.k ds fy, laf{kfIrdj.k*

dkWye ¼3½ “kh’kZd ds varxZr ,eMh ck;ksdsesLVªh ^ekU;rk izkIr vk;qfoZKku vgZrk gksxh tc ;g th,l,y esfMdy

dkWyst o tujy vLirky] y{ehiqje] jkteqanjh esa 2015 dh ctk, 2014 vFkok mlds i”pkr~ izf”kf{kr fd,

x, Nk=ksa dks MkW- ,uVhvkj LokLF; foKku fo'ofo|ky;] fot;okM+k] vka/kz izns'k }kjk çnÙk gksxh**A

¼r½ ^^,uvkbZ,e,l fo'ofo|ky;] ¼MhEM fo”ofo|ky;½ T;iqj] jktLFkku** ds le{k ^iathdj.k ds fy, laf{kfIrdj.k*

dkWye ¼3½ “kh’kZd ds varxZr ,eMh ¼Mhoh,y@peZ jksx ,oa ohMh½ ^ekU;rk izkIr vk;qfoZKku vgZrk gksxh tc ;g

jk’Vªh; vk;qfoZKku o vuqla/kku LkaLFkku] t;iqj] jktLFkku }kjk 2015 dh ctk, 2014 vFkok mlds i”pkr~

izf”kf{kr fd, x, Nk=ksa dks ,uvkbZ,e,l fo'ofo|ky;] ¼fo”ofo|ky;½ T;iqj] jktLFkku }kjk çnÙk gksxh**A

[la- ;w&12012@736@2015&,ebZ&I]

vfer fcLokl] la;qDr lfpo

CORRIGENDUM

New Delhi, the 2nd May, 2016

S.O. 1172.—In continuation to this Department’s Notification No. U-12012/736/2015-ME.I dated

15.12.2015, and 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, namely :—

2592

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

In the said Schedule—

(a)

against “Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijaywada, Andhra Pradesh” under the heading

‘Abbreviation for Registration’ (colunn 3), the D.Ortho qualification shall be recognised medical

qualification when granted by Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijaywada, Andhra Pradesh in

respect of students being trained at GSL Medical College & General Hospital, Lakshmipuram,

Rajahmundry on or after 2013 instead of 2014”.

Against Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijaywada, Andhra Pradesh” under the heading

‘Abbreviation for Registration’ (colunn 3), the qualification MD (Biochemistry) shall be recognized

medical qualification when grnated by Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijaywada, Andhra

Pradesh in respect of students being trained at GSL Medical College & General Hospital, Lakshmipuram,

Rajahmundry on or after 2014 instead of 2015”.

(p)

against “NIMS University (Deemed University) Jaipur, Rajasthan” under the heading ‘Abbreviation for

Registration’ (colunn 3), the qualification MD(DVL)/Skin & VD) shall be a recognized medical

qualification when grnated by NIMS University (Deemed University) Jaipur, Rajasthan in respect of

students being trained at National Institute of Medical Secences & Research, Jaipur, Rajasthan on or after

2014 instead of 2015”.

[No. 12012/736/2015-ME.I]

AMIT BISWAS, Under Secy.

isVª¨fy;e ,oa çkd`frd xSl ea=ky;

uÃ fnYyh] 26 ebZ] 2016

dkdkdkdk-vkvkvkvk- 1173

1173

1173-&&

&&isVª¨fy;e ,oa [kfut ikÃi ykbu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;¨xdrkZ ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e] 1962 ¼1962 dk 50½ dh /kkjk

2 ds [kaM ¼d½ ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh+; ljdkj] Hkkjr ds jkti= fnukad 28 vDrwcj] 2009 esa isVª¨fy;e ,oa çkd`frd xSl ea=ky; }kjk çdkf'kr

vf/klwpuk la- dk- vk- 2709¼v½ fnukad 27 vDVwcj] 2009 esa fuEufyf[kr #i ls la'k¨/ku djrh gS] vFkkZr %&

mD+r vf/klwpuk dh lkj.kh ds dkye ¼1½ esa] ^Jh ;q ds olkok* ds LFkku ij ^Jh ,l th xkfer* 'kCn j[ks tk,saxs A

v©j ;g fd] mD+r çdkf'kr vf/klwpuk rFkk Hkkjr ds jkti= fnukad 17 fnlEcj] 2014 esa çdkf'kr vf/klwpuk la- dk-vk- 3206¼v½

fnukad 18 fnlEcj] 2014 esa fofuZfn"V vf/kdkj ds {ks= l{ke çkf/kdkjh ds fy;s ogh gksaxs A

;g vf/klwpuk blds tkjh gksus dh rkjh[k ls ykxw gksxh A

[Qk- la- vks&12026@15@2014@vks,uth-III]

ds- ,e- flag] voj lfpo

MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS

New Delhi, the 26th May, 2016

S.O.1173.—In pursuance of Clause (a) of Section 2 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline (Acquisition of

Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby makes the following amendments in the

Notification No. 2709(E) dated 27th October, 2009 published by Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas in the Gazette

of India dated 28th October, 2009 namely:-

In the said Notification, in the table in Column (1), for the words “Shri U.K.Vasava”, the words “Shri

S.G.Gamit” shall be substituted.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2593

And whereas, the area of jurisdiction mentioned in the said published Notification as well as in the

Notification No. 3206(E) dated 17th December, 2014 published in the Gazette of India dated 18th December, 2014,

shall remain same for the Competent Authority.

This notification is applicable from the date of issue.

[F. No. O-12026/15/2014/ONG-III]

K. M. SINGH, Under Secy.

uohu vkSj uohdj.kh; ÅtkZ ea=ky;

ohu vkSj uohdj.kh; ÅtkZ ea=ky;

uÃ fnYyh] 6 twu] 2016

dkdkdkdk-vkvkvkvk- 1174

1174

1174-&&

&&jk”Vªh; iou ÅtkZ laLFkku] tks uohu vkSj uohdj.kh; ÅtkZ ea=ky; ds iz’kklfud fu;a=k.kk/khu ,d Lok;r laLFkku gS]

ds fu;eksa ,oa fofu;eksa ds fu;e 29 }kjk çnÙk vf/kdkjksa dk mi;ksx djrs gq, jk”Vªh; iou ÅtkZ laLFkku ds egkfuns’kd ds in gsrq HkrhZ

fu;ekoyh dh vuqlwph dh /kkjk 4 esa fuEufyf[kr la’kks/ku fd, tkrs gSa %

mD+r fu;ekoyh dh vuqlwph dh orZeku /kkjk 4 dh fuEufyf[kr }kjk izfrLFkkfir fd;k tkrk gS %

osrueku 37400&&67000 #- ds osru cSaM esa 10000 #- ds xzsM osru ds lkFkA rFkkfi ikap o”kks± dh fu;fer lsok iwjh dj ysus ds

i’pkr~ in/kkjh ds osreku dks fof/kor~ xfBr ih;j leh{kk lfefr dh flQkfj’kksa ds vk/kkj ij vxys mPprj xzsM esa mUur

fd;k tk ldrk gSA bl izdkj dk mUu;u in/kjh ds fy, O;fDrxr gksxk vkSj mlds dk;Z fu”iknu] dk;Zn{krk vkSj

dk;Zfu”Bk ds vfHkKku esa gksxkA

[Qk- la- 58@94@2015&MCY;wbZ]

ts- ds- tsBkuh] oSKkfud ^Mh*

MINISTRY OF NEW AND RENEWABLE ENERGY

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2016

S.O. 1174.—In exercise of powers conferred by Rule 29 of the Rules and Regulation of the National Institute

of Wind Energy, an autonomous institution under the administrative control of the Ministry of New & Renewable

Energy, the following amendment in the clause 4 of the Schedule of the Rules for Recruitment for the post of Director

General, Nationl Institute of Wind Energy is made :

The existing clause 4 of the Schedule of the said rules stands substituted by the following :

Scale

of Pay

In the Pay Band of Rs. 37400—67000 with Grade Pay fo Rs. 10000. However, on completion of five

years fo regular service the pay scale of the incumbent may e upgraded to the next higher grade based

on the recommendations of the duly constituted Peer Review Committee, Such upgradation shall be

personal to the incumbent and as a recognition of his performance, efficiency and dedication.

[F. No. 58/94/2015-WE]

J. K. JETHANI, Scientist ‘D’

2594

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

म

म और

और

और रोजगार

रोजगार

रोजगार मंालय

मंालय

नई दली, 30 मई, 2016

का

का.आ. 1175

1175

1175.----

----

----के\9ीय सरकार, कम0चारी राSय बीमा अिधिनयम, 1948 (1948 का 34) क धारा 91-क के

साथ प*ठत धारा 88 ारा द[ शि%य$ का योग करते Eए d`"kd Hkkjrh dksvkWijsfVo fyfeVsM ¼d`Hkdks½

d`"kd Hkkjrh dksvkWijsfVo fyfeVsM ¼d`Hkdks½

d`"kd Hkkjrh dksvkWijsfVo fyfeVsM ¼d`Hkdks½ के

कारखान$/थापना` के िनयिमत कम0चा*रय$ को इस अिधिनयम के वत0न से छूट दान करती है। यह छूट, 30.05.2016

से एक वष0 क अविध के िलए लागू रहेगी।

उ छूट िन&िलिखत शत) के अधीन है; अथात्:-

(1) पूव\ थापना िजसम" कमचारी िनयोिजत ह:, एक रिजटर रखेगी, िजसम" छूट 6ा7 कमचारय8 के

नाम और पदनाम दखाये जाय"गे;

(2)

इस छूट के होते Sए भी, कमचारी उ अिधिनयम के अधीन ऐसी 6सुिवधाएं 6ा7 करते रह"गे िजनको

पाने के िलए वे इस अिधसूचना ारा दी गई छूट के 6वृ] होने क तारीख से पूव संद] अंशदान8 के

आधार पर हकदार हो जाते ह:;

(3)

छूट 6ा7 अविध के िलए, यद कोई अिभदाय पहले ही कए जा चुके ह8, तो वे वापस नह3 कए

जाएंगे;

(4)

उ कारखाने/थापना का िनयोजक उस अविध क बाबत िजसके दौरान उस कारखाने/थापना पर

उ अिधिनयम (िजसे इसम" इसके प^ात उ अविध कहा गया है) 6वतमान था ऐसी िववरिणयां,

ऐसे 6ा;प म" और ऐसी िविशि_य8 सिहत देगा जो कमचारी रा`य बीमा (साधारण) िविनयम, 1950

के अधीन उसे उ अविध क बाबत देनी अपेि4त होती थ3;

(5)

िनगम ारा उ कमचारी रा`य बीमा अिधिनयम क धारा 45 क उप-धारा (1) के अधीन िनयु

कया गया कोई सामा िजक सुर4ा अ िधकारी या िनगम का इस िनिम] 6ािधकृत कोई अGय पदधारी;

(i) धारा 44 क उप-धारा (1) के अधीन, उ अविध क बाबत दी गई कसी िववरण क िविश_य8 को

सRयािपत करने के 6योजनाथ; अथवा

(ii) यह अिभिनि^त करने के 6योजनाथ क कमचारी रा`य बीमा (साधारण) िविनयम, 1950 ारा

यथाअपेि4त रिजटर और अिभलेख उ अविध के िलए रखे गये थे या नह3; या

(iii) यह अिभिनि}त करने के योजनाथ0 क कम0चारी, िनयोजक ारा दये गए उन फायद$ को, िजसके

फलवHप इस अिधसूचना के अधीन छूट दी जा रही है, नकद म और वतु Hप म पाने का हकदार बना Eआ

है या नहQ; या

(iv) यह अिभिनि^त करने के 6योजनाथ क उस अविध के दौरान, जब उ कारखाने के संबंध म"

अिधिनयम के उपबंध 6वृ] थे, ऐसे कGह3 उपबंध8 का अनुपालन कया गया था या नह3,

िन&िलिखत काय करने के िलए सश होगा:-

(क) 6धान या आसa िनयोजक से अपे4ा करना क वह उसे ऐसी जानकारी दे िजसे उपरो

िनरी4क या अGय पदधारी आवयक समझता है ; अथवा

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2595

(ख)

ऐसे 6धान या आसa िनयोजक के अिधभोगाधीन, कसी कारखाने, थापना, कायालय या

अGय परसर म" कसी भी उिचत समय पर 6वेश करना और उसके 6भारी से यह अपे4ा

करना क वह bिय8 के िनयोजन और मजदूरी के संदाय से संबंिधत ऐसे लेखा, बिहयां

और अGय दतावेज, ऐसे िनरी4क या अGय पदधारी के सम4 6तुत कर" और उनक परी4ा

करने द" या ऐसी जानकारी द" िजसे वे आवयक समझते ह:; या

(ग)

6धान या आसa िनयोजक क, उसके अिभकता या सेवक क, या ऐसे कसी bि को, जो

ऐसे कारखाने, थापना, कायालय या अGय परसर म" पाया जाए, यह िवcास करने का

युियु कारण है क वह कमचारी है, परी4ा करना; या

(घ)

ऐसे कारखाने, थापना, कायालय या अGय परसर म" रखे गए कसी रिजटर, लेखा, बही या

अGय दतावेज क नकल तैयार करना या उdरण लेना;

(ङ)

यथािनधारत अGय शिय8 का 6योग करना ।

िविनवेश/िनगमीकरण के मामले म", 6द] छूट वत: र हो जाएगी और तब नए 6ितeान को छूट हेतु

समुिचत सरकार क अनुमित लेनी होगी।

[सं. एस-38014/3/2014-एस.एस-I]

vt; efyd] अवर सिचव

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

New Delhi, the 30th May, 2016

S.O. 1175 .—In exercise of the power conferred by Section 88 read with Section 91-A of the Employees’ State

Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948) the Central Government hereby exempts the regular employees of

factories/establishments of Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd. (KRIBHCO) from the operation of the said Act. The

exemption shall be effective w.e.f. 30.05.2016 for a period of one year.

The above exemption is subject to the following conditions namely:-

(1)

The aforesaid establishments wherein the employees are employed shall maintain a register

showing the name and designations of the exempted employees’;

(2)

Not withstanding this exemption, the employees shall continue to receive such benefits

under the said Act to which they might have become entitled to on the basis of the contributions paid

prior to the date from which exemption granted by this notification operates;

(3)

The contributions for the exempted period, if already paid, shall not be refundable;

(4)

The employer of the said factory/establishment shall submit in respect of the period during

which that factory was subject to the operation of the said Act (hereinafter referred as the said

period), such returns in such forms and containing such particulars as were due from it in respect of

the said period under the Employees’ State Insurance (General) Regulations, 1950;

(5)

Any Social Security Officer appointed by the Corporation under Sub-Section (1) of Section 45 of the said ESI

Act or other official of the Corporation authorized in this behalf by it, shall, for the purpose of :-

(i)

Verifying the particulars contained in any returned submitted under sub-section (1) of

section 44 for the said period; or

(ii)

Ascertaining whether registers and records were maintained as required by the Employees’

State Insurance (General) Regulations, 1950 for the said period; or

2596

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(iii)

Ascertaining whether the employees continue to be entitled to benefits provided by the

employer in cash and kind being benefits in consideration of which exemption is being

granted under this notification; or

(iv)

Ascertaining whether any of the provisions of the Act had been complied with during the

period when such provisions were in force in relation to the said factory to be empowered

to:

(a)

require the principal or immediate employer to him such information as he may

consider necessary for the purpose of this Act; or

(b)

at any reasonable time enter any factory, establishment, office or other premises

occupied by such principal or immediate employer at any reasonable time and require

any person found in charge thereof to produce to such inspector or other official and

allow him to examine accounts, books and other documents relating to the

employment of personal and payment of wages or to furnish to him such information

as he may consider necessary; or

(c)

examine the principal or immediate employer, his agent or servant, or any person

found in such factory, establishment, office or other premises or any person whom the

said inspector or other official has reasonable cause to believe to have been an

employee ; or

(d)

make copies of or take extracts from any register, account book or other document

maintained in such factory, establishment, office or other premises,

(e)

exercise such other powers as may be prescribed.

(6)

In case of disinvestment/corporatization, the exemption granted shall become automatically cancelled

and then the new entity will have to approach the appropriate Government for exemption.

[No. S-38014/3/2014-SS-I]

AJAY MALIK, Under Secy.

ubZ fnYyh] 6 जून] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk-1176

1176

1176-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

FkSjkIiwfVDl dsfedy fjlpZ dkjiksjs”ku ds izca/kr= ds lac) fu;kstdks 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;&2] eqacbZ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh&2@

38 2013½ dks izdkf”kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-06-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42011@30@2013&vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

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

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2016

S.O.1176.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D Reference No. CGIT-2/38 of 2013) of the Central Government Industrial

Tribunal Cum Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the

employers in relation to the management of the Therapevtics Chemical Research Corporation and their workmen,

which was received by the Central Government on 06.06.2016.

[No. L-42011/30/2013-IR(DU)]

P. K.VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.2, MUMBAI

PRESENT : M.V. DESHPANDE, PRESIDING OFFICER

REFERENCE NO.CGIT-2/38 of 2013

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF M/s. THERAPEUTICS

CHEMICAL RESEARCH CORPORATION (TCRC)

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2597

M/s. Therapautics Chemical Research Corporation (TCRC)

Shiv Industrial Estate, 2nd& 3rd floor

K.V. Balmukund Marg

Chinchpokli (E)

Mumbai 400 004.

AND

THEIR WORKMEN.

The President

Goa Trade & Commercial Workers Union

Velho’s Building, 2nd floor

Opp. Municipal Garden

Panaji, Goa- 403 001.

APPEARANCES:

FOR THE EMPLOYER : Mr. Gurunath Naik, Advocate.

FOR THE UNION

No appearance.

Mumbai, dated the 1st April, 2016.

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment by its Order No.L-42011/30/2013-IR

(DU), dated 20.06.2013 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2 (A) of

Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for

adjudication:

“Whether refusal of employment to Shri Maruti Naik, Shri Manohar Kesarekar and Shri Yeshwant N. Naik

w.e.f. 17/10/2012 is legal and justified? What relief the workmen are entitled to?”

After receipt of the Order of Reference, both parties were served with notices. The matter was fixed for filing of

Statement of Claim by the Second party/ Union. Though second party union was served with notice, none appeared on

behalf of the union before this Tribunal. On 26/06/2015 fresh notice was issued to the Second party/union.

Acknowledgement receipt of the same is on record at Ex-9. However none appeared before this Tribunal on behalf of

the Second Party Union. The reference is pending since 2013 and matter was adjourned on several occasions for filing

of Statement of Claim by the Union. The second party union neither appeared before this Tribunal, nor filed their

Statement of Claim. In the circumstances, I think it proper to dispose of the Reference for want of prosecution. Thus

the order:

ORDER

Reference stands disposed offor want of prosecution.

Date: 01.04.2016

M. V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 6 जून] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk-1177

1177

1177-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ,MokaLM

lsaVj QkWj VªhVesaV fjlpZ ,aM ,tqds”ku ds izca/kr¡= ds lac) fu;kstdks 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;&2] eqacbZ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k

lhthvkbZVh&2@14 2012½ dks izdkf”kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-06-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42011@177@2011&vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

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

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2016

S.O.1177. —In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D Reference No.CGIT-2/14 of 2012) of the Central Government Industrial

Tribunal Cum Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the

employers in relation to the management of the Advanced Center for Treatment Research & Education and their

workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 06.06.2016.

[No. L-42011/177/2011-IR(DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

2598

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.2, MUMBAI

PRESENT

M.V. DESHPANDE

PRESIDING OFFICER

REFERENCE NO.CGIT-2/14 of 2012

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF

ADVANCED CENTRE FOR TREATMENT RESEARCH & EDUCATION IN CANCER

The Director

Advanced Centre for Treatment Research & Education in Cancer

Tata Memorial Centre

Kharghar

NaviMumbai 410208.

AND

THEIR WORKMEN

The General Secretary

KonkanShramikSangh

Neel Kant Apartment

(Nr. Dr. Bhadkamkar Hospital)

Khargar Lane

Mahagiri

Thane 400 601.

APPEARANCES:

FOR THE EMPLOYER : Mr. George Kurian, Advocate.

FOR THE UNION

: No appearance.

Mumbai, dated the 13thApril, 2016.

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment by its Order No. L-42011/177/2011-IR (DU),

dated 23.02.2012 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2 (A) of Section

10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

“Whether the demand of the Konkan Shramik Shramik Sangh for permanency and regularisation of Shri

Balaram M. Thakur and 94 other workmen as per Annexure A in the services of the establishment of Advanced Centre

for Treatment Research & Education in Canter (Tata Memorial Centre) Kharghar, Navi Mumbai is legal, just and

proper? What relief the workmen are entitled to?”

List of workmen

1. Shri Balaram M. Thakur.

2. Shri Shivaji K. Jadhav.

3. Shri Tolamad A. Shaikh.

4. Shri Bharat D. Mhatre.

5. Shri Aaslam A. Shaikh

6. Shri Ananta N. Bhoir.

7. Shri Dagdu R. Kesarkar.

8. Shri Lahu N. Bhoir.

9. Shri Pandurang N. Salunkhe.

10. Shri Noor H. Shaikh.

11. Shri Premshok N. Mhatre.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2599

12. Shri Ankush P. Bhoir.

13. Shri Prakash U. Morawakar.

14. Shri Baban B. Mhatre.

15. Shri Harishchandra K. Mhatre.

16. Shri Jaywant S. Kadu.

17. Shri Jagdish T. Bhoir.

18. Shri Nilesh S. Mhatre.

19. Shri Jitendra M. Bhoir.

20. Shri Sandip M. Suryawanshi.

21. Shri Tanaji S. Waidande.

22. Shri Subhash N. Shinde.

23. Shri Milind D. Revane.

24. Shri Laxman G. Jadhav.

25. Shri Jay Telvane.

26. Shri Ramesh N. Mhatre.

27. Shri Pandurang M. Mhatre.

28. Shri Sandip A. Thakur.

29. Shri Mubin M. Chaugule.

30. Shri Ram B. Mhatre.

31. Shri Santosh J. Gaikar.

32. Shri Gajanan J. Gaikar.

33. Shri Ramchandra B. Mhatre.

34. Shri Khalil Chaugule.

35. Shri Abhimanyu Mhatre.

36. Shri Ananta N. Mhatre.

37. Shri Sursh M. Kamble.

38. Shri Chandrakant B. Madhavi.

39. Shri Vinod R. Joshi.

40. Shri Rupesh H. Koli.

41. Shri Chandrakant R. Vaskar.

42. Shri Mansur A. Shaikh.

43. Shri Pradeep D. Gharat.

44. Shri Kum. Dharemendra B. Joshi.

45. Shri Ramesh J. Jadhav.

46. Smt. Hira D. Jadhav.

47. Shri Bhagwan P. Bhatose.

48. Shri Bhagwan M. Revane.

49. Shri Promod G. Baskar.

50. Shri Iftikar A. R. Patel.

51. Shri Imtihazz A. Shaikh.

52. Shri Gorakh S. Sonawane.

2600

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

53. Shri Shrad G. Mhatre.

54. Shri Nazir A. R. Patel.

55. Shri Ajay R. Bhoir.

56. Shri Pramod N. Mhatre.

57. Shri Sopan D. Bhoir.

58. Shri Sunil T. Bhoir.

59. Shri Eknath S. Bhoir.

60. Shri Dyaneshwar K. Gharat.

61. Shri Rupesh G. Joshi.

62. Shri Aarif S. Shaikh.

63. Shri Minabai R. Revane.

64. Smt. Surekhabai S. Jadhav.

65. Shri Vijay V. Jadhav.

66. Shri AansarShaikh A. Shaikh.

67. Shri Ravindra G. Katkari.

68. Shri Pramod S. Rupekar.

69. Shri Ankush S. Repekar.

70. Shri Ramdas K. Paradhi.

71. Shri Sahyardri S. Revane.

72. Shri Samad Shaikh.

73. Shri Uttam Mhatre.

74. Shri Ramesh More.

75. Shri E. Joshi.

76. Shri Chetan Patil.

77. Shri Arjun Patil.

78. Shri Javed Shaikh.

79. Shri Nitesh Joshi.

80. Shri Namdev D. Mhatre.

81. Shri Julpesh Patel.

82. Shri . Firoz Shaikh.

83. Shri Sachin D. More.

84. Mrs. Suman D. Revene.

85. Shri Dalvi.

86. Shri Harish J. Khandekar.

87. Shri Kiran A. Vasker.

88. Shri Sunil Suresh Waghmare.

89. Shri Dnyeshneshor K. Sawat.

90. Shri Joma Kashinath Pagade.

91. Shri Pradesh R. Vaskar.

92. Shri Rajesh S. Mhatre.

93. Shri Nitin T. Mhatre.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2601

94. Shri Vishwanth Patil.

95. Shri Abdul Ahamad Shaikh.

After receipt of the reference, both parties were served with notice. In response to the notice, Second party

union filed their Statement of Claim at Ex-4. The first party resisted the statement of claim by filing their Written

Statement vide Ex-5. Issues were framed at Ex-6. Thereafter matter was pending for recording evidence of second

party Union. Advocate for the second party Union filed application withdrawing his appearance on behalf of the union.

Thereafter the matter was adjourned on several occasions for filing of documents and affidavit by second party union.

Neither anybody appeared for second party union nor they filed any documents or led evidence to make out their case.

As the Second Party Union is not appearing in this Reference since July 2014 it seems they are not interested in

pursuing this Reference. Therefore, I think it proper to dispose of the Reference for want of prosecution. Accordingly

Orders passed on Ex-1.Thus the order:

ORDER

Reference stands dismissedfor want of prosecution.

Date: 13.04.2016

M.V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 6 जून] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk-1178

1178

1178-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

lqifjUVsUMsUV vkWQ iksLV vkWfQlsl dq#{ks= 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 ,oa Je U;k;ky;&2] p.Mhx<+ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ ,ylh, la-

22@2014½ dks izdkf”kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-06-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42025@03@2016&vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

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

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2016

S.O.1178.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D LCA No. 22/2014) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum

Labour Court No. 2, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the Superintendent of Post Officers Kurukshetra and their workman, which was received

by the Central Government on 06.06.2016.

[No. L-42025/03/2016-IR(DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,

CHANDIGARH

Present: Sri KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer

LCA No. 22/2014

Registered on 18.03.2015

Sh. Sat Parkash MTS

resident of Amargarh Colony

Karnal Road, Kaithal.

…Petitioner

Versus

The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices

Kurukshetra, Division

Kurukshetra.

…Respondent

APPEARANCES

For the workman

Sh. R.P. Mehra, Adv.

For the Management

Sh. Sanjeev Sharma, Adv.

2602

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Award

Passed on : 28.04.2016

Sh. Sat Parkash has filed this claim application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

(hereinafter called the ‘Act’); claiming Rs.34,500/- as severance allowance, on the averments that he was appointed as

Chowkidar w.e.f. 18.7.1989 and was promoted as MTS in May 2013 as per Court orders. That Chowkidars are ‘Gramin

Dak Sewak’ and being so he is entitled to severance allowance at the rate of Rs.1500/- per year which when calculated

come to Rs.34,500/- for the period of service he rendered. The same be calculated and paid to him.

Respondent-management filed written reply, controverting the averments and pleaded that the applicant was

appointed as part time Chowkidar and his services were regularized on the orders of Court passed in OA

No.655/HR/2013 vide order dated 02.05.2014 for regularization in MTS Cadre and his application was allowed vide

order dated 14.05.2013 with the direction to the respondent-management to consider the case of the workman and the

relevant portion of the order read as under:-

“Hence the respondent Department is directed to review the case of the applicant and to consider him for

being treated as full time casual labourer from the date any junior in the Division where applicant was working as part

time worker, has been considered as such full time casual labourer. If such junior has subsequently been regularized in

service, similar treatment may be afforded to the present applicant also. If the applicant is found entitled to

regularization as per this order, the benefit of pay fixation as a regular employee would only be allowed from the date

of filling of present O.A. i.e. from 21.01.2013. Consideration of the applicant’s case may be completed by the

respondent Department within a period of three months from the date of a certified copy of this order being served

upon the respondents.”

The services of the workman were regularized and arrears of pay, D.A. etc amounting to Rs.2,41,672/- for a

period of 14.05.2013 to 28.02.2015 have been paid to him. That he is not entitled to any severance allowance.

Parties were given opportunity to lead their evidence.

In support of his case, the workman Sat Parkash has appeared in the witness-box and filed his affidavit.

On the other hand, the respondent-management has examined Sh. I.C. Garg, who filed his affidavit, reiterating

the stand taken by the respondent-management.

I have heard Sh. R.P. Mehra for the workman and Sh. Sanjeev Sharma for the management.

It is the definite case of the respondent-management that the applicant was appointed as part time Chowkidar

and this fact was admitted by the applicant in his OA No.665/HR/2013(Annexure R2).

Thus, the applicant was appointed only as a part time Chowkidar and he was not a regular employee. He was

given the status of MTS when Court orders were passed. When he was working as a part time Chowkidar and was

given the status of MTS on Courts orders, it cannot be said that he was entitled to any severance allowance and when it

is so, he is not entitled to claim any amount on this account.

In result, this application of the workman is dismissed.

KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 6 जून] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk-1179

1179

1179-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj phQ

iksLV ekLVj tujy vkWfQl gfj;k.kk lfdZy ,aM vnlZ 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 ,oa Je U;k;ky;&2]p.Mhx<+ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ ,ylh, la-

301@2013½ dks izdkf”kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-06-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42025@03@2016&vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

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

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2016

S.O.1179.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D LCA No. 301/2013) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-Cum

-Labour Court No. 2, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the Chief Post Master General Haryana Circle and Others and their workman, which was

received by the Central Government on 06.06.2016.

[No. L-42025/03/2016-IR(DU)]

P. K.VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2603

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,

CHANDIGARH

Present: SRI KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer.

LCA No. 301/2013

Registered on 25.9.2013

Sh. Ran Vir Singh

S/o Sh. Dharam Singh,

House No. 297,

Sampla, Tehsil Sampla,

District Rohtak.

…Petitioner

Versus

1. The Chief Post Master General Haryana Circle Ambala.

2. The Superintendent of Post Offices Rohtak Division Rohtak.

3. The Senior Post Master Head Post Office Rohtak.

…Respondents

APPEARANCES

For the workman

: Sh. R.P. Mehra, Adv.

For the Management

: Sh. Sanjeev Sharma, Adv.

AWARD

Passed on : 26.04.2016

Sh. Ran Vir Singh, workman has filed this claim application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes

Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the ‘Act’); on the averments that he was appointed as Chowkidar on 15.4.1984 at Sampla.

His services were disengaged in July 2011 and he was reinstated recently. That he is entitled to ‘Bonus’ from the very

beginning which had been provided vide DG Posts letter No.26-1/93 PAP dated 16th March 1994.

That he perform his duty from 5 PM to 9AM and he is entitled to get ‘Bonus’ and the same be computed and

paid to him.

The respondent-management filed written reply controverting the averments and pleaded that the applicant

was never engaged by it and he worked only as a part time Chowkidar and paid out of contingency fund. That he is not

a ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’ and he is not entitled to get any ‘Bonus’

Parties were given opportunity to lead their evidence.

It is not seriously disputed that the workman was appointed as part time Chowkidar in the year 1984 and his

services were dispensed with in view of the letter dated 17.7.2011 (Annexure R1) vide which part time workers were

order not to be engaged and their services were disengaged. Thereafter, the workman was again engaged and his

services have been utilized by the management.

As per letter dated 19.9.2014 productivity linked Bonus for the year 2013-2014 was given to the employees

and the opening lines read as follow:-

“The undersigned is directed to convey the sanction of the President of India to the payment of Productivity

Linked Bonus for the accounting year 2013-2014 equivalent of emoluments of 60 (Sixty) Days to the

employees of Department of Posts in Group ‘D’/MTS, Group ‘C’ and non-gazetted Group ‘B’. Ex-Gratia

payment of bonus to Gramin Dak Sevaks who are regularly appointed after observing all appointment

formalities, and Ad-hoc payment of bonus to Casual Labourers who have been conferred Temporary Status

are also to be paid equivalent to allowances/wages respectively for 60 (sixty) Days for the same period.”

It is not disputed that the workman do not fall in the category of the employees mentioned in the said letter,

though he has been working with the department for the last long time. He was not conferred temporary status under

the ‘Casual Labourers’ (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme dated 7.9.1989.

2604

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

He cannot claim ‘Bonus’ simply on the averments that he has been working as part time Chowkidar who is not

a ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’ as defined under Section 3(d) of the Department of Posts, Gramin Dak Sewak (Conduct and

Engagement) Rules 2011 which read as follow:-

“(d) “Gramin Dak Sevak” means-

(i)

a Gramin Dak Sevak Branch Postmaster;

(ii)

a Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Deliverer;

(iii) a Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Carrier;

(iv) a Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Packer;

(iv) a Gramin Dak Sevak Stamp Vendor.”

Thus, the workman being not a ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’ and being not conferred the temporary status under the

relevant scheme, cannot claim any Bonus.

In result, this application is dismissed.

KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 6 twu] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk-1180

1180

1180-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj phQ

iksLV ekLVj tujy vkWfQl gfj;k.kk lfdZy ,aM vnlZ 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 ,oa Je U;k;ky;&2] p.Mhx<+ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ ,ylh,

la- 299@2013½ dks izdkf”kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-06-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42025@03@2016&vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

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

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2016

S.O. 1180.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D LCA No. 299/2013) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum

Labour Court No. 2, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the Chief Post Master General Haryana Circle and Others and their workman, which was

received by the Central Government on 06.06.2016.

[No. L-42025/03/2016-IR(DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,

CHANDIGARH

Present: Sri KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer.

LCA No. 299/2013

Registered on 25.09.2013

Sh. Sanjeev Kumar

S/o Sh. Wazir Chand,

House No. 32, Ward No.6,

Sweeper, Sub Post Office,

Pehowa, District Kurukshetra.

…Petitioner

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2605

Versus

1. The Chief Post Master General Haryana Circle Ambala.

2. The Superintendent of Post Offices Kurukshetra, Division Kurukshetra.

… Respondents

APPEARANCES

For the workman

: Sh. R.P. Mehra, Adv.

For the Management

: Sh. Sanjeev Sharma, Adv.

AWARD

Passed on : 25.4.2016

Sh. Sanjeev Kumar, has filed this claim application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act,

1947 (hereinafter called the ‘Act’), claiming bonus, on the averments that he was appointed as Sweeper on

compassionate ground in November 1996 and the post is like ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’ who are paid bonus. That he is

entitled to bonus in view of the letter dated 16^th March, 1994. That the amount be calculated and paid to him.

The respondent-management filed reply, controverting the averments and pleaded that the workman was

employed as part time Sweeper on contingency basis and he is not a ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’ and he is not entitled to any

‘Bonus’.

I have heard Sh. R. P. Mehra for the workman and Sh. Sanjeev Sharma for the management and perused the

file carefully.

It is the case of the workman himself that he has been working as part time Sweeper and being so, he cannot

claim himself to be a ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’.

‘Gramin Dak Sewak’ is defined under Section 3(d) of GDS (Conduct and Engagement) Rules 2011 which

read as follow:-

“(d) “Gramin Dak Sevak” means-

(i)

a Gramin Dak Sevak Branch Postmaster;

(ii)

a Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Deliverer;

(iii) a Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Carrier;

(iv) a Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Packer;

(v)

a Gramin Dak Sevak Stamp Vendor.”

In this definition, a part time Sweeper is not covered and as such workman cannot be said to be ‘Gramin Dak

Sewak’.

In the letter dated 19.09.2014 Productivity Linked Bonus was given to the employees and its opening lines

read as follow:-

“The undersigned is directed to convey the sanction of the President of India to the payment of Productivity

Linked Bonus for the accounting year 2013-2014 equivalent of emoluments of 60 (Sixty) Days to the

employees of Department of Posts in Group ‘D’/MTS, Group ‘C’ and non-gazetted Group ‘B’. Ex-Gratia

payment of bonus to Gramin Dak Sevaks who are regularly appointed after observing all appointment

formalities, and Ad-hoc payment of bonus to Casual Labourers who have been conferred Temporary Status

are also to be paid equivalent to allowances/wages respectively for 60 (sixty) Days for the same period.

The workman do not fall in any category of the employees mentioned in the said letter and he was not granted

temporary status under ‘Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularisation) Scheme dated 07.11.1989.

Thus, the workman neither fall within the definition of ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’ nor have been granted the

temporary status of ‘Casual Labourers’ and therefore, he is not entitled to any ‘Bonus’.

In the letter dated 16th March, 1994, as mentioned in the application, only guidelines have been given to

disburse the ‘Bonus’ to the eligible persons and the workman cannot drive any benefit out of this.

In result, the application of the workman is dismissed.

KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer

2606

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ubZ fnYyh] 6 twu] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk-1181

1181

1181-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj fefuLVªh

vkWQ dE;qfuds”ku ,aM vnlZ 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 ,oa Je U;k;ky;&2] p.Mhx<+ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ ,ylh, la- 288@2013½ dks izdkf”kr

djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-06-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42025@03@2016&vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

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

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2016

S.O.1181.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D LCA No. 288/2013) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-Cum-

Labour Court No. 2, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the Ministry of Communication and Others and their workman, which was received by

the Central Government on 06.06.2016.

[No. L-42025/03/2016-IR (DU)]

P. K.VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,

CHANDIGARH

Present: Sri KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer.

LCA No. 288/2013

Registered on 14.5.2013

Sh. Sat Pal Singh

S/o Sh. Ronak Ram Part Timer,

R/o Village Harigarh, Kingan

P.O. Cheeka, Tehsil Guhla,

District Kaithal.

… Petitioner

Versus

1. Through its Secretary Ministry of Communication Government of India, New Delhi.

2. The Chief Post Master General Haryana Circle Ambala.

3. The Superintendent of Post Offices Kurukshetra, Division Kurukshetra.

4. The Senior Post Master Head Post Office Kurukshetra.

…Respondents

APPEARANCES

For the workman

: Sh. R.P. Mehra, Adv.

For the Management

: Sh. Sanjeev Sharma, Adv.

AWARD

Passed on : 25.04.2016

Sh. Sat Pal Singh, has filed this claim application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

(hereinafter called the ‘Act’) claiming full time wages as Chowkidar; on the averments that he was appointed on

31.01.1998 as part time Chowkidar and he perform his duty from 5 PM to 9 AM. His services were disengaged in July,

2011. He again joined the duty and perform his duty for 12 hours in a day time. That Government has issued a Scheme

called ‘Casual Labourers’ (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme dated 7.9.1989 and he fulfill the

condition and he is entitled to temporary status and being so, he is entitled to wages as given to full time ‘Casual

Labourers’. Some of the employees filed application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh, which

were allowed and they were granted ‘Temporary Status’ as well as wages as full time employees. That he is also

entitled to wages as full time employee and the same be calculated and paid to him.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2607

The respondent-management admitted that the workman was appointed as part time Chowkidar and has been

continuing as such. He cannot claim parity with the employees who were employed on full time basis. That the case of

the other employees who filed application before the Central Administrative Tribunal has no relevancy.

In support of their respective case, parties filed their affidavits and even Sat Pal Singh, workman appeared in

the witness-box and supported his case.

I have heard Sh. R.P. Mehra for the workman and Sh. Sanjeev Sharma for the management and perused the

file.

It was vehemently argued by Sh. Mehra, counsel for the workman that similarly situated workmen were

granted temporary status under the ‘Casual Labourers’(Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization)Scheme dated

7.11.1989 and since the workman has been discharging the same function, he is entitled to the said status as well wages

as full time employees.

It is suffice to say that under Section 33(C)(2) of the Act, the Court can only compute the benefits in terms of

money which the workman is entitled to and this Court is not to declare first the status of the workman and then

calculate the amount. If the workman wants to get wages as full time employee, he is to approach to appropriate forum

for the ‘Grant of Temporary Status’ under the said Rules and this Court cannot grant him the wages by considering him

as full time employee as it is the case of the workman himself that he was appointed as part time Chowkidar, which is

also supported by the letter(Annexure R1).

Thus, there is no merit in this application and the same is dismissed.

KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 6 twu] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk-1182

1182

1182-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

lqifjUVsUMsUV vkWQ iksLV vkWfQlsl dq#{ks= 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 ,oa Je U;k;ky;&2]p.Mhx<+ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k ,ylh,

la- 23@2014½ dks izdkf”kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-06-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42025@03@2016&vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

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

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2016

S.O. 1182.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D LCA No. 23/2014) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum

Labour Court No. 2, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the Superintendent of Post Officers Kurukshetra and their workman, which was received

by the Central Government on 06.06.2016.

[No. L-42025/03/2016-IR(DU)]

P. K.VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,

CHANDIGARH

Present: Sri KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer.

LCA No.23/2014

Registered on 18.03.2015

Sh. Raj Kumar

S/o Sh. Roora Ram,

Village and Post Office Sarsa,

Tehsil Pehowa,

District Kurukshetra.

…Petitioner

2608

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Versus

The Senior Superintendent of

Post Offices Kurukshetra,

Division Kurukshetra.

… Respondent

APPEARANCES

For the workman

: Sh. R.P. Mehra, Adv.

For the Management

: Sh. Sanjeev Sharma, Adv.

AWARD

Passed on : 26.04.2016

Sh. Raj Kumar has filed this claim application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act,

1947(hereinafter called the ‘Act’); claiming Rs.40,500/- as severance allowance, on the averments that he was

appointed as Chowkidar on 24.12.1985 and was promoted as MTS on 21.01.2013 as per orders of the Court. That

Chowkidars are ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’ and severance allowance is to be given to ‘Gramin Dak Sewak at the rate of

Rs.1500/- per year and the applicant is entitled to Rs.40,500/- as severance allowance.

Respondent-management filed written reply, controverting the averments and pleaded that the workman was

part time Chowkidar w.e.f. 24.12.1985. He filed OA No.221/HR/2013 in Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh

for regularization in MTS Cadre and his application was allowed vide order dated 11.02.2014 with the direction to the

respondent-management to consider the case of the workman and the relevant portion of the order read as under:-

“Hence the respondent Department is directed to review the case of the applicant and to consider him for

being treated as full time casual labourer from the date any junior in the Division where applicant was working as part

time worker, has been considered as such full time casual labourer. If such junior has subsequently been regularized in

service, similar treatment may be afforded to the present applicant also. If the applicant is found entitled to

regularization as per this order, the benefit of pay fixation as a regular employee would only be allowed from the date

of filling of present O.A. i.e. from 21.01.2013. Consideration of the applicant’s case may be completed by the

respondent Department within a period of three months from the date of a certified copy of this order being served

upon the respondents.”

The services of the workman were regularized and arrears of pay, D.A. etc amounting to Rs.2,74,896/-for a

period of 21.01.2013 to 28.02.2015 have been paid to him.That he is not entitled to any severance allowance.

Parties were given opportunity to lead their evidence.

In support of his case, the workman Raj Kumar has appeared in the witness-box and filed his affidavit.

On the other hand, the respondent-management has examined Sh. I.C. Garg, who filed his affidavit, reiterating

the stand taken by the respondent-management.

I have heard Sh. R.P. Mehra for the workman and Sh. Sanjeev Sharma for the management.

It is the definite case of the respondent-management that the applicant was appointed as part time Chowkidar

and this fact was admitted by the applicant in his OA No.221/HR/2013(Annexure R2).

Thus, the applicant was appointed only as a part time Chowkidar and he was not a regular employee. He was

given the status of MTS when Court orders were passed. When he was working as a part time Chowkidar and was

given the status of MTS on Courts orders, it cannot be said that he was entitled to any severance allowance and when it

is so, he is not entitled to claim any amount on this account.

In result, this application of the workman is dismissed.

KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 6 twu] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 1183

1183

1183-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj phQ

iksLV ekLVj tujy vkWfQl gfj;k.kk lfdZy ,aM vknlZ 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 ,oa Je U;k;ky;&2]p.Mhx<+ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ ,y,lh

la- 291@2013½ dks izdkf”kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-06-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42025@03@2016&vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

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

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2609

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2016

S.O. 1183.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D LCA No. 291/2013) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-Cum-

Labour Court No. 2, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the Chief Post Master General Haryana Circle and Others and their workman, which was

received by the Central Government on 06.06.2016.

[No. L-42025/03/2016-IR(DU)]

P. K.VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,

CHANDIGARH

Present : Sri KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer.

LCA No. 291/2013

Registered on 14.5.2013

Sh. Sat Pal Singh

S/o Sh. Ronki Ram Part Time,

Village-Harigarh Kingan,

PO-Cheeka Guha,

District Kaithal.

…..Petitioner

Versus

1. The Chief Post Master General Haryana Circle Ambala.

2. The Superintendent of Post Offices Kurukshetra, Division Kurukshetra.

3. The Senior Post Master Head Post Office Kurukshetra.

…..Respondents

APPEARANCES

For the workman

: Sh. R.P. Mehra, Adv.

For the Management

: Sh. Sanjeev Sharma, Adv.

AWARD

Passed on : 26.04.2016

Sh. Sat Pal Singh, workman has filed this claim application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes

Act, 1947(hereinafter called the ‘Act’); on the averments that he was appointed as Chowkidar on 31.1.1998 and the

Chowkidars falls in the category of ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’. That he is entitled to ‘Bonus’ from the very beginning of the

service as per letter dated 16.3.1994 which is as follow:-

1. “23-DA/Bonus/other claims to ED Agents to be made without delay-instances have come to the notice that

Payment of DA/Bonus and other claims to ED Agents are not being made promptly and quite often being

delayed considerably. This has been viewed seriously by the directorate. I am therefore directed to request

you to issue necessary instructions to all concerned in future and when orders for AD/Bonus etc are issued

by the Directorate, the payment are made promptly to ED Agents.

2. Chairman Postal Service Board has also decided that special watch may be kept on the payment being made

to ED Agents and Head of Circles should ensure that there is no delay on this score.

3. To ensure that payments are not delayed in the circles, all heads of circles etc are requested to furnish a note

in this regard in their monthly reports for atleast six months following the month of issue of orders for

Payment of Bonus/DA etc confirming that the needful has been done in their circles vide A-2.”

He perform his duties from 5 PM to 9AM and he is entitled to get ‘Bonus’ as given by the Government.

2610

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Respondent-management filed written reply controverting the averments and pleaded that the workman was

appointed as part time Chowkidar and he is not entitled to claim any amount by way of ‘Bonus’. That he was not

engaged by following any procedure and he did not fall within the definition of ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’.

Parties were given opportunity to lead their evidence.

Sh. Sat Pal Singh, workman has appeared in the witness-box and filed his affidavit supporting his case as set

out in the claim statement.

On the other hand respondent-management did not lead any evidence.

I, have heard Sh. R.P. Mehra for the workman and Sh. Sanjeev Sharma for the management and perused the

file.

It was argued by Sh. R.P. Mehra, counsel for the workman that Chowkidar being ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’ are

entitled to ‘Bonus’. The learned counsel for the management did not show any rules and regulations making provisions

for payment of ‘Bonus’ despite being asked verbally several times.

However a letter dated 1.10.2010 is placed on the record vide which productivity linked bonus was given to

the employees of Group ‘D’, Group ‘C’, non-gazetted Group ‘B’ and casual labourers but it is the case of the applicant

himself that he joined the department as part time Chowkidar and he states so while appearing in the witness-box. He

also placed on record a copy of the appointment letter(Annexure A-1), showing that he was appointed as a part time

Chowkidar. Thus, he was not a regular employee of the respondent-management and when it was so, he is not entitled

to any payment by way of ‘Bonus’ in the absence of the rules and regulations in this respect.

Being so, it is held that the applicant is not entitled to get any payment by way of ‘Bonus’ and his application

is dismissed.

KEWEL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 6 twu] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 1184

1184

1184-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj phQ

iksLV ekLVj tujy vkWfQl gfj;k.kk lfdZy ,aM vknlZ 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 ,oa Je U;k;ky;&2] p.Mhx<+ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ ,ylh,

la- 292@2013½ dks izdkf”kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-06-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42025@03@2016&vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

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

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2016

S.O. 1184.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D LCA No. 292/2013) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-Cum-

Labour Court No. 2, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the Chief Post Master General Haryana Circle and Others and their workman, which was

received by the Central Government on 06.06.2016.

[No. L-42025/03/2016-IR(DU)]

P. K.VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,

CHANDIGARH

Present: SRI KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer.

LCA No. 292/2013

Registered on 14.5.2013

Sh. Sat Parkash

S/o Sh. Jai Bhagwan Part Timer,

House No. 34, Ward No.13,

Gali No. 5, Amargarh Gamri Karnal,

District Kaithal.

…..Petitioner

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2611

Versus

1. The Chief Post Master General Haryana Circle Ambala.

2. The Superintendent of Post Offices Kurukshetra, Division Kurukshetra.

3. The Senior Post Master Head Post Office Kurukshetra.

….Respondents

APPEARANCES

For the workman

: Sh. R.P. Mehra, Adv.

For the Management

: Sh. Sanjeev Sharma, Adv.

AWARD

Passed on : 26.04.2016

Sh. Sat Parkash, has filed this claim application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act,

1947(hereinafter called the ‘Act’); on the averments that he was appointed as Chowkidar on 18.7.1989 and falls in the

category of ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’ and he is entitled to ‘Bonus’ in view of the letter dated 16.3.1994 by the management.

That he perform his duties from 5 PM to 9AM and the amount of ‘Bonus’ be calculated and paid to him.

Respondent-management filed written reply controverting the averments and pleaded that the workman was

engaged as part time Chowkidar on purely temporary basis and he being not regular employee, he is not entitled to any

‘Bonus’.

In support of his case, the workman filed his affidavit.

I have heard Sh. R.P. Mehra for the workman and Sh. Sanjeev Sharma for the management and perused the

file.

As per letter dated 17.7.1989(Annexure R1), the workman was appointed as part time Chowkidar.

Now the question is whether part time Chowkidar are ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’ and they are entitled to get the

bonus. ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’ is defined under Section 3(d) of the GDS(Conduct and Engagement)Rules 2011which

read as follow:-

“(d) “Gramin Dak Sevak” means-

(i) a Gramin Dak Sevak Branch Postmaster;

(ii) a Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Deliverer;

(iii) a Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Carrier;

(iv) a Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Packer;

(v) a Gramin Dak Sevak Stamp Vendor.”

Thus, its bare perusal shows that part time Chowkidars are not ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’.

A letter dated 19.9.2014 which is placed on file show that productivity linked bonus was given to the

employees for the year 2013-2014 and its opening lines read as follow:-

“The undersigned is directed to convey the sanction of the President of India to the payment of Productivity

Linked Bonus for the accounting year 2013-2014 equivalent of emoluments of 60(Sixty)Days to the employees of

Department of Posts in Group ‘D’/MTS, Group ‘C’ and non-gazetted Group ‘B’. Ex-Gratia payment of bonus to

Gramin Dak Sevaks who are regularly appointed after observing all appointment formalities, and Ad-hoc payment of

bonus to Casual Labourers who have been conferred Temporary Status are also to be paid equivalent to

allowances/wages respectively for 60(sixty)Days for the same period.”

2612

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

The workman do not fall in any of the post mentioned in the said letter and he has not been granted the

temporary status under the ‘Casual Labourers’(Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization)Scheme dated 7.11.1989.

In these circumstances, the workman is not entitled to claim any amount by way of ‘Bonus’.

KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 6 twu] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 1185

1185

1185-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj phQ

iksLV lqifjUVsUMsUV vkWQ iksLV vkWfQl dq#{ks= 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 ,oa Je U;k;ky;&2]p.Mhx<+ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ ,ylh,

la- 13@2015½ dks izdkf”kr djrh g]S tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-06-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42025@03@2016&vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

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

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2016

S.O. 1185.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D LCA No. 13/2015) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-Cum-

Labour Court No. 2, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the Superintendentof Post Offices Kurukshetra and their workman, which was received

by the Central Government on 06.06.2016.

[No. L-42025/03/2016-IR(DU)]

P. K.VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,

CHANDIGARH

Present: Sri KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer.

LCA No.13/2015

Registered on 8.5.2015

Sh. Surender Kumar

S/o Sh. Parash Ram,

Resident of Village and Post Office Pehowa,

Tehsil Pehowa, District Kurukshetra.

…Petitioner

Versus

The Superintendent of Post Offices Kurukshetra,

Division Kurukshetra.

…Respondent

APPEARANCES

For the workman

: Sh. R.P. Mehra, Adv.

For the Management

: Sh. Sanjeev Sharma, Adv.

AWARD

Passed on : 25.04.2016

Sh. Surender Kumar, has filed this claim application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act,

1947(hereinafter called the ‘Act’), claiming Rs.95,850/- as leave encashment; on the averments that he was appointed

as EDA/GDS on 08.10.1980 and after 33 years of service, he was selected as MTS. That as per letter dated 14.05.2007,

industrial workers are entitled to accumulation of earned leave which can be encashed to the extent of 10 months pay.

That he is entitled to the amount by way of leave encashment along with the interest.

Respondent-management filed written reply, pleading that the letter dated 14.05.2007 has no relevancy and as

per Rule 7 of the ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’(Conduct and Engagement)Rules 2011, the employee is only entitled to 20 paid

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2613

leaves which cannot be accumulated and as such, the workman is not entitled to any amount by way of leave

encashment.

Surender Kumar, workman appeared in the witness-box and filed his affidavit.

I have heard. Sh. R.P. Mehra for the workman and Sh. Sanjeev Sharma for the management and perused the

file carefully.

Sh. R.P. Mehra, counsel for the workman has referred to letter dated 14.05.2007 to contend that the workman

is entitled to leave encashment. This letter appears in All India Service Law Journal XI 2007 and it read as follow:-

“The undersigned is directed to refer to Department of Personnel and Training O.M. No.14028/2/2003-

Estt.(L), dated 7.11.2006,(Published in SLJ of June, 2006 as Sl. No.34) forwarded vide MOD OM of even number

dated 13.11.2006 on the above subject. It is clarified that the accumulation and encashment limit of earned leave is

raised to 300 days from 120 days in respect of industrial employees’ w.e.f. 7.11.2006. That is, as industrial employee

who is already having 120 days of earned leave as on 1.1.2006 is eligible to get a credit of the leave earned by him/her

during the year 2006, subject to a ceiling of 30 days, on 1.1.2007. Thus the total earned leave at his/her credit can

become 120+30=150 days as on 1.1.2007 in case he/she has earned the maximum of 30 days of E.L. during 2006.”

Its bare perusal shows that leave encashment was enhanced from 120 days to 300 days and it was not provided

that it can be got at any time of the service.

The workman himself claimed to be a ‘Gramin Dak Sewak’ and being so, he is governed by the ‘Gramin Dak

Sewak’(Conduct and Regularization)Rules 2011 and Rule 7deals with the leave and it read as follow:-

“The Sevaks may be granted paid leave at the rate of 20 days in a year without accumulation or as may be

determined by the Government, from time to time:

Provided that-

(a) Where a Sevak falls to resume duty on the expiry of the maximum period of leave admissible and granted to

him, or

(b) Where such a Sevak who is granted leave for a period less than the maximum period admissible to him under

these rules, remains absent from duty for any period which together with the leave granted exceeds the limit

up to which he could have been granted such leave.”

He shall unless the Government, in view of the exceptional circumstances of the case, otherwise decides, be

removed from service after following the procedure laid down in Rule 10.

Thus, this rule provides that a Sewak can be granted paid leave of 20 days in a year without accumulation.

This rule do not provide for any leave encashment and only gives the liberty to the employee to avail paid leave for 20

days in a year which cannot be accumulated. In view of this specific rule which is applicable to the service of the

workman, he is not entitled to any amount by way of leave encashment;and the letter dated 14.05.2007 reproduced

above, has no application to the present case.

In result, this application of the workman is dismissed.

KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 6 twu] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 1186

1186

1186-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj phQ

iksLV ekLVj tujy vkWfQl gfj;k.kk lfdZy ,aM lqifjUVsUMsV vkWQ vkfQlsl dq:{ks= 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 ,oa Je

U;k;ky;&2]p.Mhx<+ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ ,ylh, la- 297@2013½ dks izdkf”kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-06-2016 dks

izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42025@03@2016&vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

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

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2016

S.O. 1186.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D LCA No. 297/2013) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-Cum-

Labour Court No. 2, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the Chief Post Master General Haryana Circle and Superintendent of Post Offices

Kurukshetra and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 06.06.2016.

[No. L-42025/03/2016-IR(DU)]

P. K.VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

2614

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,

CHANDIGARH

Present: Sri KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer.

LCA No.297/2013

Registered on 25.9.2013

Sh. Sewa Ram alias Sewa Singh Sweeper,

Office of the Superintendent of Post Offices,

Kurukshetra, Division Kurukshetra.

...Petitioner

Versus

The Chief Post Master General Office Haryana Circle Ambala.

The Superintendent of Post Offices Kurukshetra, Division Kurukshetra.

…Respondents

APPEARANCES

For the workman

: Sh. R.P. Mehra, Adv.

For the Management

: Sh. Sanjeev Sharma, Adv.

AWARD

Passed on : 26.04.2016

Sh. Sewa Singh has filed this claim application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act,

1947(hereinafter called the ‘Act’); on the averments that he was appointed as Sweeper about six or seven years ago by

the respondents. He is entitled to ‘bonus’ and the Government has already issued an instruction vide letter dated

16.03.1994 to disburse the bonus immediately. That the workman was not paid bonus by the department.

Respondent-management filed written reply controverting the averments and even denied that claimant was

appointed as Sweeper and he is not entitled to receive any payment on account of ‘Bonus’.

In support of his case, respondent-management has examined Sh. Ishwar Chan, who filed his affidavit

reiterating the stand of respondent-management. However the workman did not lead any evidence.

I have heard Sh. R.P. Mehra for the workman and Sh. Sanjeev Sharma for the management and perused the

file.

It may be added at the outset that despite being asked about the relevant rules and regulations relating to

‘Bonus’ verbally, counsel for the respondent-management did not produce the same. However, it may be submitted that

‘Bonus’ is determined from year to year by the department by issuing separate letters. Such letter dated

01.10.2010(Annexure R-I) has been placed on the file. Vide this letter, ‘Bonus’ was payable to the employees of

Group-‘D’, Group-‘C’ and non-gazetted Group-‘B’ employees as well to casual labourers who have been

given“temporary status”. According to the workman, he was appointed as Sweeper by the respondent-management and

this fact is denied by the respondent-management in his written statement. The workman did not lead any evidence to

prove this fact that he was given regular employment by the respondent-management and therefore, he cannot claim

any amount by way of ‘Bonus’, which is applicable only to the above such employees. Though, the respondent-

management has denied the relationship but Sh. Ishwar Chand while appearing in the witness-box, has admitted that

workman is a contingency paid employee and not a regular employee. The workman was engaged for some days to

perform the work of Sweeper and paid out of contingency fund and he could not claim parity with the regular

employees; and as such, he is not entitled to claim any ‘Bonus’.

In the above circumstances, there is no merit in the case and it is dismissed.

KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2615

ubZ fnYyh] 6 twu] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 1187

1187

1187-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

lqifjUVsUMasV vkWQ iksLV vkfQlsl dq:{ks= 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 ,oa Je U;k;ky;&2] p.Mhx<+ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ ,ylh, la-

14@2015½ dks izdkf”kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-06-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42025@03@2016&vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

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

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2016

S.O. 1187.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D LCA No. 14/2015) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-Cum-

Labour Court No. 2, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the Superintendentof Post Offices Kurukshetra and their workman, which was received

by the Central Government on 06.06.2016.

[No. L-42025/03/2016-IR(DU)]

P. K.VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,

CHANDIGARH

Present: Sri KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer.

LCA No.14/2015

Registered on 8.5.2015

Sh. Surender Singh

S/o Sh. Parash Ram

R/o Village and Post Office Pehowa,

Tehsil Pehowa,

District Kurukshetra.

…Petitioner

Versus

The Superintendent of Post Offices Kurukshetra,

Division Kurukshetra.

…Respondent

APPEARANCES

For the workman

: Sh. R.P. Mehra, Adv.

For the Management

: Sh. Sanjeev Sharma, Adv.

AWARD

Passed on : 26.04.2016

Sh. Surender Kumar has filed this application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act,

1947(hereinafter called the ‘Act’); pleading that he was appointed as Gramin Dak Sewak on 08.10.1980 and after 33

years of service, he was selected as MTS in September 2013. That as per rules and regulations of the respondent-

management, he is not entitled to any gratuity or leave encashment. That this Court can grant the gratuity under the 3rd

Schedule of the Act. He has claimed Rs.2,09,856/- by way of gratuity.

Respondent-management filed written reply, pleading that the services of the workman comes under the

purview of Postal Gramin Dak Sewak(Conduct and Engagement)Rules 2011; whereby the gratuity is payable only on

the termination of the service of the employee. The services of the workman were never terminated and on his

promotion, he was paid severance allowance of Rs.48,000/- and he was not entitled to any amount by way of gratuity.

In support of his case, Sh. Surender Kumar, workman appeared in the witness-box and filed his affidavit

supporting his case as set out in the claim statement.

On the other hand, the management did not lead any evidence.

It was contended by Sh. R.P. Mehra that the workman served for 33 years as E.D.A. and he was not paid any

gratuity for the service rendered by him and therefore, he is entitled to payment of gratuity. It may be added that the

2616

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

workman has been claiming gratuity under Section 7(4) of the Payment of Gratuity Act and Section ‘3’ of the Act

envisages that the provisions of the Act will be administered by the Controlling Authority and it read as follow:-

“Controlling Authority-The appropriate Government may, by notification, appoint any officer to be a

controlling authority, who shall be responsible for the administration of this Act and different controlling authorities

may be appointed for different areas.”

Section 14 of the Act makes the provisions of the Act as mandatory and it read as follow:-

Act to override other enactments, etc-The provisions of this Act or any rule made thereunder shall have effect

notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any enactment other than this Act or in any instrument or

contract having effect by virtue of any enactment other than this Act.”

Thus, in view of the provisions of the payment of Gratuity Act, question involved is to be decided by the ‘Controlling

Authority’ appointed under the Act and this Court cannot consider the controversy raised by the workman.

In result the application of the workman is dismissed.

KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 6 twu] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 1188

1188

1188-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

,u,pihlh ,aM vnlZ 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 ,oa Je U;k;ky;&2]p.Mhx<+ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la- 242@2012½ dks izdkf”kr djrh gS]

tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-06-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42012@149@2011&vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

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

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2016

S.O. 1188.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D No. 242/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-Cum-

Labour Court No. 2, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the NHPC and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on

06.06.2016.

[No. L-42012/149/2011-IR(DU)]

P. K. VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,

CHANDIGARH

Present: Sri KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer.

Case No. I.D. No. 242/2012

Registered on 27.07.2012

Sh. Tej Singh,

S/o Sh. Maya Ram,

R/o Village Kuther,

P.O. Chachyout, Att (Gohar),

District Mandi(HP).

…Petitioner

Versus

4. The General Manager,

NHPC, 2nd Stage,

VPO Nagwain, Sub-Tehsil Aut,

Distt. Mandi(HP).

5. The Director Himachal,

Joint Venture, Parbati,

HE Project, Lot PB-2,

Thela (Bhunter),

Tehsil and Distt. Kullu(HP).

…Respondents

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2617

APPEARANCES

For the workman

: Sh. Manoj Dhiman, Adv.

For the Management

: Sh. V.K. Gupta for Resp. No.1.

Smt. Hem Lata for Resp. No.2

AWARD

Passed on : 05.04.2016

Vide Order No.L-42012/149/2011-IR(DU), dated 06.07.2012 the Central Government in exercise of the

powers conferred by Clause (d) of Sub-Section (1) and Sub-Section 2(A) of Section 10 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

(in short Act) has referred the following industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal.

“Whether the demand of Sh. Tej Singh S/o Sh. Maya Ram, Vill. Kuther, PO Chailchowk, Tehsil Chachiot,

Distt. Mandi(HP) against the management of Himachal Pradesh Joint Venture Parbati HE Project, Thela Distt.

Kullu(HP) in retrenching the services w.e.f. 18/10/2010 is just valid and legal? If so, what relief to the workman is

entitled for and what directions are necessary in the matter?”

In response to the notice, the workman appeared and submitted statement of claim, pleading that respondent

No.1 was constructing Dam and engaged respondent No.2 as contractor for the execution of the work at the project.

That respondent No.2 appointed the workman as Driver w.e.f. 5.3.2003 and last paid salary was of Rs.16,000/- per

month.

It is pleaded that respondent No.2 retrenched the services of the workman on 18.10.2010 without service of

any notice or payment of compensation. It is further pleaded that signatures of some of the employees were taken on

blank paper and the fact of ‘lay off’ was not brought to the notice of the workman or of respondent No.1. That

respondent No.1 and 2 has engaged numerous workers from other contracts for the execution work at the site. Since the

workman was retrenched illegally, he be reinstated in service.

Respondent No.1 filed written statement and pleaded that it has given a contract for the “Construction of Civil

and Hydro-mechenical work of Head Race Tunnel and Associated Works of Parbati HE Project to respondent No.2.

Workman was engaged by respondent No.2. That the workman was not retrenched on 18.10.2010. It is pleaded that

HJV Workers Union(CITU) and management of respondent No.2 entered into negotiations and settled the matter

amicably on 14.7.2011 and agreed to make payments to the workers and the last day of work was considered as

30.04.2011. It did not engage any other worker at the site.

Respondent No.2 filed separate written statement, stating that the workman was engaged as Driver at Adit-I

site and work was completed in September, 2010 and further pleaded that a settlement was affected between the

Workers Union and the management and 192 workers out of total 196 workers were paid retrenchment benefits except

the present workmen. That the services of the workmen were retrenched in view of the settlement dated 26.6.2011.

Parties were given opportunity to lead its evidence.

Sh, Tej Singh, workman appeared in the witness-box and filed his affidavit, reiterating the stand as taken in

his statement of claim.

On the other hand, respondent No.2 has examined Sh. Vinay Walia, who filed his affidavit supporting the case

of respondent No.2.

I have heard Sh. R.S. Dhiman for the workman, Sh. V.K. Gupta for Resp. No.1 and Smt. Hem Lata for Resp.

No.2 and perused the file carefully.

The admitted facts are that respondent No.1 had given a contract to respondent No.2 for Construction of Civil

and Hydro-mechenical work and it was respondent No.2 who engaged the workman as Driver on 5.3.2003. Though the

workman has pleaded that his services were ‘retrenched’ on 18.10.2010, but in the affidavit, he has given the date of his

retrenchment as 30.6.2011. Therefore, it is to be taken that his services were disengaged on 30.6.2011. A memorandum

of settlement dated 26.6.2011(Annexure R-1) has been placed on file vide which settlement was affected between the

management of respondent No.2 and workers union and it was agreed to pay the salary and allowances to the workmen.

Again a chart has been placed on file showing that a sum of Rs.98,989/- was payable to the workman.

2618

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 18, 2016/ JYAISTHA 28, 1938 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Though, the workman has admitted that there was Union of workers but it is not proved that he was a member

of the CITU with whom the settlement was affected.

As per Section 18 of the Act, settlements arrived at between the employer and the workmen are binding on the

parties. In the present case, the settlement was affected between the Office Bearers of the CITU and the management

and, as stated above, nothing has come on the file that workman was a member of the said Workers Union and

therefore, the said settlement is not binding on the workman.

Again, as per settlement dated 26.6.2011(Annexure R-1), the settled amount was to be disbursed within six

months. There is nothing on the file that the amount was ever offered to the workman during this period and in the

circumstances, the settlement if any affected, came to an end and is not binding on the workman as per Section 19 of

the Act, which inter alia provides that the settlement shall be binding for such period as is agreed upon, and if no such

period is agreed upon, for a period of six months. Therefore, respondent No.2 cannot drive any benefit from the

settlement dated 26.6.2011 (Annexure R-1). Thus, the workman was retrenched without service of notice or payment of

retrenchment compensation. Therefore, the retrenchment of the workman is not legal.

There is no denial of the fact that the workman was appointed as a Driver on 5.3.2003 and his services were

‘retrenched’ on 30.6.2011, as deposed by him in his affidavit. Thus, he worked for a period of more than 8 years. As

per the Section 25-F of the Act, the workman who is to be retrenched, is to be given one month notice in writing or be

paid wages for the period of notice and is also to be paid compensation equivalent to 15 days for average pay for every

completed year of continuous service. The workman has pleaded that he was getting a salary of Rs.16,000/- per month

but did not produce any document to prove his exact salary. Since the work of respondent No.2 has been stopped,

workman is to be paid compensation only and considering the totality of the circumstances and by doing some guess

work, he is found entitled to a compensation of Rs.3 lacks which he shall recover from the respondents jointly and

severely as respondent No.1 was admittedly the Principal employer.

In result, it is held that the retrenchment of the workman was illegal and he is entitled to get a sum of Rs.3

lacks from the respondents jointly and severely. If respondent No.1 pay the amount, he is at liberty to recover the same

from respondent No.2. The amount of compensation be paid within 3 months of the publication of award failing which

the workman shall be entitled to get interest @ 9% per annum on the awarded amount from the date of the award till

realization.

KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 6 twu] 2016

dk-vk

vkvk

vk- 1189

1189

1189-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

,u,pihlh ,aM vnlZ 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 ,oa Je U;k;ky;&2]p.Mhx<+ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la- 240@2012½ dks izdkf”kr djrh gS]

tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-06-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&42012@150@2011&vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]

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

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2016

S.O. 1189.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (I.D No. 240/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-Cum-

Labour Court No. 2, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in

relation to the management of the NHPC and Others their workman, which was received by the Central Government on

06.06.2016.

[No. L-42012/150/2011-IR(DU)]

P. K.VENUGOPAL, Desk Officer

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % twu 18] 2016@T;s"B 28] 1938

2619

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,

CHANDIGARH

Present: Sri KEWAL KRISHAN, Presiding Officer

Case No. I.D. No.240/2012

Registered on 10.4.2012

Sh. Chaman Lal-II,

S/o Sh. Durga Dass,

R/o Village Chakgohar,

P.O. Bhagroty, Tehsil Sadar,

District Mandi (HP).

…Petitioner

Versus

The General Manager, NHPC,

2nd Stage, VPO Nagwain,

Sub-Tehsil Aut,

Distt. Mandi(HP).

The Director Himachal, Joint Venture,

Parbati, HE Project, Lot PB-2,

Thela (Bhunter),

Tehsil and Distt.

Kullu (HP).

…Respondents

APPEARANCES

For the workman

: Sh. Manoj Dhiman, Adv.

For the Management

: Sh. V.K. Gupta for Resp. No.1.

Smt. Hem Lata for Resp. No. 2

AWARD

Passed on : 05.04.2016

Vide Order No.L-42012/150/2011-IR(DU), dated 14.03.2012 the Central Government in exercise of the

powers conferred by Clause (d) of Sub-section (1) and Sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

(in short Act) has referred the following industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal.

“Whether the demand of Sh. Chaman Lal S/o Sh. Durga Dass, Mandi(HP) against the management of

Himachal Pradesh Joint Venture Parbati HE Project, Thela Distt. Kullu(HP) in retrenching the services w.e.f.

18.10.2010 is legal & just? What relief the workman is entitled to?”

In response to the notice, the workman appeared and submitted statement of claim, pleading that respondent

No.1 was constructing Dam and engaged respondent No.2 as contractor for the execution of the work at the project.

That respondent No.2 appointed the workman as Driver w.e.f. 23.6.2003 and last paid salary was of Rs.16,000/- per