5695 GI/2016

(5687)

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- 52]

ubZ fnYyh] fnlEcj 18—fnlEcj 24] 2016] 'kfuokj@vxzgk;.k 27— ikS"k 3] 1938

No. 52]

NEW DELHI, DECEMBER 18—DECEMBER 24, 2016, SATURDAY/AGRAHAYANA 27—PAUSA 3, 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)

कामक

कामक, , , , लोक िशकायत तथा पशन मंालय

लोक िशकायत तथा पशन मंालय

(कामक और िशण िवभाग)

नई द ली, 25 नव बर, 2016

का

का.आ. 2426

2426

2426.—क सरकार, द ली िवशेष पुिलस थापन अिधिनयम, 1946 (1946 का अिधिनयम सं. 25) क

धारा 6 के साथ पठत धारा 5 क उप धारा (1) "ारा #द$ त शि%य' का #योग करते *ए कना,टक रा. य सरकार, के सरकारी

आदेश सं. एचडी 278 सीआईडी 2014, बंगलोर दनांक 22.01.2016 के मा2 यम से #ा3 त सहमित से मा5 डया शहरी

िवकास #ािधकरण "ारा 107 8े साइट' के अवैध आव5 टन और लॉटरी प?ित "ारा साइट' के आव5 टन से संबंध म वे ट

पुिलस टेशन, िजला मा5 डया म दज, अपराध सं. 184/2014 क जांच करने के िलए द ली िवशेष पुिलस थापन के सद य'

क शि%य' और CेDािधकार का िव तार समत कना,टक रा. य म करती है।

[फा.सं. 228/33/2016–एवीडी. II]

एस. पी. आर. िDपाठी, अवर सिच व

5688 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS

(Department of Personnel and Training)

New Delhi, the 25th November, 2016

S.O. 2426.—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 Karnataka vide Government order No. HD 278 CID 2014, Bangalore dated 22.01.2016 hereby

extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State

of Karnataka for investigation of the case in crime No.184/2014 of West police Station, Mandya District, Mandya,

Which pertains to illegal allotment of 107 stray sites and allotment of sites by lottery system by Mandya Urban

Development Authority.

[F.No. 228/33/2016-AVD-II]

S. P. R. TRIPATHI, Under Secy.

उपभो ता

उपभो ता मामले

मामले

मामले, , , , खा और सावजिनक िवतरण मंालय

खा और सावजिनक िवतरण मंालय

(उपभो ता

उपभो ता

उपभो ता मामले िवभाग

मामले िवभाग

मामले िवभाग)

(भारतीय मानक यू

भारतीय मानक यू

भारतीय मानक यूरो

रोरो

रो)

नई द ली, 15 दस बर, 2016

का

का.आ. . . . 2427

2427

2427.—भारतीय मानक यूरो (माणन) िविनयम 1988 के िविनयम (4) के उपिविनयम (5) के अनुसरण म भारतीय

मानक यूरो एतदारा अिधसूिचत करता है क िजन लाइसस% के िववरण नीचे अनुसूची म दए गए ह(, वे ) वीकृत कर दए गए ह(:-

अनुसूची

म

सं या

लाइसस सं या

वीकृत करने

क ितिथ

लाइससधारी का नाम

व पा

भारतीय मानक का शीषक

भा मा

भाग

अनु

वष

एल-

9512353221

02.06.2016

मै0 एस आर इलै !ॉिन स,

आदश नगर इ% ड !ीयल ए'रया,

मलेरना रोड, ब) लभगढ़,

िजला फरीदाबाद – 121004,

ह'रयाणा

िबजली के पानी गरम करने

के भंडारण -क म के िथर

हीटर

2082

1993

एल-

9512353019

08.06.2016

मै0 एल एस केब) स .ा0 िल0,

/ लॉट नं0 28-31, सै टर – 5,

फेस – II, जी सी बावल,

बावल,

िजला 'रवाड़ी – 123501,

ह'रयाणा

पोलीिवनाइल लोराइड से

िवधुत रोिधत अनाव'रत

और आव'रत केबल

694

2010

एल-

9512353120

10.06.2016

मै0 सांई टाइ) स,

खसरा नं0 122/105,

राधा वामी सतसंग के सामने,

सूया नगर,

बहादुरगढ़,

िजला झ: जर – 124507,

ह'रयाणा

खड़ंजे के िलए

पूव

ढिलत कंट < लॉक

15658

2006

एल-

9512353322

13.06.2016

मै0 एचआईएल िल0,

अमदलशाहपुर ग=व अकेरी

मदनपुर,

माटनहेल तहसील,

िजला झ: जर – 124146,

ह'रयाणा

कंट िचनाई इकाइयां

भाग 3: ऑटो लेवड

से) लूलर (वातयु त) कंट

< लॉक

2185

1984

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5689

एल-

9512354417

16.06.2016

मै0 कबीर लBड .ा0 िल0,

बीपीओ सुD दीपुर, जEद रोड,

िजला रोहतक - 124001,

ह'रयाणा

खड़ंजे के िलए

पूव

ढिलत कंट < लॉक

15658

2006

एल-

9512353415

17.06.2016

मै0 अF फा गो) ड बैवरेिजस,

.ा0 िल0,

हाउस नं0 198, गली नं0 03,

बसई इD कलेव,

िजला गुड़ग=व - 122001,

ह'रयाणा

पैकेजबD द पेय जल

(पैकेजबD द .ाकृितक

िमनरल जल के अलावा)

14543

2004

एल-

9512353516

17.06.2016

मै0 इि%डयन ओरिचड िमनर) स,

62/4, डीएवी कूल के पास,

कुशलीपुर,

िजला पलवल – 121102,

ह'रयाणा

पैकेजबD द पेय जल

(पैकेजबD द .ाकृितक

िमनरल जल के अलावा)

14543

2004

एल-

9512353718

22.06.2016

मै0 ह'रयाणा : वैलस,

मेन सोहना रोड, बादशाहपुर,

िजला गुड़ग=व - 122101,

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

एल-

9512353819

22.06.2016

मै0 कैम’स : वैलस,

गुड़ बाजार,

िजला 'रवाड़ी – 123401,

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

10.

एल-

9512353920

22.06.2016

मै0 लL मी : वैलस,

7121-22, D यू सराफा बाज़ार,

बारा हज़ारी रोड,

िजला 'रवाड़ी – 123401,

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

11.

एल-

9512354122

22.06.2016

मै0 िशव शिM मैD यूफै चNरग

!ेडस,

गू: जर -फOलग टेशन के पास,

'रिध िसिध बBकट हॉल,

मेन िभवानी रोड,

कलानौर,

िजला रोहतक – 124113,

ह'रयाणा

खड़ंजे के िलए

पूव ढिलत कंट

< लॉक

15658

2006

12.

एल-

9512354215

22.06.2016

मै0 लL मी : वैलस,

7121-22, D यू सराफा बाज़ार,

बाराहज़ारी रोड,

िजला 'रवाड़ी – 123401,

ह'रयाणा

च=दी एवं च=दी िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

2112

2014

13.

एल-

9512353617

24.06.2016

मै0 जैन जवैलस,

बजाजा बाज़ार,

बारा हज़ारी रोड,

िजला 'रवाड़ी – 123401,

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

5690 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

14.

एल-

9512354021

24.06.2016

मै0 गणपित जवैलस,

रेलवे रोड,

िजला रोहतक – 124001,

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

15.

एल-

9512354316

24.06.2016

मै0 िग'रराज : वैलस,

शॉप नं0 1, लाल कपड़ा माPकट,

रेलवे रोड,

िजला रोहतक – 124001,

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

16.

एल-

9512354518

29.06.2016

मै0 वालस टै नोलाजीस .ा0

िल0,

खसरा नं0 116/23/2,

ग=व खतावली,

नज़दीक धाSहेड़ा इ% ड !ीयल

ए'रया,

धाSहेरा,

िजला 'रवाड़ी – 123106,

ह'रयाणा

पानी क आपुTत के िलए

उV च घनX व वाले

पॉलीईिथलीन पाइप

4984

1995

17.

एल-

9512354619

30.06.2016

मै0 महालL मी : वैलस,

शॉप नं0 171, माPकट नं0 1,

एन आई टी,

िजला फरीदाबाद – 121001,

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

18.

एल-

9512354720

30.06.2016

मै0 महालL मी : वैलस,

शॉप नं0 171, माPकट नं0 1,

एन आई टी,

िजला फरीदाबाद – 121001,

ह'रयाणा

च=दी एवं च=दी िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

2112

2014

[सं. सीएमडी-13:11]

सुनील कुमार, वै,ािनक एफ एवं मुख

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

(BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS)

New Delhi, the 15th December, 2016

S.O. 2427.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (5) of the regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards

(Certification) Regulations 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of

which are given in the following schedule :

SCHEDULE

Sl.

No.

Licences No.

CM/L-

Grant Date

Name & Address of the

Licensee

Title of the Standard

IS No.

Part

Sec.

Year

L-

9512353221

02.06.2016

M/s. S.R. Electronics,

Adarsh Nagar Industrial Area,

Malerna Road, Ballabgarh,

Distt. Faridabad – 121004,

Haryana

Stationary Storage Type

Electric Water Heaters

2082

1993

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5691

L-

9512353019

08.06.2016

M/s. L.S. Cables India Pvt. Ltd.,

Plot No. 28-31, Sector – 5,

Phase – II, GC Bawal,

Bawal,

Distt. Rewari - 123501,

Haryana

PVC Insulated Cables for

Working Voltage upto and

including 1100 V

694

2010

L-

9512353120

10.06.2016

M/s. Sai Tiles,

Khasra No.122/105,

Opp. Radha Swami Satsang,

Surya Nagar,

Bahadurgarh,

Distt. Jhajjar – 124507,

Haryana

Precast Concrete Blocks

for Paving

15658

2006

L-

9512353322

13.06.2016

M/s. HIL Limited,

Amdalshapur, Village Akeri

Madanpur, Matanhail Tehsil,

Distt. Jhajjar – 124146,

Haryana

Concrete Masonry Units

Part 3 Autoclaved Cellular

(Aerated) Concrete Blocks

2185

1984

L-

9512354417

16.06.2016

M/s. Kabir Land Pvt. Ltd.,

VPO-Sunderpur, Jind Road,

Distt. Rohtak - 124001,

Haryana

Precast Concrete Blocks

for Paving

15658

2006

L-

9512353415

17.06.2016

M/s. Agfa Gold Beverages

Pvt. Ltd.,

House No.198, Street No. 03,

Basai Enclave,

Distt. Gurgaon - 122001,

Haryana

Packaged Drinking Water

(Other Than Natural

Mineral Water)

14543

2004

L-

9512353516

17.06.2016

M/s. Indian Orchid Minerals,

62/4, Near DAV School,

Kushlipur,

Distt. Palwal – 121102,

Haryana

Packaged Drinking Water

(Other Than Natural

Mineral Water)

14543

2004

L-

9512353718

22.06.2016

M/s. Haryana Jewellers,

Main Sohna Road, Badshahpur,

Distt. Gurgaon -122101,

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

L-

9512353819

22.06.2016

M/s. KAM’s Jewellers,

Gur Bazar,

Distt. Rewari – 123401,

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

10.

L-

9512353920

22.06.2016

M/s. Laxmi Jewellers,

7121-22, New Sarafa Bazar,

Bara hazari Road,

Distt. Rewari – 123401,

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

11.

L-

9512354122

22.06.2016

M/s. Shiv Shakti Manufacturing

Traders,

Near Gujjar Filling Station,

Ridhi Sidhi Banquet Hall,

Main Bhiwani Road, Kalanaur,

Kalanarou

Distt. Rohtak – 124113,

Haryana

Precast Concrete Blocks

for Paving

15658

2006

12.

L-

9512354215

22.06.2016

M/s. Laxmi Jewellers,

7121-22, New Sarapha Bazar,

Bara hazari Road,

Distt. Rewari – 123401,

Haryana

Silver and Silver Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts –

Fineness and Marking

2112

2014

5692 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

13.

L-

9512353617

24.06.2016

M/s. Jain Jewellers,

Bajaja Bazar,

Bara Hazari Road,

Distt. Rewari – 123401,

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

14.

L-

9512354021

24.06.2016

M/s. Ganpati Jewellers,

Railway Road,

Distt. Rohtak – 124001,

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

15.

L-

9512354316

24.06.2016

M/s. Giriraj Jewellers,

Shop No. 1, Lal Cloth Market,

Railway Road,

Distt. Rohtak – 124001,

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

16.

L-

9512354518

29.06.2016

M/s. Valens Technologies

Pvt. Ltd.,

Khasra No. 116/23/2,

Village Khatawali,

Near Dharuhera Industrial Area,

Dharuhera

Distt. Rewari – 123106,

Haryana

High Density Polyethylene

Pipes for Water Supplies

4984

1995

17.

L-

9512354619

30.06.2016

M/s. Mahalaxmi Jewellers,

Shop No. 171, Market No. 1,

N.I,T,

Distt. Faridabad – 121001,

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

18.

L-

9512354720

30.06.2016

M/s. Mahalaxmi Jewellers,

Shop No. 171, Market No. 1,

N.I,T,

Distt. Faridabad – 121001,

Haryana

Silver and Silver Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts –

Fineness and Marking

2112

2014

[No. CMD/13:11]

SUNIL KUMAR, Scientist F & Head

नई द ली, 15 दस बर, 2016

का

का.आ. 2428

2428

2428.—भारतीय मानक यूरो (माणन) िविनयम 1988 के िविनयम (5) के उपिविनयम (6) के अनुसरण म

भारतीय मानक यूरो एतदारा अिधसूिचत करता है क िन न िववरण वाले लाइसस% को उनके आगे दशा3यी गई तारीख से र4/) थिगत

कर दया गया है/:-

अनुसूची

7म

लाइसस सं8 या

लाइससधारी का नाम व प:ा

लाइसस के अ; तग3त व) तु/7म

र4 करने क< ितिथ

सं8 या

सीएम/एल

स ब= भारतीय मानक का शीष3क

-------------शू; य-----------

[सं. सीएमडी-13:13]

सुनील कुमार, वै,ािनक एफ एवं मुख

New Delhi, the 15th December, 2016

S.O. 2428.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (6) of the regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards

(Certification) Regulations 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies that the licences particulars of

which are given below have been cancelled/suspended with effect from the date indicated against each:

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5693

SCHEDULE

Sl.

Licences

Name & Address

Article/Process with relevant

Date of Cancellation

No.

No. CM/L-

of the Licensee

Indian Standards covered by

the licence cancelled/suspension

----------NIL----------

[No. CMD/13:13]

SUNIL KUMAR, Scientist F & Head

नई द ली, 15 दस बर, 2016

का

का.आ. . . . 2429

2429

2429.—भारतीय मानक यूरो (माणन) िविनयम 1988 के िविनयम (4) के उपिविनयम (5) के अनुसरण म भारतीय

अनुसूची

म

सं या

लाइसस सं या

वीकृत करने

क ितिथ

लाइससधारी का नाम

व पा

भारतीय मानक का शीषक

भा मा

भाग

अनु

वष

एल-

9512354821

04.07.2016

मै0 सुपर : वैलस,

शॉप नं0 9, माPकट नं0 1,

एन आई टी,

िजला फरीदाबाद – 121001,

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

एल-

9512355015

04.07.2016

मै0 आरएसएस : वैलस,

बूरा बाज़ार,

िजला 'रवाड़ी – 123401

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

एल-

9512355116

04.07.2016

मै0 वधमान : वैलस,

गुड़ बाज़ार,

िजला 'रवाड़ी,

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

एल-

9512355217

04.07.2016

मै0 सुनील : वैलस,

7121,बारा हज़ारी रोड,

िजला 'रवाड़ी – 123401,

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

एल-

9512355318

04.07.2016

मै0 िन/ पी : वैलस,

स< जी म% डी के पास,

आय समाज मिDदर के पास,

िजला 'रवाड़ी – 123401,

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

एल-

9512355419

04.07.2016

मै0 मु% डी वाले -कशन लाल

सोनी,

िजवाली बाजार,

िजला 'रवाड़ी – 123401,

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

एल-

9512355621

05.07.2016

मै0 जय िशवम इ% ड !ीस,

-द) ली रोहतक बाय पास रोड,

चरखी दादरी,

िजला िभवानी,

ह'रयाणा

पूवढिलत कंट मैनहोल के

ढ कन व Zेम

12592

2002

5694 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

एल-

9512354922

06.07.2016

मै0 सुपर : वैलस,

शॉप नं0 9, माPकट नं0 1,

एन आई टी,

िजला फरीदाबाद – 121001,

ह'रयाणा

च=दी एवं च=दी िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

2112

2014

एल-

9512355520

06.07.2016

मै0 कृ[ णा इ% ड !ीस,

वी 19ए, \ाउंड फलोर,

रेड ास रोड, एमआईई, भाग बी,

बहादुरगढ़,

िजला झ: जर – 124507,

ह'रयाणा

िनम: जनीय प] पसेट

8034

2002

10.

एल -

9512355924

12.07.2016

मै0 एस जी कD !ोल ए% ड

िवच िगयर,

/ लॉट नं0 82, उ^योग िवहार,

फेस – IV,

िजला गुड़ग=व – 122001,

ह'रयाणा

घरेलू एवं समान .योजन_

के िलए अविश[ ट करंट

चािलत सPकट िवयोजन

(आरसीसीबीएस)

भाग 1: सामाD य िनयम

12640

2008

11.

एल -

9512356017

12.07.2016

मै0 रायडर इि%डया .ा0 िल0,

/ लॉट नं0 352, सै टर – 17,

फुटिवयर पाक , एचएसआईडीसी,

बहादुरगढ़,

िजला रोहतक – 124507,

ह'रयाणा

िनजी सुर`ा उप कर

भाग 3: सुर`ा फुटिवयर

15298

2011

12.

एल -

9512356118

12.07.2016

मै0 िशव शिM फाइबर उbोग,

यूिनट II, -कला नं0 71/8/1/1,

ग=व हसनगढ़, तहसील सांपला,

िजला रोहतक – 124404,

ह'रयाणा

तापदृढ़ पोिलए टर रेिजन

(क=च रेशा) .बिनत से

बनाई गई पारभाषी च^दर

12866

1989

13.

एल -

9512355722

13.07.2016

मै0 पी डी म) होdा ए% ड सD स

: वैलस .ा0 िल0,

बारा बाज़ार, सोहना चौक,

कृ[ णा पैलेस के सामने,

िजला गुड़ग=व – 122001,

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

14.

एल -

9512355823

13.07.2016

मै0 पी डी म) होdा ए% ड सD स

: वैलस .ा0 िल0,

बारा बाज़ार, सोहना चौक,

कृ[ णा पैलेस के सामने,

िजला गुड़ग=व – 122001,

ह'रयाणा

च=दी एवं च=दी िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

2112

2014

15.

एल -

9512356219

18.07.2016

मै0 रिव : वैलस,

सराफा बाज़ार,

िजला महैD eगढ़,

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

16.

एल -

9512356320

18.07.2016

मै0 रिव : वैलस,

सराफा बाज़ार,

िजला महैD eगढ़,

ह'रयाणा

च=दी एवं च=दी िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

2112

2014

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5695

17.

एल -

9512356421

19.07.2016

मै0 संगम : वैलस,

िभवानी टै% ड,

नागपाल होटल के पास,

रेलवे रोड,

िजला रोहतक,

ह'रयाणा

वण एवं वण िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

1417

1999

18.

एल -

9512356522

19.07.2016

मै0 संगम : वैलस,

िभवानी टै% ड,

नागपाल होटल के पास,

रेलवे रोड,

िजला रोहतक,

ह'रयाणा

च=दी एवं च=दी िमIधातु

आभूषण/िश) प व तुK –

महीनता एवं मुहरांकन

2112

2014

19.

एल -

9512356623

20.07.2016

मै0 केपी एfेिसवस (.ा0) िल0,

गली नं0 8, (डब) यू),

सSरपुर इ% ड !ीयल ए'रया,

सोहना रोड के पास,

िजला फरीदाबाद – 121005,

ह'रयाणा

eिवत पै!ोिलयम गैस (e पै

गै) िमIण के उपयोग के

िलए अ) पदाब रेF यूलेटर

9798

2013

20.

एल -

9512356724

27.07.2016

मै0 संत टील इD जीिनयस,

/ लॉट नं0 50, आई ई 9 कुटाना,

एचएसआईआईडीसी,

बहादुरगढ़,

िजला रोहतक – 124001,

ह'रयाणा

अिg होज़ .दाय युगमन

शाखा पाईप नोज़ल और

नोज़ल पाने क िविश[ टी

903

1993

[सं. सीएमडी-13:11]

सुनील कुमार, वै,ािनक एफ एवं मुख

New Delhi, the 15th December, 2016

S.O. 2429.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (5) of the regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards

(Certification) Regulations 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of

which are given in the following schedule :

SCHEDULE

Sl.

No.

Licences

No.

CM/L-

Grant Date

Name & Address of the Licensee

Title of the Standard

No.

Part

Sec.

Year

L-

9512354821

04.07.2016

M/s. Super Jewellers,

Shop No. 9, Market No. 1,

N.I.T.,

Distt. Faridabad – 121001,

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

L-

9512355015

04.07.2016

M/s. RSS Jewellers,

Boora Bazar,

Distt. Rewari – 123401

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

L-

9512355116

04.07.2016

M/s. Vardhman Jewellers,

Gur Bazar,

Distt. Rewari,

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

L-

9512355217

04.07.2016

M/s. Sunil Jewellers,

7121, Bara Hazari Road,

Distt. Rewari – 123401,

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

5696 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

L-

9512355318

04.07.2016

M/s. Nippi Jewellers,

Near Sabzi Mandi,

Near Arya Samaj Mandir,

Distt. Rewari – 123401,

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

L-

9512355419

04.07.2016

M/s. Mundi Wale Kishan Lal

Soni,

Jiwali Bazar,

Distt. Rewari – 123401,

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

L-

9512355621

05.07.2016

M/s. Jai Shivam Industries,

Delhi Rohtak Bye Pass Road,

Charkhi Dadri,

Distt. Bhiwani,

Haryana

Precast Concrete Manhole

Covers & Frames

12592

2002

L-

9512354922

06.07.2016

M/s. Super Jewellers,

Shop No. 9, Market No. 1,

N.I.T.,

Distt. Faridabad – 121001,

Haryana

Silver and Silver Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

2112

2014

L-

9512355520

06.07.2016

M/s. Krishna Industries,

V 19A, Ground Floor,

Red Cross Road, MIE, Part B,

Bahadurgarh,

Distt. Jhajjar – 124507,

Haryana

Submersible Pumpset

8034

2002

10.

L-

9512355924

12.07.2016

M/s. S.G. Control & Switchgear,

Plot No. 82, Udyog Vihar,

Phase – IV,

Distt. Gurgaon – 122001,

Haryana

Residual Current Operated

Circuit-Breakers Without

Integral Over-current

Protection for Household

and Similar Uses (RCCBs)

Part 1: General Rules

12640

2008

11.

L-

9512356017

12.07.2016

M/s. Ryder India Pvt. Ltd.,

Plot No. 352, Sector – 17,

Footwear Park, HSIDC,

Bahadurgarh,

Distt. Rohtak – 124507,

Haryana

Personal Protective

Equipment

Part 3: Protective

Footwear

15298

2011

12.

L-

9512356118

12.07.2016

M/s. Shiv Shakti Fibre Udyog,

Unit II, Kila No. 71/8/1/1,

Village Hasangarh, Tehsil

Sampla,

Distt. Rohtak – 124404,

Haryana

Plastic Translucent Sheets

Made From Thermo-

Setting Polyester Resin

(Glass Fibre Reinforced)

12866

1989

13.

L-

9512355722

13.07.2016

M/s. P.D. Malhotra & Sons

Jewellers Pvt. Ltd.,

Bara Bazar, Sohna Chowk,

Opp. Krishna Palace,

Distt. Gurgaon – 122001,

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

14.

L-

9512355823

13.07.2016

M/s. P.D. Malhotra & Sons

Jewellers Pvt. Ltd.,

Bara Bazar, Sohna Chowk,

Opp. Krishna Palace,

Distt. Gurgaon – 122001,

Haryana

Silver and Silver Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

2112

2014

15.

L-

9512356219

18.07.2016

M/s. Ravi Jewellers,

Sarafa Bazar,

Distt. Mahendragarh,

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

16.

L -

9512356320

18.07.2016

M/s. Ravi Jewellers,

Sarafa Bazar,

Distt. Mahendragarh,

Silver and Silver Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

2112

2014

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5697

Haryana

17.

L-

9512356421

19.07.2016

M/s. Sangam Jewellers,

Bhiwani Stand,

Near Nagpal Hotal,

Railway Road,

Distt. Rohtak,

Haryana

Gold and Gold Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts -

Fineness and Marking

1417

1999

18.

L-

9512356522

19.07.2016

M/s. Sangam Jewellers,

Bhiwani Stand,

Near Nagpal Hotal,

Railway Road,

Distt. Rohtak,

Haryana

Silver and Silver Alloys

Jewellery/Artefacts –

Fineness and Marking

2112

2014

19.

L-

9512356623

20.07.2016

M/s. K.P. Abrasives (P) Ltd.,

Street No. 8, (W),

Saroorpur Industrial Area,

Near Sohna Road,

Distt. Faridabad – 121005,

Haryana

Low Pressure Regulators

for use with Liquefied

Petroleum Gases

9798

2013

20.

L-

9512356724

27.07.2016

M/s. Sant Steel Engineers,

Plot No. 50, I.E. 9 Kutana,

HSIIDC, Hissar Road,

Distt. Rohtak – 124001,

Haryana

Fire Hose Delivery

Couplings, Branch Pipe,

Nozzles

903

1993

[No. CMD/13:11]

SUNIL KUMAR, Scientist F & Head

नई द ली, 15 दस बर, 2016

का

का.आ. 2430

2430

2430.— भारतीय मानक यूरो (माणन) िविनयम 1988 के िविनयम (5) के उपिविनयम (6) के अनुसरण म

कर दया गया है/:-

अनुसूची

7म

लाइसस सं8 या

लाइससधारी का नाम व प:ा

लाइसस के अ; तग3त व) तु/7म

र4 करने क< ितिथ

सं8 या

सीएम/एल

स ब= भारतीय मानक का शीष3क

-------------शू; य-----------

[सं. सीएमडी-13:13]

सुनील कुमार, वै,ािनक एफ एवं मुख

New Delhi, the 15th December, 2016

S.O. 2430.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (6) of the regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards

(Certification) Regulations 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies that the licences particulars of

which are given below have been cancelled/suspended with effect from the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

Sl.

Licences

Name & Address

Article/Process with relevant

Date of Cancellation

No.

No. CM/L-

of the Licensee

Indian Standards covered by

the licence cancelled/suspension

----------NIL----------

[No. CMD/13:13]

SUNIL KUMAR, Scientist F & Head

5698 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Je ,oa jkstxkj ea=kky;

ubZ fnYyh] 13 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2431-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj xsy ds

çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] vgenkckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 664@2004) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 13-12-2016 dks

çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&30012@117@1998&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- ds- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

New Delhi, the 13th December, 2016

S.O. 2431.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 664/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Ahmedabad now as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s..

GAIL and their workman, received by the Central Government on 13.12.2016.

[No. L-30012/117/1998-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

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

AHMEDABAD

Present :

Pramod Kumar Chaturvedi,

Presiding Officer, CGIT-cum-Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated 16^th September 2016

Reference: (CGITA) No. 664/2004

The General Manager,

Gas Authority of India Limited,

Darpan B., R.C. Datt Road,

Baroda

…First Party

V/s.

Shri Arvindbhai Chotebhai Palaar,

BiyaranVarudhi Kendra,

Kampur Farm,

Post Sewasi, Baroda

…Second Party

For the First Party

Shri B. K. Oza

For the Second Party

None

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-30012/117/98-

IR(C-I) dated 30.03.1999 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) in

respect of the matter specified in the Schedule:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the demand of Shri Arvindbhai Chotebhai Palaar that he is the direct employee of Gas Authority of

India, is right and is it legal not to regular his services by Tekhedar Manager? If no, what relief the concerned

workman is entitled to?”

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5699

The reference dates back to 30.03.1999.The second party submitted the statement of claim Ext. 5 on 17.02.2000

and the first party filed the written statement Ext. 7 on 19.12.2000. Since then both the parties are absent and second

party workman and his advocate have not been appearing for prosecution and cross-examination. Thus it appears that

second party is not willing to prosecute the case.

Thus the reference is decided as not pressed.

P. K. CHATURVEDI, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 13 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2432-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj xsy ds

çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] vgenkckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 661@2004) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 13-12-2016 dks

çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&30012@115@1998&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- ds- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 13th December, 2016

S.O. 2432.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 661/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Ahmedabad now as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s..

GAIL and their workman, received by the Central Government on 13.12.2016.

[No. L-30012/115/1998-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

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

AHMEDABAD

Present :

Pramod Kumar Chaturvedi,

Presiding Officer, CGIT-cum-Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated 16^th September 2016

Reference: (CGITA) No. 661/2004

The General Manager,

Gas Authority of India Limited,

Darpan B., R.C. Datt Road,

Baroda

…First Party

V/s.

Shri Mukeshbhai G. Solanki,

I. D. Hospital,

Staff Quarter, Karelwing,

Baroda

…Second Party

For the First Party

Shri B. K. Oza

For the Second Party

None

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-30012/115/98-

IR(C-I) dated 15.03.1999 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) in

respect of the matter specified in the Schedule:

5700 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

SCHEDULE

“Whether the demand of Shri Mukeshbhai G. Solanki that he is the direct employee of Gas Authority of India, is

right and is it legal not to regular his services by Tekhedar Manager?If no, what relief the concerned workman is

entitled to?”

The reference dates back to 15.03.1999. The second party submitted the statement of claim Ext. 5 on 17.02.2000

and the first party filed the written statement Ext. 7 on 19.12.2000. The second party submitted his

affidavit/examination-in-chief Ext. 14 on 24.04.2006 but since then both the parties are absent and second party

workman and his advocate have not been appearing for prosecution and cross-examination. Thus it appears that second

party is not willing to prosecute the case.

Thus the reference is decided as not pressed.

P. K. CHATURVEDI, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 13 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2433-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj xsy ds

çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] vgenkckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 662@2004) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 13-12-2016 dks

çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&30012@116@1998&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- ds- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 13th December, 2016

S.O. 2433.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 662/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Ahmedabad now as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s..

GAIL and their workman, received by the Central Government on 13.12.2016.

[No. L-30012/116/1998-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

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

AHMEDABAD

Present :

Pramod Kumar Chaturvedi,

Presiding Officer, CGIT-cum-Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated 16^th September 2016

Reference: (CGITA) No. 662/2004

The General Manager,

Gas Authority of India Limited,

Darpan B., R.C. Datt Road,

Baroda

…First Party

V/s.

Shri Vinodkumar P. Yadav,

Bhimtalav Bashahat,

Opp. Bhavna Chemical, Atlandara,

Baroda

…Second Party

For the First Party

Shri B. K. Oza

For the Second Party

None

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5701

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-30012/116/98-

IR(C-I) dated 15.03.1999 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) in

respect of the matter specified in the Schedule:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the demand of Shri Vinodkumar P. Yadav that he is the direct employee of Gas Authority of India, is

right and is it legal not to regular his services by Tekhedar Manager? If no, what relief the concerned workman is

entitled to?”

The reference dates back to 15.03.1999. The second party submitted the statement of claim Ext. 5 on 17.02.2000

and the first party filed the written statement Ext. 7 on 06.10.2000. The second party submitted his

affidavit/examination-in-chief Ext. 14 on 24.04.2006 but since then both the parties are absent and second party

workman and his advocate have not been appearing for prosecution and cross-examination. Thus it appears that second

party is not willing to prosecute the case.

Thus the reference is decided as not pressed.

P. K. CHATURVEDI, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 13 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2434-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj chlhlh,y

ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 59@2015) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 13-12-2016

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@83@2015&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- ds- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 13th December, 2016

S.O. 2434.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No. 2,

Dhanbad (I.D. No. 59 of 2015) as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to

the management of M/s.. BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 13.12.2016.

[No. L-20012/83/2015-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO.2), AT DHANBAD

PRESENT : Shri R. K. Saran, Presiding Officer

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1) (d) of the I.D. Act, 1947.

REFERENCE NO. 59 OF 2014

PARTIES

The Area Secretary,

United Coal Workers Union,

E.J. Area Bhowra, PO : Bhowra, Dhanbad.

Vs.

The General Manager,

E.J. Area of M/s. BCCL,

PO : Bhowra, Dhanbad.

Order No. L-20012/83/2015-IR(CM-I) dt. 27.07.2015

5702 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

APPEARANCES :

On behalf of the workman/Union

None

On behalf of the Management

Mr.D.K. Verma, Ld. Advocate .

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated, Dhanbad, the 19th July, 2016

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Sec.10(1)(d) of

the I.D. Act,1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-

20012/83/2015-IR (CM-I) dt. 27.07.2015.

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the Management of Amlabad Project under E.J. Area of M/s. BCCL in denying

employment to Sri Shanto Bauri, dependent son of Late Sahedeo Bauri under the provisions of NCWA is fair and

justified? To what relief the dependent son of Late Sahedeo Bauri is entitled to?”

Neither the Sponsoring Union nor the workman nor any Representative is reported to be present on date, not even

earlier also. So did the Management too, barring in exception of filing Authority by Ld. Advocate by Shri D.K. Verma,

who is present on date. Due to non-appearance on the part of workman and non-submission of W.S., the case did not

unfold after coming into existence bearing I.D. Case No. 59 of 2015. The status of case rests with filing W.S. on the

part of the workman who seems to be not in a hurry to file the Statement with taking almost four adjournments since

23.09.2015. Though formal Regd. Notices dt. 28.08.2015 was sent to both the parties concerned at the addressees

referred in Order of the Reference itself but in vain. The further proceedings came to a grinding halt as workman side

did not move even by filing the W.S.

On perusal of the case record it reveals that workman/Union did not show interest to get the case to finality

through adjudication. Rather they prefer taking adjourments to contest the case. However full opportunity was

provided to both the litigant parties, in general and specially to the workman. Thus in the natural interest of justice

further rolling of the case will not be fair and proper. So the case should be winded up in presumption of non-existence

of Industrial Dispute whatsoever between the parties concerned. Accordingly an Award of No Dispute is passed.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 13 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2435-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj chlhlh,y

ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 27@2012) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 13-12-2016

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@131@2011&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- ds- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 13th December, 2016

S.O. 2435.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No. 1,

Dhanbad (I.D. No. 27 of 2012) as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation

to the management of M/s.. BCCL and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 13.12.2016.

[No. L-20012/131/2011-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.1, DHANBAD

In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A) of I.D. Act, 1947

Reference: No. 27/2012

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5703

Employer in relation to the management of P.B.Area, M/s.. BCCL

AND

Their workman

Present : Shri R.K. Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances:

For the Employers

Shri D.K. Verma , Advocate

For the workman

None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated : 24/10/2016

AWARD

By order No. L-20012 /131/2011-IR(CM-1) dated 23/02/2012, the central Government in the Ministry of Labour

has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub –section (1) and sub-section (2A) of section 10 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of management of South Balihari Colliery of M/s. BCCL in not regularizing Sh. Bhola

Prasad Rana as Surface Trammer is fair and justified? To what relief the concerned workman is entitled to?”

After receipt of the reference, both parties are noticed. But appearing for certain dates on behalf of the workman,

none appears subsequently. Case remains pending. It is felt that the disputes between the parties have been resolved in

the meantime. Hence No Dispute Award is passed. Communicate.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 13 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2436-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj chlhlh,y

ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 50@2015) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 13-12-2016

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@110@2015&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- ds- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 13th December, 2016

S.O. 2436.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No. 1,

Dhanbad (I.D. No. 50 of 2015) as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation

to the management of M/s.. BCCL and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 13.12.2016.

[No. L-20012/110/2015-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.1, DHANBAD

In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A) of I.D. Act, 1947

Reference: No. 50/2015

Employer in relation to the management of Sijua Area of M/s.. BCCL

AND

Their workman

5704 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Present : Shri R.K. Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances :

For the Employers

Shri D.K. Verma, Advocate

For the workman

Shri S.K. Sinha, Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated : 26/10/2016

AWARD

By order No.-L-20012/110/2015 IR-(CM-I), dated. 09/10/2015 the Central Govt. in the Ministry of Labour has,

in exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub –Section (1) and Sub-Section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act.1947, referred the following disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the management of Sijua Area of M/S. BCCL in dismissing Sri Laddu Gopal Bauri

M/Loader vide letter dated 10.09.2005 is fair and justified? To what relief the concerned workman is entitled

to?”

The case is received from the Ministry of Labour on 02.11.2015 After receipt of reference , both parties are

noticed. The Sponsoring Union files their written statement on 09.12.2015. And the management files their written

statement -cum-rejoinder on 19.02.2016. The point involved in the reference is that the workman has been dismissed

from his services.

During preliminary hearing of this case, domestic enquiry held by the management is accept by the Sponsoring

Union/workman as Fair & Proper.

Thereafter document of workman is marked as W-1 to W-3 and document of management is marked as M-1 to

M-8.

The point involved in the reference is that the workman has been dismissed from his services on the ground of

long absence. But he has already out of service for 11 years. It is felt to give another chance to the workman to

serve.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I hold that he be taken into job as a fresh employee. But the

workman be kept under probation for a period two year. Therefore the question of back wages does not arise at all.

This is my award.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 13 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2437-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj chlhlh,y

ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 139@1994) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 13-12-2016

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@121@1991&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- ds- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 13th December, 2016

S.O. 2437.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No. 1,

Dhanbad (I.D. No. 139 of 1994) as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation

to the management of M/s.. BCCL and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 13.12.2016.

[No. L-20012/121/1991-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5705

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.1, DHANBAD

In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A) of I.D. Act, 1947

Reference: No. 139/1994

Employer in relation to the management of Barora Area No. 1 of M/s.. BCCL

AND

Their workman

Present : Shri R.K. Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances:

For the Employers

Shri Ganesh Prasad, Advocate

For the workman

None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated : 25/10/2016

AWARD

By order No. L-20012 /121/1991-IR(C-1) dated 30/05/1994, the central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in

exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub –section (1) and sub-section (2A) of section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the management of Phularitand colliery in Barora Area No. 1 of M/s. BCCL in denial

of placement of the workman Shri Laxmi Prasad in clerical Gr. II w.e.f. 01/05/1973 and promotion in clerical

Grade I w.e.f. November 1984 with payment of all attendant benefits including arrears of wages is justified? If

not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled to and from what date?”

After receipt of the reference, both parties are noticed. But appearing for certain dates by the workman none

appears subsequently. Case remains pending. It is felt that the disputes between the parties have been resolved in the

meantime. Hence No Dispute Award is passed. Communicate.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 13 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2438-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj chlhlh,y

ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 107@1994) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 13-12-2016

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la- ,y&20012@183@1993&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º

,e- ds- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 13th December, 2016

S.O. 2438.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No. 1,

Dhanbad (I.D. No. 107 of 1994) as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation

to the management of M/s.. BCCL and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 13.12.2016.

[No. L-20012/183/1993-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.1, DHANBAD

In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A) of I.D. Act, 1947

Reference: No. 107/1994

5706 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Employer in relation to the management of Block-II Area, M/s.. BCCL

AND

Their workman

Present : Shri R.K. Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances:

For the Employers

Shri D.K. Verma, Advocate

For the workman

None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated : 25/10/2016

AWARD

By order No. L-20012 /183/1993-IR(C-1) dated 27/04/1994, the central Government in the Ministry of Labour

has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub –section (1) and sub-section (2A) of section 10 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the Chief General manager, Block-II Area of M/s. BCCL, P.O. Nawagarh, Dt.

Dhanbad in denying regularization and Cat. I wages to Sh. Ramdeo Prasad Yadav, water Carrier is justified? If

not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled?”

After receipt of the reference, both parties are noticed. But appearing for certain dates by the workman, none

appears subsequently. Case remains pending. It is felt that the disputes between the parties have been resolved in the

meantime. Hence No Dispute Award is passed. Communicate.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 14 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2439-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh /kjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eqEcbZ iksVZ

VªLV ds izca/ra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/ esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vf/dj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 17@2016) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 14-12-2016 dks

izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&31011@09@2015&vkbZvkj (ch&II)]

jfo dqekj] MsLd vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 14th December, 2016

S.O. 2439.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 17/2016) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Mumbai

Port Trust, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 14.12.2016.

[No. L-31011/09/2015-IR (B-II)]

RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, MUMBAI

PRESENT : M.V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer

REFERENCE NO. CGIT-2/17 of 2016

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF

MUMBAI PORT TRUST

The Chairman

Mumbai Port Trust

Port Bhavan, 2^nd Floor,

S.V. Marg, Ballard Estate

Mumbai-400 001.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5707

AND

THEIR WORKMEN

The Secretary

Mumbai Port Trust General Workers’ Union

Kavarana Building, 1^st floor

26/4, Wadi Bunder

Masjid (E)

Mumbai-400 009.

APPEARANCES:

FOR THE EMPLOYER :

Mr. Umesh Nabar, Advocate

FOR THE WORKMAN :

No appearance

Mumbai, dated the 5^thOctober, 2016

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour& Employment by its Order No.L-31011/09/2015-IR (B-II), dated

31.03.2016 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 demand of the Mumbai Port Trust General Workers’ Union Mumbai in their Strike notice dated

09.09.2014 for transfer and posting of Shri Genubhau M. Auty and Shri Ajay A. Kadam, Wiremen, promoted

from Mazdoor in December 2013 from Pirpau to Jawahardweep is just and proper? If so, what relief the

workmen concerned are entitled to?”

After receipt of the Reference, notices were issued to both the parties. Acknowledgement of notice served on the

second party Unionis at Ex-7.First party Management filed Vakalatnama of Mr. Umesh Nabar. Matter was adjourned

on several occasions for filing Statement of Claim by second party/ Union. Second party/Unionneither appeared before

this Tribunal nor filed Statement of claim. Without Statement of claim, the Reference cannot be decided on merits and

the same deserves to be dismissed. Orders were passed on Ex-1. Accordingly I pass the following order:

ORDER

Reference stands dismissed for want of prosecution.

Date: 05.10.2016

M. V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 14 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2440-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh /kjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eqEcbZ iksVZ

VªLV ds izca/ra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/ esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vf/dj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 74@2009) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 14-12-2016 dks

izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&31011@1@2009&vkbZvkj (ch&II)]

jfo dqekj] MsLd vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 14th December, 2016

S.O. 2440.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 74/2009) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Mumbai

Port Trust, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 14.12.2016.

[No. L-31011/1/2009-IR (B-II)]

RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer

5708 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 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-2/74 of 2009

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF

MUMBAI PORT TRUST

The Chairman

Mumbai Port Trust

Port House, Ballard Estate

Mumbai 400 038.

AND

THEIR WORKMEN

The General Secretary

MbPT Diploma Engineers Association

Nirman Bhavan, 4^th floor

Dockyard, Mazgaon

Mumbai 400 010.

1. Shri Satheesh S. Pillai, AEE

O/o. The Dy. Chief Engineer (Construction Division)

4^th floor, Vijaydeep Building

S.V. Marg, Ballard Estate

Mumbai 400 001.

2. Shri M.M. Waghela, AEE

O/o. The Superintending Engineer (General Works Northern Division)

Mumbai Port Trust,

Br. Nath Pai Marg

Kalachowki, Mumbai 400 033.

3. Shri V.R. Pawar, AEE

O/o. The Executive Engineer

(Railway Engineer Section)

Mumbai Port Trust,

Nirman Bhavan, Muzawar Pakhadi Road

Mazgaon, Mumbai 400 010.

4. Shri Bidyadhar Thakur, AEE

O/o. The Dy. Chief Engineer (Construction Division)

4^th floor, Vijaydeep Building

S.V. Marg, Ballard Estate

Mumbai 400 001.

APPEARANCES :

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Mr. Umesh Nabar, Advocate

FOR THE UNION

Shri J. H. Sawant, Advocate

FOR THE IMPLEADED PARTY :

Mr. Abhay Kulkarni, Representative.

Mumbai, dated the 7^thNovember, 2016

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment by its Order No.L-31011 / 1 /2009-IR (B-II), dated

10.09.2009 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 action of the management of Mumbai Port Trust in scrapping the panel of 18 Diploma Engineers

who have passed the departmental examination for the post of Assistant Executive Engineers is legal and

justified? To what relief the workman concerned is entitled?”

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5709

After receipt of the reference, notices were issued to both the parties. In response to the notice, second party

union has filed its statement of claim at Ex-5. According to the second party the workmen enlisted in the reference are

all diploma holders and had appeared and passed the examination to the promotional post of Assistant Executive

Engineer. Therefore as per rule, waiting list for the promotional post was prepared as per the seniority and these 18

workmen were in the said list prepared in the year 1999. Out of these 18 workmen the workmen at Sr. Nos. 8 & 16

have been already promoted and workman at Sr. No. 2 has resigned from service. The reference is only in respect of

these 15 workmen whose names were reflected in the waiting list for the promotion to the post of Assistant Executive

Engineer. Candidates selected thereafter were to be promoted after the waiting list is exhausted. However Chief

Engineer by his letter dt. 6/6/2007 informed the union that the Chairman MbPT by his order dt. 12/9/2002 has scrapped

the waiting list of the year 1999 and Chief Engineer has declared fresh examination for the post of promotion to

Assistant Executive Engineer.

The waiting list of the year 1999 was scrapped arbitrarily, unlawfully, unreasonably in colourable exercise of

power and without following the lawful procedure and the procedure laid down under Section 9 A of the I.D. Act 1947

and has also violated the mandatory rights ensured by Article 14 & 16 of Constitution of India. These 15 workmen

were given discriminatory treatment by the first party and caused monetary loss. Therefore the union has raised the

industrial dispute. As conciliation failed, on the report of ALC (C), the Central Labour Ministry has sent the reference

to this Tribunal. The union therefore prays for declaration that the action of the first party scrapping the waiting list of

the year 1999 be declared illegal and unjustified. The union also prays that the employees in the waiting list of 1999 be

directed to be promoted to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer with all consequential benefits, cost and

compensation. The union also prays to direct the first party to cancel all promotions given to the workmen in the post

of Assistant Executive Engineer, Mumbai Port Trust whose names are not appearing in the waiting list of the year 1999

and were promoted thereafter. The union also prays that the first party be directed to operate the waiting list of 1999

only till it is fully exhausted.

The first party resisted the statement of claim vide its written statement at Ex-6. According to them the list was

scrapped in the year 2002 and intimation thereof was given to the second party union by its letter dt. 16/10/2002. The

second party has not challenged the said decision of the first party till 2007. It is further contended that S/Shri M.M.

Waghela, Bidyadhar Thakur and V. R. Pawar the employees belonging to SC/ST Category holding the posts of Jr.

Engineer, Grade-I. They made representation to the Chairman vide their petition dt. 10/10/2000 that they were not

allowed to appear for the departmental examination for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer as they

were falling short of only 6 months for completing the required 8 years’ service for being eligible to appear for the

exam. They also complained that there was large panel of 27 candidates in the waiting list of the year 1999 which was

not based on vacancies likely to arise during next 3 years and would deprive SC/ST candidates like them from getting

opportunity to qualify for the post of Assistant Executive Engineer. They also pointed out that they would not get

opportunity to qualify for the post during next 20/25 years. Therefore they have prayed that large panel / waiting list

prepared in the year 1999 without taking into consideration the prospective vacancies in the next 3 years be scrapped.

They also represented their case through SC/ST and OBC Welfare Association. In these circumstances and in the light

of relevant provisions of rules and regulations the waiting list was required to be reviewed. As per the rules for

promotion of Class-III employees to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer the examination has to be held once in

every three years or earlier if necessary with the approval of the Chairman of the first party. As per the said rules the

waiting list cannot be for indefinite period and has to be exhausted/scrapped after lapse of period of 12 months. 20%

Quota reserved for departmental candidates was exhausted after the promotion of the six empanelled class-III

employees to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer. The panel of employees prepared in March 1999 was more than

three years old. Considering the rules and regulations the Chairman vide his order dt. 05/09/2002 scrapped the list of

1999 which was more than 3 years old and declared fresh examination. The decision of the Chairman was

communicated to the Chief Engineer by Manager (SOM) by letter dated 12/09/2002. It was also intimated to the

second party and SC/ST & OBC Association vide its letter dt. 16/10/2002. The second party union has no locus-standi

to challenge the promotions affected by the first party management. The first party has not committed any illegality in

scrapping the list. The reference is not tenable as the other employees who are promoted after 2002 and whose

seniority is likely to be affected are not made parties to this reference. The first party therefore prays that the reference

be dismissed with cost.

By way of amendment S/Shri Satheesh S. Pillai, M.M. Waghela, V.R. Pawar & Bidyadhar Thakur, Assistant

Executive Engineer were impleaded as second party No.2 to this reference. They resisted the statement of claim vide

their written statement at Ex-42. According to them the first party has prepared exorbitant select list of 27 candidates

for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer. However the vacancies were very less and the said list

would not have been exhausted even in the period of next ten years. Furthermore these workmen were from SC/ST

category and they could not appear for the examination as they fall short by six months of eligible service of 8 years to

appear for the examination. Had the 1999 list been continued their way of promotion would have been locked as many

candidates from the list were junior to them by age. Therefore the SC/ST Association made a representation to the

5710 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Chairman. After considering their representation the Chairman has taken the decision to scrap the list. Accordingly in

2002 the Chairman has scrapped the list and informed all the concerned. By the time, out of the 27 candidates, only six

candidates were promoted. The decision of the Chairman was just and proper. The second party No.1 was informed

about the decision in October 2002. However they did not raise any objection thereto till 2007. The second party No.1

kept on shifting their stand as per their convenience without any consistency in their approach and their attitude. On

the promotion issue they took different stances at different time suiting to their perceived expediency to procrastinate

the conduct of departmental examination.

The reference has become stale and time barred due to inordinate delay of five years. Meanwhile administration

found it difficult to carryout day to day work. Therefore they resorted to ad-hoc appointment to the five vacant posts of

Assistant Executive Engineer on the basis of service seniority of Diploma Engineers. The first party has filled up six

posts of direct recruitment vacancies. The second party No.1 surprisingly demanded to fill up the promotion

vacancies/ad-hoc vacancies/ temporary vacancies/ leave vacancies from the select list prepared in 1999 which was

scrapped in 2002. They raised this demand after almost period of six years. As ad-hoc vacancies could not be

continued forever as per the Government guidelines a decision was taken by the management to hold departmental

examination in 2009 to fill up three vacancies of promotion post of Assistant Executive Engineer. Accordingly

examination was conducted and list of seven candidates including the three candidates of second party No. 2 were

immediately appointed in March 2009 against existing three vacancies and fourth one, BhayandarTaluka was appointed

in December 2009. The second party No.1 had created obstruction in conducting examination in 2006, 2007 & 2008

which was finally conducted in 2009. The second party had given strike notice; therefore matter was referred to RLC

for conciliation. In conciliation proceeding second party No.1 had agreed for examination. Therefore management had

postponed the date of examination. In spite of that the members of the second party No1.did not appear for the

examination. The second party No.1 is not interested in securing promotion by merit but are keen to hold posts through

backdoor entry. Therefore the second party No.2 prays that the reference be dismissed with cost.

7. This tribunal has passed Award dated 28.07.2014 and allowed the reference with no order as to cost. However,

First Party has filed Write Petition No. 15/2016 before Hon’ble High Court of Judicature, Mumbai. Hon’ble High

Court has set a side award passed by this Tribunal and remanded the matter back to the Tribunal for decision of the

matter afresh and in accordance with the law.

As per order on Exhibit 58, additional issues are framed. After framing additional issues both the parties have

not adduced any evidence. As per the order of Hon’ble High Court while deciding the matter, the Tribunal shall take

into account the matter already placed on record, including the issues and also order passed by Hon’ble High Court on

8.2.2016.

Following are the issues for my determination. I record my findings thereon for the reasons to follow.

Sr. No.

Issues

Findings

Whether employees involved in the reference deserve post of Assistant

Executive Engineers?

Whether action taken by first party in scraping the names of these

employees for the post of Assistant Executive Engineers is legal and

justified ?

Yes

Whether the First Party and the Second Party No.2 prove that reference

suffers from delay ?

Yes

Whether there was violation of Section 9-A of the Industrial Disputes

Act, 1947 by the management of Mumbai Port Trust in scrapping the

balance select list of the year 1999 of the candidates qualified for the

posts of the Assistant Executive Engineer by amending in the year 2007

the clause No. 7 of the “Scheme for regulating the promotion of Class III

employees in the Civil Engineering Department to ‘promotion’ vacancies

in posts of Assistant Executive Engineer against 20% reserved

vacancies” within the meaning of any of the items enumerated in the

third Schedule of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and in light of the

Regulations, including the clause (g) of the Regulation 30(2) of the

Mumbai Port Trust Employees (Recruitment, Seniority and Promotion)

Regulations, 1977 governing the service conditions of the employees

covered and concerning the dispute and the Constitutional provisions in

the matter ?

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5711

To what relief the workmen represented by the Second Party No.1 are

entitled ?

As per final

order

What order ?

As per final

order

REASONS

Issues Nos. 1, 2 and 4:

10.

The main issue raised by Second Party Union in this reference is whether the waiting list / panel of the year 1999

for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer has been scrapped illegally and arbitrarily in violation of

Rules and Regulations, in the year 2002. For, it is explicit that clause 2 of the Scheme for regulating the promotion of

Class III employees in Civil Engineering Department to promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer provides

that same will be on the basis of written and oral examination. It further provides that examination will be held once in

every 3 years or earlier if necessary with the approval of the Chairman of the First Party. The Regulation 30(2)(g) of

the Mumbai Port Trust Employees (Recruitment, Seniority and Promotion) Regulations, 1977 provides that with a view

to provide candidates and for some unforeseen vacancy the number of employees on each select list shall normally be

slightly more than the number of vacancies which are likely to arise in higher post in the following 12 months. The

said provisions of the Regulations envisages in clear terms that waiting list prepared for the examination cannot be for

indefinite period and has to be exhausted within the period of 12 months.

11.

In this respect, it is contention of the Second Party union that the Trustee’s Resolution No. 702 dated 21.07.1965

was passed by the Board of Trustees of Port of Mumbai, Central Government under the Provisions of Mumbai Port

Trust Act, 1963 as published in the Gazette of India dated 26.03.1977, Mumbai Port Trust Employees (Recruitment,

Seniority and Promotion) Regulations, 1977. As per the said regulations, the conditions of the promotion to the post of

Assistant Executive Engineer,are that for the vacancies filled by promotion, such employees in the Civil Engineering

Department are holding a Diploma in Civil Engineering of a recognized university or institute or classification

recognized as equivalent thereto by the Central Government and have put in not less than 8 years’ service in the Post

Trust and have passed a departmental qualifying examination prescribed by the Chief Engineer shall be eligible for

promotion. It is a contention that as per the said notification, the names of employees in the Civil Engineering

Department of First Party who have passed the departmental qualifying examination are entered in the waiting list /

panel and such wait listed employees have been given promotions in the post of Assistant Executive Engineer from

time to time against the vacancies. The employees passed in the departmental qualifying examination have been

promoted against the said provisional post of the Assistant Executive Engineer as and when vacancy arose and as per

the rank in the panel of selected candidates. It is contention of the Second Party union that there is no provisions for

scrapping of list and as per well settled practice of usage the waiting list of the employees who clear the departmental

qualifying examination for the post of Assistant Executive Engineer and named in the list are given promotion first and

their names ranks senior to those who may pass in subsequent departmental qualifying examination. It is contention of

Second Party union that the waiting list / panel remains alive and does not lapse for any reason and the employees

named in such panel are given promotions first and on exhausting the said panel / waiting list only the employees

passed in departmental qualifying examination held later on are given promotions.

12.

At the first blush outset, I would say that there is no concrete evidence to show that there was established practice

to the effect that the waiting list of the candidates passed in the departmental qualifying examination remains alive. It

appears that the examination was held in 1984 and 2 employees are given promotion in 1984. Then it appears that the

examination was held in 1987 and the employees were given promotion in 1988. It then appears that examination was

held in 1989 and employees were given promotion in 1990. It is not that the examination was held in 1984 and that

waiting list / panel remained alive till 1990 or for more than 3 years.

13.

Even then Learned Counsel for the Second Party union submitted that the circular was issued by the Chief

Engineer of Mumbai Port Trust and that circular also refers to Resolution No. 702 of 1965 of Mumbai Port Trust

Employees (Recruitment, Seniority and Promotion) Regulations, 1977. Submission is to the effect that the conditions

for preparing the waiting list are the same and then the Chief Engineer in his letter dated 28.07.2001 addressed to the

employees has confirmed the said conditions of service to the effect that there is no expiry of the panel. In this view

the submission is that the waiting list / panel prepared in respect of the candidates who are successfully passed in

departmental qualifying examination cannot be scrapped and as such scrapping of said list is illegal.

14.

It is to be seen in what circumstances select list/ panel has been scrapped. Departmental examination was held in

1999 to prepare a select list against 20% promotional quota for the post of Assistant Executive Engineer in Civil

Engineering Deptt for two available posts. So there were only two clear vacancies at the time of preparing list. In all

27 Class III employees who passed the examination were placed in 1999 select list which was more than the

5712 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

requirement when in fact such select list shall normally be slightly more than the number of vacancies which are likely

to arise in higher posts in following 12 months. Thereafter in 2006 continued use of 1999 panel was objected and

therefore senior most SC/ ST Candidates and SC/ ST Association took up the matter with the management.

Considering that 20% promotional quota has already been fulfilled with the promotion of 6 employees during 1999 to

2002 the Chairman vide his order dt. 5/9/2002 scrapped the list of 1999 and the order of Chairman was communicated

to MbPT Diploma Engineers Association and also the Mumbai Port Trust SC ST and OBC Welfare Association on

16/10/2002.

15.

Whether the Chairman is authority to scrap the list or not? For, it is explicitthat Clause 10 of the said scheme of

examination provides that on any point regulating the subject matter but not specifically provided for in the scheme the

Chairman’s decision shall be final. It appears therefore, that the Chairman has taken decision of scrapping of the above

select list after he was fully satisfied that the 20% promotional quota has been fulfilled and the said select list was more

than three years old. It is in that circumstances Chairman has exercised powers vested in him under clause 10 of the

said Scheme of examination. When the said select list was prepared in 1999 and 20% promotional quota has been

fulfilled, then in that circumstances the select list cannot be continued for more than three years.

16.

Ld. Counsel for the second party union has vehemently urged that as per clause 7 of the said scheme, the waiting

lists have to be maintained in the following manner. (i) The names arranged in seniority of class III employees who will

qualify as the first examination to be held in pursuance of the scheme, (ii) Thereunder the names are arranged in the

order of their seniority of Class-III employees who qualified at each subsequent examination. Precisely it is submission

of the second party union that there is no provision for scrapping the said list and the said list remains alive till it is

fully exhausted.

17.

This submission is not acceptable since clause 30 (2) (g) (Ex-26) clearly reads that; The number of vacancies on

each select list shall normally be slightly more than the number of vacancies which are likely to arise in higher posts in

following 12 months. The specific period of 12 months is mentioned in this clause which reads that ; the select list/

panel will not remain alive till it is exhausted. If that would be the position then the eligible candidates who will be

selected in next subsequent examination even will not get promotion since such an exorbitant list would take 20 to 25

years to exhaust and that would be against the principles of natural justice.

18.

Even then the ld. Counsel for the second party union Shri Sawantsubmitted that Clause 7 has been altered after

scrapping the select list on and from 20/7/2007 by the letter dt. 6/6/2007 (Ex-22) letter dt. 29/11/2007 (Ex-23) and

Circular dt.27/7/2007 (Ex-24).He submits that as per the alteration or change in the clause the earlier panel prepared for

filling vacancies of Assistant Executive Engineer against 20% promotional quota has been scrapped. Therefore those

who have appeared and passed and were on the panel will have to re-appear for the examination being conducted in

pursuance of this circular will be treated as fresh and first examination and after the result of each examination

beginning from the examination to be held in pursuance of this circular are known,waiting list will be prepared. He

submits that when the waiting list has to be maintained, in the manner that the seniority of the class III employees who

will qualify in the first three examination will be maintained and the names of the selected candidates shall be arranged

in order of seniority of Class III employees who qualify at each subsequent examination, then the alteration in the

clause is a serious change in the service condition of the first party No.1 and therefore said condition attracts item nos.

1, 8 & 9 of the first schedule read with Section 9 A of the I.D. Act 1947. Submission is to the effect that if there is

change in service conditions then notice under Section 9 A is mandatory.

19.

In the context he relied on the decision in case of Food Corporation of India Employees Association V/s. FCI

&Ors.1991 II LLJ 562. In that case in respect of change in service condition the Hon’ble High Court in Para 8 has

observed that;

“A notice will have to be given to the workman in compliance with provision of Sec 9-A of ID Act.”

20.

Said case is related to over time allowances. It is settled law that over time allowance is service condition and

therefore any change that adversely affect the overtime may attract Section 9A. So far promotions are concerned it is

well settled that none has any right to promotion.

21.

In the context,Ld. Counsel for the added parties Shri Kulkarnihas placed reliance on the decision in the case of

Life Insurance Corp V/s. All India Insurance Employees 1989 (58) FLR 149 to submit that Section 9 A of the I.D.

Act 1947 was given effect for change in conditions of service. Section 9A of I.D. Act lays down that no employer who

proposes any change in condition of service in respect of Schedule 4 shall effect such change without giving the

workman likely to be effected by the change a notice in the prescribed manner of the nature of the change to be

effected. Notice is required only when any change in the conditions of service relating to the matter specified in the

fourth schedule required to be changed. In the fourth Schedule the clause relied upon is Clause II which deals with

change in the conditions of service. In the instant case what is changed is merely a right to appear for examination to

the other qualified employees along with the employees named in select list after scrapping the select list for the year

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5713

1999. What is changed is merely the channel of promotion. Therefore the provisions of Section 9A of I.D. Act are not

attracted and consequently the notice as contemplatedunder Section 9A is not necessary.

22.

Ld. Counsel for added party Shri Kulkarnialso placed reliance on the decision in case of Municipal Corp of

India V/s. PandurangDinkarKatkar1998 (3) Bombay CR 444.In that case Corporation issued a circular under the

authority of Municipal Commissioner introducing written and oral test for promotions. It came to be modified in view

of the directions given by Divisional Court, Mumbai and female candidates also submitted to appear for tests. In Para 9

of the judgment it has been held that Section 9A makes it obligatory upon an employer who proposes effect any change

in the conditions of service applicable to any workman in respect of any matter specified in the fourth Schedule to give

a notice of desired or intended change. It cannot do so without giving to the workmen likely to be affected by the

change, a notice in the prescribed manner of the nature of the change proposed to be effected and within 21 days of

giving such notice. It is held that the method introduced by the employer for judging the suitability of employee for

promotion cannot be faulted on this ground. In the circumstances it was held that the introduction of written and oral

test does not amount to change in service conditionsunder Sec 9A of the I.D. Act 1947.

23.

Ld. Counsel for the 2^nd party union Shri Sawantseeks to rely on the decision in case of Dnyaneshwer P.

KudalkarV/s Union of India 2006 (3) Bom.C.R. 544 (CR) to submit that only because the added parties were

wrongly considered by committee that cannot give them any right to challenge the said/select list which was prepared

in year 1999 and as such modification in eligibility criteria and its applicability before its approval by the central

Government and/or publication in official gazette and also the presumption of the selection committee amounts to

change in selection criteria. With this the submission is that if there is change in criteria, & notice under Sec 9A is

mandatory.

24.

In the instant case there was no requirement of obtaining prior approval for scrapping the list from Central

Government. Likewise there was no requirement of publication of scrapping of 1999 panel/selection list in the Official

Gazette. The competent authority is the chairman who scrapped the said list of the panel after he was satisfied that the

list of the year 1999 was prepared for fulfilling 20% promotional quota and then 20% promotional quota has already

been fulfilled with the promotion of six employees during the period 1999 to 2002. In view of that I think that there

was no change in the selection criteria since the said list was to remain alive only for 3 years. In view of that the

observations in cited dictum are of no assistance to the union.

25.

In my considered view there is no evidence to show that as per regular practice the select list was to be continued

till it was exhausted. In the circumstances the Chairman is competent authority to scrap the list after 20% quota has

been fulfilled and the period of 3 years has been lapsed after preparing the select list. If it is necessary to prepare the

select list for every 3 years and to be reviewed or revised from time to time taking in to consideration the anticipated

number of vacancies then in that circumstances the scrapping of list is not illegal. Since the scrapping of list would sub-

serve the object of the rules and accord the equal opportunity to the promote officers who reach the higher echelon of

the service. It is not therefore possible to accept the contention of the ld. adv for second party union that there was

change in service condition and therefore notice under Section 9A was mandatory.

26.

Even it is not that the opportunities were not given to the employees named in select list. It seems to be admitted

position that the first party in 2002 itself had informed the union of scrapping of list after filling up of the six posts of

the panel.The first party also directed the concerned employees in the Reference to appear for the said examination in

the year 2007 when the vacancies were declared and fresh examinations were to be held. But they did not appear for

the examination. It is also admitted position that out of 18 candidates, 2 appeared for the examination of other

department for direct recruitment and were promoted to higher post. It is also admitted by the witness of the second

party union in his cross examination at Ex-13 that the examination was postponed initially for six months to offer

opportunity to them or to concerned workmen represented by the second party Union to appear for examination and

was again postponed for 15 days. It can be said therefore that fair opportunity was given to the workmen concerned to

appear for examination after scrapping the said list as the period of the list was elapsed. It is not possible therefore to

accept the contention of concerned workmen that the principles of natural justice were not followed and they were not

given opportunity to appear for examination.

27.

For the above reasons I hold that the action taken by first party in scrapping the names of these employees for the

post of Assistant Executive Engineer is legal and proper. Accordingly issue nos. 1, 2 & 4 are answered in the negative.

(Additional) Issue No. 3

28.

In view of the glaring admission of union is witness, it is clear that the association had received the management

communication dt 16/10/2002 intimating the scrapping of the list/panel vide Exhibit-13 Page 15 and Para 25. It is in

that circumstances association ought to have raised the dispute immediately on receiving of the said communication in

the year 2002. However it appears that the association has raised the said dispute after lapse of 6 years that too after

the other employees have been selected and promoted in the subsequent selection process.

5714 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

29.

It cannot be accepted that the association was not aware about scrapping of the section list in 2002. Even-though

it is contention of the union that the cause of action arose for in the end of year 2007 when the earlier scheme came to

be altered.

30.

It appears that second party union by its letter dt 29/7/2008 raised the dispute in this regard, when infactin the

year 2002 the union was intimidated of scrapping of list in the year 1999.It was expected of union to raise the dispute

without any delay in 2002 itself. It appears that the union waited till the section process is completed and selection list

was prepared. Even it can be seen that the employees concerned were given an opportunity to appear for the

examination but they did not appear and then thereafter they raised the said dispute. It is in that circumstances, it can

be considered that the Industrial Dispute raised by the union suffers from unexplained, delay and latches. This issue is

therefore answered in the affirmative.

Issues Nos. 5 & 6:

31.

In view of finding to above issues, I find that the action by first party in scraping the select list/panel of the year

1999 for the post of Asst. Executive Engineer is legal and proper and therefore the employee involved in the Reference

are not entitled to reliefs sought.

32.

Thus I proceed to pass the following Order.

ORDER

Reference is rejected with no order as to costs.

Date: 07.11.2016

M. V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 14 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2441-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh /kjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj cSad vkWiQ

cM+kSnk ds izca/ra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/ esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vf/dj.k@Je U;k;ky;] csaxywj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 31@2015) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 14-12-2016 dks izkIr

gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&12011@63@2015&vkbZvkj (ch&II)]

jfo dqekj] MsLd vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 14th December, 2016

S.O. 2441.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 31/2015) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Bangalore as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Bank of

Baroda, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 14.12.2016.

[No. L-12011/63/2015-IR (B-II)]

RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIUBNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

BANGALORE

DATED : 2^nd DECEMBER, 2016

PRESENT : Shri V. S. RAVI, Presiding Officer

C R No. 31/2015

I Party

II Party

The General Secetary,

The Chief Manager,

Bank of Baroda Employees Union

Bank of Baroda, SJMC Campus Branch, Opp.

Redg. Office, C/o Bank of Baroda,

BDA Complex,

K.G. Road,

Koramangala,

Bangalore – 560009

Bangalore - 560034

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5715

AWARD

The Central Government vide Order No.L-12011/63/2015-IR(B-II) dated 17.09.2015 in exercise of the powers

conferred by Clause (d) of Sub-Section (1) and Sub-Section 2(A) of Section 10 of Industrial Dispute act, 1947 has

made this reference for adjudication with following Schedule :

SCHEDULE

“Whether Smt. D. Lalithamma was a part-time employee of Bank of Baroda, Bangalore, and entitled for

consolidated wages as per clause No.21 of the Bi-partite settlement dated 02.06.2005. If so, what wages is she

entitled to?”

After the receipt of the reference, the matter has been registered on the file of this Tribunal and notices have been

sent for both parties. Still, no representation has been made on behalf of I party and also, I party is called, absent.

On a perusal of records already notices have been sent and, the said notices have been served to both the parties

and the RPAD acknowledgment cards have been received by this Tribunal. Hence, it is found that in spite of giving

sufficient and adequate chances by issuing notices of hearing to I party, the I party has not made any appearance. In

such circumstances, the matter is posted for passing Award, after the perusal of entire records brought on record.

Further, from the above mentioned circumstances, it would be very much clear, in the present matter, that the I

party has no interest to contest the present matter. It is for the I party to make out a case that I party is entitled to the

above mentioned benefits and that the management has done a mistake by denying the said benefits. Further, on behalf

of the II party, Sri. Ramesh Upadhyaya, Advocate of the II Party, reported that the II party has not violated any

provisions of the Rules and also, already granted all the legitimate benefits to the I party and also, as per the provisions

of law, the relevant benefits have been granted by the II Party. Under the above mentioned special circumstances and

peculiar facts, this Tribunal is constrained to pass appropriate award, after the perusal of materials available on record.

Since no appearance has been made and also claim statement has not been filed and further, no case has been

made out by I party and the present reference has only to be rejected for non- prosecution. Therefore, keeping in

view the conduct of I party in, not appearing before this Tribunal, even though notices have been sent to the I party by

way of RPAD and the conduct of I Party in not filing claim statement, in support of the said reference, it is crystal

clear that the I party is no more interested in prosecuting the claim against II party.

Further, the I Party has failed to show up that the I Party is entitled to get the above mentioned benefits, though

sufficient time has been granted to the I Party to establish the above mentioned rights. In the result and also in above

mentioned facts and situations, it is to be held that the present reference has to be rejected, for non-prosecution and no

useful purpose will be served in keeping the proceedings, any more pending. Hence the following award.

AWARD

Reference is dismissed for non-prosecution.

(Dictated, transcribed, corrected and signed by me on 2^nd December, 2016)

V. S. RAVI, Presiding Officer

CORRIGENDUM

New Delhi, the 15th December, 2016

S.O. 2442.—In partial modification of this Ministry’s Notification of even number dated 07/11/2016 in Award

I.D. No. 1259/2004, CGIT-cum-Labour Court may now be read as “CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Ahmedabad” and the

name of the Management as “Life Insurance Corporation of India” instead of Life Insurance Company.

[No. L-17012/31/1997-IR(B-II)]

RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 16 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2443-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh /kjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ,u,ylh

fyfeVsM ds izca/ra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/ esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vf/dj.k@Je U;k;ky;] pSUubZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 75@2014) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 15-12-2016 dks izkIr

gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&22012@59@2014&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)]

jktsUæ ¯lg] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

5716 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi, the 16th December, 2016

S.O. 2443.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 75/2014) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/s. Neyveli

Lignite Corporation Limited and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 15.12.2016.

[No. L-22012/59/2014-IR (CM-II)]

RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

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

Tuesday, the 6^th September, 2016

Present : K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer

Industrial Dispute No. 75/2014

(In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of

the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), between the Management of Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. and their

workman)

BETWEEN :

The General Secretary

: 1^st Party/Petitioner Union

CITU NLC Labour Staff Union

H.K. Gosh Street, Block-24

Neyveli -607803

AND

The Chairman & Managing Director :

2^nd Party/Respondent

M/s. Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd.

Corporate Office

Neyveli -607801

Appearance :

For the 1^st Party/Petitioner Union

M/s.. V. Ajoy Khose, Advocates

For the 2^nd Party/Respondent

M/s.. T.S. Gopalan & Co., Advocates

AWARD

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour & Employment vide its Order No. L-22012/59/2014-IR (CM.II)

dated 09.09.2014 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication.

The Schedule mentioned in that order is :

“Whether the action of the management of NLC Ltd., Neyveli in denying W-6 Grade to Sri S. Muthuraj and 85

Others (List attached as Annexure-A) who are working as CME Operators is legal and justified? If not to what

relief the concerned workmen are entitled?

On receipt of the Industrial Dispute this Tribunal numbered it as ID No. 75/2014 and issued notices to both sides.

Both sides entered appearance through their counsel and filed Claim and Counter Statement respectively. The petitioner

has filed rejoinder in answer to the Counter Statement.

The averments in the Claim Statement filed by the petitioner in brief are these:

The Respondent is a Public Sector Undertaking owned by the Government of India and is involved in mining of

lignite and generation of electricity. It has three mines and three thermal power stations. It is having other service and

supporting units also. The Respondent has 16,000 regular employees and 13,000 contract employees. The labour

category of the Respondent are governed by the Standing Orders and Settlements signed between the Management and

the Unions. They were earlier divided into 11 grades viz. W1 to W8 and EO,E1 and E2. After the settlement dated

04.09.2010 the number of grades have increased to 12. The grades/scales of this category used to be revised from time

to time. It is also having and operating a time-bound promotion Scheme. The Respondent employs regular employees

to operate various kinds of vehicles for transport, excavation/removal/dumping of lignite and they are called Operators.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5717

Operators who operate vehicles for transport of employees and materials will be inducted in Operator Grade-III (C)

which belongs to W3 Grade/Scale. The other Operators come under two categories by name SME Operators and

CME/EME Operators. After 1995 no appointment was made to the post of CME Operator till the middle of 2007. The

86 workmen concerned in the dispute were originally employed as contract labourers and were later enrolled as

members of the Indco-Serve and were regularized as Grade-II workers in W1 Grade consequent to a settlement. They

were later promoted to W2 Grade. While the concerned workmen were working in W2 Grade the Respondent called for

applications for appointment to the post of Operator Grade-III Trainee and were appointed in the post after interview

and selection. They were put on training for a period of one year. After training they were appointed as Operator

Grade-III (C) in W3 Grade by order dated 22.08.2009. Though they were appointed as Operator Grade-III Trainees the

Respondent gave them CME Operators Training throughout the one year training period. After appointment as regular

Grade-III-C Operators they were engaged for operation of conventional mining equipments exclusively. However, they

have been paid only the scale applicable to W2 Grade during the training period and pay and allowances applicable to

W3 Grade after their regular appointment as Operator Grade-III-C instead of giving them W5 Grade/Scale during their

training and W6 Grade/Scale after regular appointment. They gave a representation to the Respondent to extend them

pay and allowances and other benefits applicable to W6 Grade from the date of their appointment as regular Operator

as Grade-III-C. But there was no response from the Respondent. So the concerned workmen raised the dispute through

the Petitioner Union before the Assistant Labour Commissioner by application dated 04.11.2013. The Respondent has

contended before the Labour Commissioner that the concerned workmen are not entitled to W6 Grade and scale. The

action of the Respondent in denying the benefit to the concerned workmen is illegal and unjust. It is violative of

Articles-14, 16, 21 and 39 (d) of the Constitution. The concerned workmen were given training only for operation of

conventional mining equipments. They have been engaged only to operate these equipments from the date of their

regular engagement as Operator Grade-III-C. So they are entitled to have the same grade and scale of pay as applicable

to CME Trainee and CME Operators with W5 Grade and W6 Grade respectively as given to other CME Operator

Trainees and regular CME Operators. The concerned workmen being similarly placed to other CME Operators

employed under the Respondent and they having been doing the same and similar work as that of the other CME

Operators, not extending the same grade and scale to the concerned workmen is discriminatory and is also contrary to

the principle of equal pay for equal work as guaranteed under Article-39 (d) of the Constitutions and the provisions of

the Equal Remuneration Act. An award may be passed holding that the action of the Respondent in not extending W6

Grade/Scale to the concerned workmen is not legal and also directing the Respondent to extend the grade and scale to

the concerned workmen from the date of their regular appointment as Operator Grade-III (C) with designation of CME

Operator with arrears of pay and all other consequential benefits.

The Respondent has filed Counter Statement contending as below:

The Respondent is a public Sector Undertaking engaged in mining of Lignite and Operation of Thermal Stations

for generation of electricity. The post of CME Operators and SME Operators are filled-up by appointment and not by

automatic career progression. While Operators in Grade W3 and W4 can apply for the post of CME Operators and

SME Operators, the technicians in Grade W3 and W4 can apply for only the post of SME Operators and not CME

Operators. The concerned workmen were neither Operators nor ITI Technicians when applications were called for

filling the posts of Operators Grade-III (C). They were only unskilled category in W2 Grade. In the normal course it

will take not less than 20 years for them to move upto W6 Grade by automatic promotion based on their period of

service. In the year 2007 the concerned workmen were members of NLC Workers Progressive Union. As they

possessed driving license to drive heavy duty vehicles and as sufficient number of Operators to drive vehicles were not

available the Union wanted them to be considered for appointment as Operators in W3 Grade. The Respondent agreed

to consider this request if the workmen would agree for driving not only vehicles but also mining equipments. This

suggestion was accepted by the Union. Thus applications were invited for the post of Operator Grade-III Trainee from

among unskilled workmen in W1 and W2 Grade to satisfy the eligibility criteria. The concerned workmen and others

were selected and appointed for the post. This appointment was not by way of promotion but only to provide

opportunity to them to get into the channel leading to appointment as CME Operators and the move up further. While

the conventional mining equipment operators operate only the conventional mining equipments, the operators in W3

Grade pursuant to the notification dated 27.10.2007 were required to work on all types of vehicles as well as

conventional mining equipments depending on the day-to-day exigencies of work. They were not appointed exclusively

for working on CME equipments nor for driving heavy duty vehicles alone. They have no right to be considered for

the post of CME Operators in W5/W6 Grade. The Petitioner Union does not command membership from among a

substantial section of workmen of the establishment. The Union has not taken up the cause of 86 workmen in a manner

known to law to raise the industrial dispute. It lacks the representative character to take up the cause of the concerned

workmen. So the dispute is not a valid industrial dispute. The concerned workmen are not entitled to any relief.

The petitioner has filed rejoinder denying the averments in the Counter Statement and reiterating its case in the

Claim Statement.

5718 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Complainants 1 to 4 in Complaint 1/15 are four workmen among the 85 workmen who are concerned in the

dispute. The 5^th complainant is the Union which raised the Industrial Dispute on behalf of the 85 workmen. According

to these complainants, during the pendency of the dispute NLC Limited, the Respondent had transferred complainants

1 to 4 to Conveyor Vulcanizing Division where there are no CME Equipments and is without CME Operator work.

According to the complainants, by such transfer the Respondent altered the position of complainants 1 to 4 during the

pendency of the dispute. This is said to be done to defeat their right to get W6 Grade as in the case of other workmen.

The Complaint seeks an Award that the transfer without obtaining permission under Section-33(1)(A) of the ID Act is

void, nonest and inoperative and also seeks to direct the Respondent to restore complainants 1 to 4 as CME Operators

in the same place in which they were earlier working.

The Respondent has filed Counter Statement to the complaint contending that the workmen who are on the rolls

can be posted to any of the three units of the Respondent depending on requirements, that the transfer is in accordance

with the normal service conditions of the workmen and is not in violation of Section-33 of the ID Act. It is also

contended that the four complainants had worked in driving vehicles while working in the CME Division and the plea

that the position was altered by the transfer is not correct.

In ID No. 2/2016 the complainants are another 20 workmen out of the 86 involved in the dispute and the Union

who raised the dispute. The 20 complainants also were subsequently transferred to divisions without CME Operator

work. The complaint is to restore complainants 1 to 20 to the previous position till the disposal of the ID.

The Respondent has filed Counter Statement to this complaint in tune with the Counter Statement in Complaint

1/2015.

10.

The parties have filed joint memo agreeing for joint trial in the ID and the complaints. Accordingly, they were

tried jointly.

11.

The evidence consists of oral evidence of WW1 and WW2 and MW1 and MW2 and documents marked as

Ext.W1 to Ext.W61 and Ext.M1 to Ext.M19.

12.

The points for consideration are:

(i)

Whether the concerned workmen are entitled to W6 Grade in the Respondent establishment?

(ii)

Whether the transfers mentioned in the two complaints are void and nonest?

(iii) What, if any are the reliefs to which the concerned workmen are entitled?

The Points

13.

The dispute is raised by the petitioner union on behalf of 86 workmen of the Respondent establishment whose

names are annexed to the Schedule of reference. It is stated in the Claim Statement itself that three of the 86 workmen

by name Mohan, Venkatesan and Pandian have died. Four workmen by name Elangovan, Ramanan, Govindasamy and

Sundaram have joined to their original post which they were holding prior to their appointment as Operator Grade–III-

(C). One workman, Arogyasamy has informed that he is not interested in pursuing the issue. So the Petitioner Union is

not pressing the relief on behalf of the four persons named. Thus the relief now claimed is only on behalf of 78

workmen out of the 86 named in the annexure to the schedule of reference.

14.

The Respondent has raised a contention in the Counter Statement that the petitioner union lacks the representative

character and no authority or competence to take up the cause of the concerned workmen. It is stated in the Counter

Statement that the dispute is not valid for this reason.

15.

The petitioner has produced Ext.W1, the Minutes Book of the Petitioner Union. Ext.W2-the Membership

these documents, the counsel for the Respondent has stated during the argument that the Respondent is not pressing the

contention questioning the locus-standi of the petitioner to raise the dispute. It is apparent from Ext.W1 to Ext.W3 that

the Petitioner Union is competent to raise the dispute on behalf of the concerned workmen who are its members.

16.

The grievance of the petitioner on behalf of the concerned workmen in brief is that though they were appointed to

the post of Operator Grade-III (C) in the establishment they were made to work as CME Operators which comes under

W6 immediately after the appointment itself and so they are entitled to have this grade and the benefits thereunder from

the date of their appointment itself. The Respondent defends this claim of the petitioner on the ground that the

application was called for the post of Operator Grade-III (C) and the concerned workmen were appointed for this post

only, that their qualification were different from the applicants for the post of CME/EME Operators, that they were

taken in from those working in W2 Grade only, that the work done by them is operation of vehicles though it included

CME Equipments also and they are not eligible to be placed in the W6 Grade or for the scale of pay or benefits of this

grade.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5719

17.

The initial question to be considered is what exactly is the nature of work that was done by the concerned

workmen after they were appointed as Operator Grade-III-C. It is not disputed by the Respondent that though the

appointment was as Operator Grade-III-C coming under W3 Grade, the concerned employee were operating CME

equipments as well. It is also not in dispute that those who are operating SME and CME/EME equipments exclusively

are placed in a higher pedestal and during their training they are given W5 grade and on appointment W6 grade. The

Respondent has stated in the Counter Statement that the concerned workmen were taken as Operators in W3 Grade

under certain particular circumstances. According to it in 2007 the concerned workmen were members of NLC

Workers Progressive Union. They have started their career as members of NLC Indco-Serve and were absorbed as

Unskilled Workers in W1 Grade in the respondent establishment and some of them have moved up to W2 grade by the

year 2007. All of them had possessed license to drive heavy duty vehicles. There was a situation at that time that there

were no sufficient number of Operators to drive vehicles. So NLC Workers Progressive Union of which they were

members requested that they should be considered for appointment as Operators in W3 Grade. It agreed for this course

in case the concerned workmen were ready to operate not only ordinary vehicles but also mining equipments such as

CME and EME Equipments. According to the Respondent it was on such understanding applications were invited for

the post of Operator Grade-III Trainee by notification dated 27.10.2007 from among the willing workmen in W1 and

W2 grade who satisfy the eligibility criteria for the post. The concerned workmen and others had applied for

the post and were selected and appointed. The appointment was not as CME Operators and they were not excluded

from working on ordinary vehicles. Ext.M17, a letter from the NLC Workers Progressive Union to the Management is

referred to on behalf of the Respondent to justify the stand. The Union has stated in this letter that it is thanking the

management for issue of the notification for the post. It has also requested that the last date for receiving the

applications for the post shall be extended from 15.11.2007 to 26.11.2007. However, Ext.M7, the notification calling

for applications for the post will not show that on employment they will have to operate CME equipments. It only

states that the applicants should possess a valid HTV license to drive heavy vehicles.

18.

The claim of the petitioner is that immediately after appointment the concerned workmen were given training to

operate CME Equipments and on appointment after training they were made to operate CME Equipments only and no

other vehicles. It could be seen from the admission of MW1 that these workmen were given training for operating CME

equipments during their training period. They were given training through TLCON which deals with showels and

Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. which deals with Dumpers. MW1 admitted that training in operation of the mining

equipments only were given to these workmen. According to MW1, since there were no CME Operators in Mines

Division the concerned workmen were given training for CME operation. He also admitted that from the date they have

been appointed in the CME Division they were operating CME equipments. Without training ordinary Drivers could

not operate CME equipments, he further admitted.

19.

Though it is the case of the petitioner that the concerned workmen were operating only CME equipments, the

admission on the part of the General Secretary of the Union examined as WW1 would show that the workmen were at

times operating other vehicles also. He has admitted during his cross-examination that some of the concerned

\workmen might have been required to drive passenger vehicles, pick-up lorries or bus to visit CME Division, by

rotation. WW2, one of the concerned workmen also has stated during his cross-examination that some of the concerned

workmen would be required to drive passenger vehicles, pick-up lorries, etc. by way of rotation. He further stated that

he was asked to drive passenger vehicles only on urgent occasions. MW1 has stated during his cross-examination that

the workers have been given the work of operating Dumpers, Canteen Van, Pick-Up Lorry, Pick-Up Bus and Jeep on

daily basis. He further stated that the Canteen Van or Lorry will be taken only during lunch time to bring food items

from the Canteen. If a vehicle is allotted to a worker on a particular day he will be operating only that vehicle on the

day. However, he has admitted that except those workers who were allotted the work to operate Canteen Van, Lorry

and Jeep, the others will be operating CME equipments.

20.

There is no doubt from the admission of WW1 and WW2 that the concerned workmen were made to operate

vehicles other than CME equipments also. However, it could be seen from the admission of MW1 and also the Log

Book marked as Ext.M44 (series) that it was only occasionally they were made to operate ordinary vehicles and not

CME equipments. All the concerned workmen were posted in Mines-II after their induction in W3 grade. Ext.W44

(series) are the Loc Books of the Respondent showing the work done by the concerned workmen. Ext.W44(i) shows

that the concerned workmen were mostly operating CME equipments itself. The counsel for the petitioner has referred

to Pages 80, 82, 86, 90, 96, etc. to show that only one ordinary vehicle will be operated in one shift while all others will

be CME equipments. A perusal of Page-80 reveals that Vehicle Number is shown only against one workman out of the

21 workmen in the shift. MW1 has stated during his cross-examination that 20 workmen will be required to operate

CME equipments in one shift. The number given against the names of other workmen in the page are those of CME

equipments. The other pages also would reveal this. Thus, it could be seen that except on occasions the concerned

workmen were operating CME equipments only. It was brought out during the cross-examination of MW1 that those

workmen who were posted as Operator Grade-III (C) by subsequent selection were not given training to operate CME

5720 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

equipments but were operating ordinary vehicles only. So it is a fact that the concerned workmen have been operating

CME equipments mostly.

21.

The argument that is advanced on behalf of the petitioner is that the concerned workmen having been doing the

work of CME Operators coming under Grade-VI they also should be given the pay, allowances and grade applicable to

Grade-VI. The case of the petitioner is that they are entitled to equal pay for equal work done by them alongwith those

workmen coming under W6 grade. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the action of the Respondent in

retaining them in W3 grade with a lesser scale of pay and allowances is in violation of Article-14, 16, 21 and 39 (d) of

the Constitution and also in violation of The Equal Remuneration Act.

22.

The counsel for the petitioner has referred to the dictums laid down by the Apex Court in support of his argument

that the concerned workmen are entitled to equal pay alongwith those workmen coming under W6 grade as the work

done by them is equal to that done by them. Reference was also made the decision in RANDHIR SINGH VS. UNION

OF INDIA AND OTHERS reported in 1982 1 SCC 618 the Apex Court has considered the case of Drivers in the Delhi

Police Force alongwith the Drivers in the service of Delhi Administration and the Central Government and has held

that the Drivers in Delhi Police Force performed the same functions and duties as other Drivers in the service of Delhi

Administration and the Central Government and there is no reason for giving them a lower scale of pay than others. At

the same time the Apex Court has laid down that the principle of “equal pay for equal work” is not an abstract doctrine

but one of substance, that higher qualifications for the higher grade which may be either academic qualifications or

experience based on length of service, reasonably sustained the classification of Officers into two grades with different

scales of pay. Reference was also made to the decision in STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS VS. CHARANJIT

SINGH AND OTHERS reported in 2006 1 LLJ 431 wherein it was held that the principle of “equal pay for equal

work” has no mechanical application in every case and differences such as merit or experience or non-selection through

process of recruitment and differences in educational qualifications would be relevant.

23.

The counsel for the Respondent has also referred to certain decisions regarding the principle equal pay for equal

work. In the decision in UNION OF INDIA VS. TARIT RANJAN DAS reported in 2003 11 SCC 658 the Apex Court

has considered the claim for parity of pay by a Stenographer in the Office of Geological Survey of India with that of

Stenographer of a Central Secretariat. The Apex Court has quoted the 5^th Pay Commission which stated that the size of

a Stenographer’s job is very much dependent upon the nature of work entrusted to the concerned Officer and that it

would not be correct to go merely by the status in disregard of a functional requirement, that by the very nature of work

in the Secretariat the volume of dictation and typing work would be heavier than in a subordinate office.. The Apex

Court has held that in view of such distinguishable feature the demand for absolute parity in regard to pay-scales

between Stenographers in Offices outside the Secretariat and in the Secretariat notwithstanding the fact that some

petitioner/stenographers have got other benefits of parity in pay-scale through Courts cannot be accepted. Thus the

claim for equal pay for equal work was not accepted though some relief was given. Reference was also made to the

decision in Civil Appeal 1532 of 2005 of the Apex Court in S.C. CHANDRA AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF

JHARKHAND AND OTHERS. The decision referred to the earlier decision in STATE OF HARYANA VS. TILAK

RAJ (2003 6 SCC 123) where it was held that the principle of equal work for equal pay apply only if there is complete

and wholesale identity between two groups that if the employees in the two groups are doing identical work they

cannot be granted equal pay if there is no complete and wholesale identity, e.g. a daily rated employee will be doing the

same work as a regular employee and yet he cannot be granted the same pay-scale. Similarly, two groups of employees

may be doing the same work, yet they may be given different pay-scales if the educational qualifications are different

and that pay-scales can be different if the nature of jobs, responsibilities, experience, method of recruitment, etc. are

different, it was further held. Reference was also made to STATE OF UP AND OTHERS VS. MINISTERIAL

KARMACHARI SANGH (AIR 1998 SC 303) where it was held that even if persons holding the same post are

performing similar work but if the mode of recruitment, qualification, promotion, etc. are different it would be

sufficient for fixing different pay-scale. Where the mode of recruitment, qualification and promotion are totally

different in the two categories of posts, there cannot be any application of the principle of equal pay for equal work, it

was further held. It is also observed in the decision that fixing pay-scales by Courts by applying the principle of equal

pay for equal work upsets the high constitutional principle of separation of powers between the three organs of the

State and realizing this the Court in recent years avoided applying the principle unless there is complete and wholesale

identity between the two groups. Quoting the decision in GOVERNMENT OF BENGAL VS. TARUN K ROY AND

OTHERS reported in 2004 1 SCC 347 it was further observed that it is settled by the Supreme Court that only because

the nature of the work is the same irrespective of educational qualification, mode of appointment, experience and other

relevant factors the principle of equal pay for equal work cannot apply.

24.

It is clear from the dictum laid down by the Apex Court through the above decisions that the principle of equal

pay for equal work cannot be applied unless there is complete and wholesale identity between the two groups. In the

light of the above dictum it is to be seen whether the workmen concerned in the present dispute are having such

complete and wholesale identity with those workmen who are working as CME Operators Grade-VI at present.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5721

25.

In order to understand whether such complete and wholesale identity is there, it is necessary to refer to the

relevant appointments made by the Respondent some years prior to the appointment of the concerned workmen. The

records available are from the year 1982. In fact it was in the year 1972 by Ext.W4 the categories of SME and CME

Operators Grade-I were brought to the regular establishment and reclassified as Operator SME and Operator CME. By

Ext.W5 special grade was introduced for the Operators working in high capacity machines. Both CME as well as SME

Operators were grouped in two. Group-I was in the lower scale while Group-II who were operating machines of higher

capacity were given higher pay-scale. Ext.W6 is an order by which those who were selected for the post of CME/EME

Operators were appointed as Junior Operator Trainee for EME/CME. The pay-scale applicable to them on their

completing the training also is given in the order. Ext.W7 is the order appointing one of the Junior CME/EME Operator

Trainee.

26.

Ext.M1 is the first notification available calling applications for the post of Junior EME/CME Operator Trainee.

This is dated 12.01.1985. As could be seen from the notification, those employees of the Respondent who are holding

the post of Technician Grade-IV or above or other equivalent posts are allowed to apply for the post. The qualification

prescribed is that they should have passed SSLC or its equivalent and must have passed ITI and NAC Examination in

the Trade of Mechanic (MV/Diesel) etc. The next notification is Ext.W8 dated 14.02.1985. It seems sufficient

candidates were not available in response to Ext.M1 application and Ext.MW8 advertisement was published inviting

applications for the post of Junior EME/CME Operator Trainee from the open. The educational qualification prescribed

was passing SSLC or 10^th Standard. This was relaxed to 8^th Standard pass for those with experience of 10 years. A valid

license to drive heavy goods transport vehicles was also required. Then there is Ext.W9 circular calling to appear for

interview for the post alongwith requisite certificates. Ext.M2 is the paper publication for appointment as EME/CME

Operators in Sept. 1985. The qualification prescribed in this is 8^th Standard or equivalent and also 3 years experience in

the operation of Dozers, Dumpers, Showels, etc. The pay-scale given in Ext.W8 as well as Ext.M2 is with Basic Pay as

Rs. 675/-. However, subsequent to Ext.M2 before the applications were processed, the Respondent evolved a new

scheme to train SME/CME Operators. As seen from Ext.M3 only 8 persons could be appointed consequent to a

notification for appointment to the post of EME/CME Operators in June 1984 though the qualification prescribed was

8^th Standard and 3 years experience. In 1985 when applications were called for with qualification as SSLC and ITI

nobody responded to the same. Ext.M3 states that having exhausted the local means, press notification was given with

qualification of 8^th Standard and 3 years experience for the post of CME/EME Operators and that considering the

age and experience and the level of technical competence of those persons who responded to the notification it has

become necessary to have a separate career plan. Thus it was suggested that those who are recruited with the

qualification as 8^th Standard shall be initially placed at the level of Operator Grade-IV (EME/CME) in the scale of Rs.

595-885/- instead of Rs. 675-1083/- which was earlier notified. Thus, it could be seen from Ext.M3 that the Respondent

had decided to create a new category of employees having lesser qualification. Ext.W13 to Ext.W16 are orders calling

for interview, orders appointing EME/CME Operators in Grade-IV, etc. In 1995 also CME/EME Operators were

appointed, as seen from Ext.W21 and Ext.W22.

27.

After 1995 no appointment was made to the post of CME Operator till 2007. Ext.W28 is the notification dated

27.10.2007 calling applications for the post of Operator Grade-III Trainee from the willing employees. The

qualification prescribed was passing SSLC and possession of a valid HTV license. No experience was prescribed.

Only those persons who were employees in Ext.W2 grades were eligible to respond to the notification. However, those

who have completed 4 years of service in W2 grade were not allowed to apply. It is in response to this application the

workmen concerned in this dispute have applied and were appointed in the post of Operators Grade-III Trainee. In the

letter asking to appear for selection they were not asked to bring any experience certificate. Ext.W31 is the appointment

order issued to one of the concerned workman. It states that on successful completion of training he will be regularized

as Operator Grade-III (C). Ext.W33 is the appointment order given on completion of his training in the scale of pay of

Rs. 5,150-8,270/-.

28.

On an examination of various notifications produced on the side of the petitioner as well as the Respondent it

could be seen that the qualification prescribed for the post of CME/EME Operators coming under Grade-VI were

different from the qualification prescribed as per Ext.W28-the notification inviting applications for the post of Operator

Grade-III (C). Ext.M1 is the first available notification for EME/CME Operators and in this the qualification prescribed

are SSLC and ITI. This application was invited from the employees. Apart from the educational qualification there was

also the restriction that only those employees who are working in Grade-IV and above are eligible to apply for the post.

The next notification available is Ext.W8 of February 1985 in which the qualification is SSLC or 8^th Standard for those

who are having experience of 10 years. Those who have completed ITI Course were preferred. This was notification

inviting application from open candidates. Then there is also Ext.M6 in the year 2006 prescribing SSLC or ITI and

experience of 6 years. By this applications were invited from the employees. It does not refer to the grade of the

applicants. However, there is the fact that 6 years experience is prescribed by this application. Though subsequently

also EME/CME Operators were appointed the notifications are not seen produced. It could be seen on a perusal of the

notifications referred to above that higher qualifications or experience than prescribed under Ext.M7 by which the

5722 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

concerned workmen had applied had been prescribed as per those notifications. In Ext.M1 though experience is not

required, the applicants should have been from Grade-IV or above. That means they should have been sufficiently

experienced on their reaching Grade-IV. In Ext.W8 it was SSLC and for those with more than 10 years experience 8^th

Standard. Preference was given to ITI Certificate Holders. As per Ext.M6 it was SSLC or ITI and experience of not less

than 6 years. So far as Ext.M7 is concerned only SSLC was the prescribed qualification. No experience was asked for.

Again it was insisted that only those from W2 Grade can submit applications. Even from among W2 Grade those who

have completed 4 years could not have applied. Thus, it could be seen that qualification prescribed for the post of

Operator Grade-III (C) (Earlier Grade-IV EME/CME) was lesser than that of the notifications earlier referred to. Only

in Ext.M2 notification pass of 8^th Standard with HTV License and 3 years experience was prescribed. This notification

also was for the post of EME/CME Operators. However, after the notification was issued the Management decided that

the persons appointed on the basis of this notification should be given a lesser scale for the reason that they are of

lesser qualification. Thus, a new scale was introduced for this purpose. Ext.M3 is the report submitted by the

Committee for Interview for Applicants as per Ext.M2 to introduce the lesser scale of Rs. 595-885 instead of Rs. 675-

1083 as notified in Ext.M2. Ext.W14 is the order by which the applicants as per Ext.M2 notification were appointed.

29.

It could be seen that there are other reasons also to deny the same pay scale as those of workmen coming under

Grade-VI to the concerned workmen. Those who are working under Grade-VI were appointed in the grade on calling

applications for working in that grade or have become promoted to that grade. On the other hand, the workmen

concerned in this case have applied for the post of Operator Grade-III (C). The pay scale also was given in the

application. Only those persons who were working in W2 scale were allowed to make the application. There is the fact

that those who were in W3, W4 and W5 scale were not allowed to respond to the application. If the appointment was to

be for W6 scale they also would have been allowed to apply. WW1 has stated during his cross-examination that the

stipulation that those who have completed 4 years of service in W2 grade need not apply was prescribed for the reason

that in another year they would have automatically moved to Grade W3. 9941077857

It could be seen on a consideration of the above notifications and other aspects referred to that there was no

complete and wholesale identity so far as the group of earlier CME/EME workmen and the workmen concerned in this

case. In the earlier cases they were either higher in qualification and were having more experience. So they can be

differentiated from the present workmen. WW1 has stated that before the concerned workmen were appointed in the

post of Operator Grade-III(C) they were not operating CME equipments. So it is clear that they have no experience in

operating the CME equipments when they applied for the post. WW1 has stated that there was no instance of workers

under Ext.W2 grade having been directly appointed in W6 grade. He further stated that on two occasions prior to 2007

in which year is Ext.M7 notification, direct appointments were made to W5 grade as Trainees for appointment to W6

grade. He further admitted that on three earlier occasions internal candidates were appointed but these were from

Grade-3 and Grade-4 and not from Grade-2. Again the case of the concerned workmen that after they were appointed

as Operator Grade-III ©, they were operating only CME equipments is not fully correct. The very case of the

Respondent is that they are to operate ordinary vehicles and at the same time they were made to operate CME

equipments as well. WW1 has admitted during his cross-examination that some of the concerned workmen were

required to driver passenger vehicles, pick-up lorries, bus, etc. and this was by rotation. WW2, one among the

concerned workmen also have admitted that they were required to drive passenger vehicles, pick-up lorries, bus, etc. by

way of rotation. On the other hand those who were posted in W6 Grade after training in W5 Grade were operating

CME/EME equipments exclusively. These also establish that there is no wholesale identity of the concerned workmen

with the workers coming under W6 Grade. So the criteria laid down by the Apex Court for implementing the principle

of equal pay for equal work is not satisfied in the case of the concerned workmen.

31.

In spite of the above facts, there are certain aspects that differentiate the concerned workmen from those who

were posted in the same category subsequently. They are in fact an isolated category in the sense that they were made

to work as CME Operators immediately after they were given posting as Operator Grade-III (C). As could be seen,

soon after they were selected they were given training for one year not for operation of other vehicles but for operation

of CME/EME equipments. As seen from the evidence and Ext.W44 they were mostly made to work as CME/EME

Operators itself. They were appointed in a lesser grade and they were made to work on equipments of sophisticated

nature which required more skill and care. MW1 has stated during his cross-examination that subsequently also

employees were appointed as Operator Grade-III (C). They were not given training to use CME/EME equipments.

They were made to work on ordinary heavy vehicles only. As per Ext.W28 on the basis of which the concerned

workmen were selected, the qualification is SSLC and possession of HTV license.

32.

The position of the concerned workmen is somewhat on par with those who were appointed based on Ext.M2

notification. Though the notification was for the post of CME/EME Operators with scale of Rs. 675-1083/- they were

posted as Operator Grade-III (C) in the scale of Rs. 595-885/-. These employees subsequently made representation that

they should be given posting under W6 scale. By Ext.W18 it was directed that though in the normal course they are

eligible for promotion only on completion of 6 years in the post of Operator Grade-IV, after conducting a skill test, they

can be recommended for movement to the next higher grade. Under Ext.W19, the workers coming under this were

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5723

asked to appear for the skill test. Subsequently, they were promoted to the next grade. The case of the concerned

workmen can also be considered similar. Their position is almost in parity with those workmen selected under Ext.M2

notification. They are 8^th Standard pass with 3 years experience while the concerned workmen had passed SSLC but

without experience. As in the case of employees coming under Ext.M2 the workmen concerned in this dispute also

could have been allowed to move to the next grade on completion of 3 years in Grade-III (C) and to the next grade on

completion of the usual period in that grade. In that case they would have reached W6 scale or at least W5 scale. It is

only proper that this advantage is given to the workmen concerned.

33.

Complaints 1/15 and 2/16 are filed alleging that some of the concerned workmen are transferred in violation of

Section-33(A) of the ID Act. The question of any violation will be there only if the case of the petitioner that they are to

be treated to be under Grade-6 is accepted. This contention having been rejected, both complaints are liable to be

dismissed.

34.

In view of my discussion above, an award is passed as below in the ID:

The 78 workmen concerned in the dispute shall be deemed to have been promoted to W4 grade on their

completion of 3 years in service in W3 grade and to the next grades on completion of the specified period of

service in the respective grades. Their pay and allowances shall be fixed on the basis of the above retrospective

promotion.

The concerned workmen shall be entitled to pay and all other monetary and other benefits to which they

would have been entitled to on such promotion. The arrears of wages shall be paid to them within two months of

the Award. In default, interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum will be payable from the date of the Award.

The reference is answered accordingly.

Complaints 1/15 and 2/16 are dismissed.

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the

6^th September, 2016)

K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined:

For the First Party/Petitioner Union

WW1, Sri T. Jayaraman

WW2, Sri K.G. Archunan

For the 2^nd Party/Respondent

MW1, Sri D.R. Senthilkumar

MW2, Sri C. Thiagaraju

On the petitioner’s side

Ex.No.

Date

Description

Ext.W1

2013

Minutes Book of the First Party Union

Ext.W2

2013

Membership Register and Form-E of the First Party Union

Ext.W3

2013

Subscription Receipt Books of the First Party Union

Ext.W4

07.08.1972

Brining the category of SME Operators and EME/CME Operator to Regular

Establishment

Ext.W5

17.05.1982

Order introducing Special Grade for the Operators working high capacity machines

Ext.W6

10.11.1983

Appointment Order issued to the CME/EME Operators

Ext.W7

24.11.1984

Appointment Order issued to Christopher Charles

Ext.W8

14.02.1985

Advertisement issued by 2^nd Party for appointment to the post of Junior EME/CME

Operator

Ext.W9

13.06.1985

Circular calling for applications for appointment to the post of Junior EME/CME

Operator/Trainees

Ext.W10

16.07.1985

Junior EME/CME Operator appointment orders

Ext.W11

21.08.1985

Junior EME/CME Operator/Trainee Appointment Orders

5724 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Ext.W12

18.09.1985

Advertisement calling for applications for appointment to the post of EME/CME

Operators

Ext.W13

12.10.1985

Order calling for interview for recruitment to the post of CME Operator

Ext.W14

02.07.1986

Order appointment EME/CME Operators in Grade-IV

Ext.W15

23.10.1986

Order calling the Junior EME Trainees for Trade Test

Ext.W16

04.11.1986

Appointment Order issued after completion of EME/CME training, as Operator

Grade-II

Ext.W17

25.07.1989

Order declaring successful completion of probation by the EME/CME Operators

Ext.W18

29.06.1990

Order promoting the EME/CME Operators from Grade-IV to Grade-III

Ext.W19

25.07.1990

Order calling the Grade-IV EME/CME Operators for skill test for advancement to

Grade-V

Ext.W20

28.01.1991

Dispute raised to give Rs. 675-19-789-21-1083 scale to EME/CME Operators as

per the advertisement

Ext.W21

27.08.1994

Order calling for interview to the post of CME Operator

Ext.W22

08.03.1995

Order appointing Operators / CME

Ext.W23

17.03.1995

Order issued by the 2^nd Party

Ext.W24

18.03.1995

Appointment Order issued by the 2^nd Party

Ext.W25

29.01.1996

Orders issued by the 2^nd Party

Ext.W26

26.11.1996

Training for the operation of BEMI bulldozers

Ext.W27

01.10.1997

Orders issued by the 2^nd Party

Ext.W28

27.10.2007

Notification issued by the 2^nd Party

Ext.W29

27.10.2007

Order issued by the 2^nd Party

Ext.W30

26.12.2007

Order issued by the 2^nd Party to the post of Operator Grade-III (Trainee)

Ext.W31

11.02.2008

Appointment Order issued to the post of Operator Grade-III-C

Ext.W32

16.02.2008

Order issued by the 2^nd Party

Ext.W33

22.08.2009

Order issued by the 2^nd Party

Ext.W34

04.04.2011

Order issued by the 2^nd Party

Ext.W35

20.09.2011

Representation given by the LPF Union to the 2^nd Party

Ext.W36

15.11.2012

Transfer Orders issued by the 2^nd Party

Ext.W37

04.09.2013

Appointment Order issued by the 2^nd Party

Ext.W38

04.11.2013

2(k) dispute raised before the ALC by the 1^st Party Union

Ext.W39

10.02.2014

Counter Statement by the Respondent before ALC

Ext.W40

11.03.2014

Rejoinder filed by the 1^st Party Union

Ext.W41

19.06.2014

Failure Report

Ext.W42

09.09.2014

Order of Reference

Ext.W43

Experience Certificates issued by the 2^nd Party

Ext.W44

Log Books showing the work allocations to the workmen including the workmen

concerned in the dispute (Separately filed Vol.I, II, III, V & V)

Ext.W45

27.09.1994

Proceedings No. M.1(2) 192

Ext.W46

25.01.2011

Notification issued by the 2^nd Party

Ext.W47

26.09.2011

Order issued by the 2^nd Party

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5725

Ext.W48

14.08.2014

Order transferring 9 of the workmen concerned to other Division but with same

CME Operator work

Ext.W49

15.06.2015

Order transferring 4 of the workmen concerned to Conveyor Vulcanising Work in

Conveyor Division

Ext.W50

18.06.2015

Representation made by the 1^st Party Union

Ext.W51

09.07.2015

Individual representation made by 4 affected Workmen

Ext.W52

09.07.2015

Representation made by the 1^st Party Union

Ext.W53

26.10.2015

Order transferring 20 of the workmen concerned to various divisions

Ext.W54

29.10.2015

Representation made by the 1^st Party Union

Ext.W55

29.10.2015

Joint representation made by the 20 affected workmen concerned

Ext.W56

Order in WP No. 36430/2015

Ext.W57

08.01.2016

Order of deputation issued to 14 workmen concerned

Ext.W58

05.04.2016

Order of deputation issued to 12 workmen concerned

Ext.W59

CD showing the various kinds of CME equipment and its working and functioning

Ext.W60

Literature / Printouts taken out from the websites with regard to various kind of

CME equipments and its working and functioning

Ext.W61

Salary Bills

On the Management’s side

Ex.No.

Date

Description

Ext.M1

12.01.1985

Notification No. 684/P&A-IV-I/84-Project Notification –Junior EME/CME/

Operator/Trainee for operating ESEs/CMEs – filing up – Applications called for

Ext.M2

18.09.1985

Paper publication in Dina Thanthi dated 18.09.1985 –calling application for

EME/CME Operators prescribing educational, age and experience in earth moving

machineries

Ext.M3

23.08.1986

Scheme to train SME/CME are Operators and change in the level of induction to

EME/CME Operators – career planning

Ext.M4

19.03.1996

Communication No. 05/P&A/WR/96-reg. wage revision –re-group of scales of pay

and posts – revised procedure for advancement – instructions

Ext.M5

06.08.1996

Notification No. 8080/P&A/WR/96-regrouping of scales of pay – revisions

procedure for advancement –regulation of pay

Ext.M6

Project notification – Recruitment to the post of Junior Operator / SME “Trainee”

– Applications invited – to submit on or before 12.12.2005

Ext.M7

27.10.2007

Notification No. Corp/P&A/473/5536/2007 – Notification – Recruitment to the

post of Operator-III/Trainee (W2) with copy to Union, Federation and Associations

– from willing employees – applications to reach on or before 15.11.2007

Ext.M8

11.02.2008

Procs. No. Corp/P&A/473/5536 of 2007 – Offer of appointment issued to 92

candidates – provisionally selected for appointment to the post of Operator Grade-

III / Trainee (W-2 Grade)

Ext.M9

04.09.2010

Settlement under Section 12(3) of the ID Act – arrived between NLC Management

and Workmen represented by 4 recognized unions (LPF, PTS, NLC WPU and NLc

PTS and attached MoU dated 16.07.2010

Ext.M10

06.06.2014

Minutes of Conciliation Proceedings before ALC (C), Puducherry

Ext.M11

19.06.2014

Conciliation failure report

Ext.M12

Career path for EME/CME Operatives (W3) – Sl.No. 36

Ext.M13

Career path for EME Operator (6) – Sl.No. 20

5726 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Ext.M14

Extract of Respondent’s Standing Order Clause-7

Ext.M15

Extract of – NLC Personnel Manual Vol.I – Appointment and promotion rules for

non-executives – relevant pages

Ext.M16

Comparative chart of Operators at various designation

Ext.M17

14.11.2007

Letter from NLC Workers Progressive Union in reply to the Notification No.

Corp/P&A/473/5536/2007 requesting to extend the last date upto 26.11.2007 for

receiving the application

Ext.M18

10.12.2007

Recommendations of the Committee constituted to scrutinize the applications for

Operator Grade-III/Trainee with enclosure 1 and 2

Ext.M19

29.06.2001

Settlement u/r Sec.12(3) of 01 to 11 of ID Act between the Respondent and the

Representatives if unionized employees of NLC Ltd. before RLC (Central),

Chennai.

ubZ fnYyh] 16 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2444-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh /kjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ,u,ylh

fyfeVsM ds izca/ra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/ esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vf/dj.k@Je U;k;ky;] pSUubZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 120@2015) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 16-12-2016 dks izkIr

gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&22011@12@2015&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)]

jktsUæ ¯lg] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 16th December, 2016

S.O. 2444.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 120/2015) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/s.. Food

Corporation of India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16.12.2016.

[No. L-22011/12/2015-IR (CM-II)]

RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

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

Monday, the 26^th September, 2016

Present : K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer

Industrial Dispute No. 120/2015

(In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of

the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), between the Management of Food Corporation of India and their

workman)

BETWEEN :

Ms. K. Dhanalakshmi

: 1^st Party/Petitioner

AND

The Area Manager

: 2^nd Party/Respondent

Food Corporation of India

District Office, PO Box No. 2911,

Tatabad Post

Coimbatore -641012

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5727

Appearance :

For the 1^st Party/Petitioner

M/s.. Balan Haridas, Advocates

For the 2^nd Party/Respondent

Sri M. Imthias, Advocate

AWARD

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour & Employment vide its Order No. L-22011/12/2015-IR (CM.II)

dated 31.08.2015 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication.

The schedule mentioned in that order is:

“Whether the termination of Smt. K. Dhanalakshmi by the Management of Food Corporation of India,

Coimbatore is justified or not? If not, to what relief the petitioner is entitled?”

On receipt of the Industrial Dispute this Tribunal numbered it as ID 120/2015 and issued notices to both sides.

Both sides entered appearance through their counsel and filed Claim and Counter Statement respectively. The petitioner

has filed rejoinder in answer to the Counter Statement.

The averments in the Claim Statement filed by the petitioner in brief are these:

The petitioner had joined the Respondent Corporation in the year 2009. She was appointed to do the work of

Sweeper which is a regular post in the Respondent. The petitioner was working in Peelamedu Depot of the Respondent

against a regular vacancy. Her appointment was due to acute shortage of manpower in the Respondent establishment.

The petitioner had continuously worked from 01.10.2009 to 05.04.2013 without any break. She had worked for more

than 240 days in one calendar year. She had worked continuously for more than 480 days within a period of 24

calendar months and is to be deemed to be a permanent employee. The petitioner is qualified to be appointed as

Sweeper in the service of the Respondent. She had been discharging the work of Sweeper under the direct control and

supervision of the Manager of Peelamedu. The service of the petitioner was terminated orally on 06.04.2013. The

termination was without complying with Section-25(F) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The same would amount to

retrenchment. The termination is void-abinitio. After termination of the petitioner the Respondent had engaged others

by outsourcing the work. An order may be passed directing the Respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service with

full backwages, continuity of service and other attendant benefits.

The Respondent has filed Counter Statement contending as below:

It is incorrect to state that the petitioner was appointed by the Respondent as Sweeper in the year 2009 due to

acute shortage of manpower and she had worked from 01.10.2009 to 05.04.2013. It is also incorrect to state that she has

worked for more than 240 days in one calendar year and 480 days within a period of 24 calendar months. The petitioner

was engaged as a Casual Labour on temporary basis for certain emergency purposes. She has not been appointed on

any permanent post nor terminated from any permanent post. Regular appointment in the Respondent Corporation is

done through recruitment process under FCI Staff Regulation. The petitioner having been employed on casual basis

there is no question of any violation under Section-25(F) of the Industrial Disputes Act or any termination from service

also. The petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

The petitioner has filed rejoinder denying the allegations in the Counter Statement and reiterating the case in the

Claim Statement.

Evidence in the case consists of oral evidence of WW1 and MW1 and documents marked as Ext.W1 to Ext.W10.

No documents were marked on the Respondent’s side

The points for consideration are:

(i)

Whether the Respondent is justified in terminating the petitioner from service?

(ii)

What, if any is the relief to which the petitioner is entitled?

The Points

The petitioner is said to have been working with the Respondent in its Peelamedu Depot as a Sweeper from the

year 2009. According to her, she had worked continuously without any break till 05.04.2013 on which date she is said

to have been orally terminated from service. According to her, the termination is in violation of Section-25(F) of the

Industrial Disputes Act and she is entitled to be reinstated in service. The Respondent has admitted in the Counter

Statement that the petitioner was working with it. However, according to the Respondent it was only during exigencies

and not continuously as claimed by her.

The petitioner has given evidence reiterating her case in the Claim Statement. She has stated during her cross-

examination that she was not given any appointment order nor was she given any order of termination. She further

admitted that she was engaged only as a casual labour.

5728 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

10.

MW1 the Assistant General Manager of the Respondent at its Regional Office, Chennai has given evidence

against the case of the petitioner. He has stated in the Proof Affidavit filed by him that the petitioner was engaged only

on casual basis.

11.

Ext.W1 to Ext.W10 were marked through the petitioner also to establish her case. Ext.W2 is a communication

from the Area Manager to the General Manager stating that there were considerable retirements in the establishment

and they were not substituted and because of the shortage of employees they have to resort to hiring of persons for

certain works in the establishment. Ext.W3 and Ext.W4 are the copies of file notes in the Respondent establishment

which also states that due to shortage of hands persons have to be engaged on casual basis.

12.

Ext.W8 and Ext.9 are the only documents produced by the petitioner to show that she had been engaged by the

Respondent. Ext.W8 is the copy of the Attendance Register from 10.01.2011 to 07.01.2012. This document shows

continuous engagement of the petitioner from 10.01.2011 to 07.01.2012 except for a few days. The document of course

does not show for what purpose the petitioner was engaged. The Respondent has denied the claim of the petitioner in

the Claim Statement that she was engaged as a Sweeper and has stated that she was engaged only as a casual labour.

Ext.W9 is the copy of the Attendance Register for the period from 18.07.2012 to 06.04.2013. During this period also

the petitioner seems to have been engaged almost continuously.

13.

The case in the petition that the petitioner has been engaged by the Respondent establishment form 01.10.2009 is

not proved by the petitioner by producing any positive evidence. The Attendance Registers produced by her shows

engagement from 10.01.2011 and till 06.04.2013. Even during this period there is a gap of more than 6 months from

08.01.2012 to 19.07.2012. The petuitioenr has stated during her cross-examination that she had obtained the copies of

documents from the Respondent establishment with the permission of the Manager. If she was able to get copies of

documents of proof of her engagement for the period from 10.01.2011 there would not have been any difficulty for her

in getting such documents for the previous period also if she was actually engaged earlier than the year 2011. The case

of the Respondent itself is that the engagement was only during exigencies. So the case of the petitioner that she was

engaged even from 01.10.2009 with the Respondent is not established. So also even as seen from the documents

produced by her it is more likely that there was a gap in the engagement even in between 10.01.2011 and 06.04.2013,

the date of her termination. Thus the period of engagement as seen from the evidence is only about 1.5 years.

14.

The case advanced by the petitioner is that she was engaged on a permanent post. However, Exts.W8 and Ext.W9

the Registers produced by her would not show that she was engaged on a permanent post. Merely from the statement in

Ext.W2 that persons are to be hired to make up for the shortage caused by retirement, it cannot be assumed that the

engagement of the petitioner was on permanent vacancy. Even as admitted by her during her cross-examination she

was engaged only as a casual labour. According to MW1 Peelamedu is a very big complex of the Respondent with 22

godowns. There is direct payment system for labourers engaged in the godown for collecting spillage and doing the

cleaning. Whenever such work is there they used to take casual labourers Even for Direct Payment System labourers

the service regulations are not applicable but are having separate rules. MW1 has stated that the petitioner was stopped

from engagement alongwith other casual labourers as there was no work. Thus there is nothing to show that the

engagement of the petitioner was on a permanent post. On the other hand the engagement seems to have been to

expedite the heavy work that had occurred in the godown.

15.

The petitioner, even as admitted by the Respondent was sent out from work without any written order of

termination. It is very well established form the Ext.W8 and Ext.W9 that the petitioner was working for some time in

the establishment. So she is a workman as contemplated in Section-2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act.

16.

Even as admitted by the Respondent, no notice of termination was given to the petitioner. She was not given any

compensation before termination also. Her termination was in violation of Section-25(F) of the Industrial Disputes Act.

17.

The petitioner has claimed the relief of reinstatement in her Claim Statement. No doubt, she is entitled to some

relief because of her termination without complying with Section-25(F) of the Act. However, the relief need not be by

way reinstatement if the facts and circumstances are taken into account. The petitioner had worked in the establishment

only for a short period and that also only as a casual worker. According to the Respondent, herself and others were

turned out from work as work was not available. In the circumstance compensation will be the proper relief rather than

reinstatement. Rs. 75,000/- is fixed as compensation.

18.

In view of my discussion above, the Respondent is directed to pay Rs. 75,000/- to the petitioner as compensation

within two months of the publication of the Award. In default of payment, the amount will carry interest @ 7.5 per

annum.

The reference is answered accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this

day the 26^th September, 2016)

K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5729

Witnesses Examined:

For the 1^st Party/Petitioner

WW1, Sri K. Dhanalakshmi

For the 2^nd Party/Management

MW1, Sri C. Saravanan

Documents Marked:

On the petitioner’s side

Ex.No.

Date

Description

Ext.W1

06.08.2010

Age proof certificate in respect of petitioner

Ext.W2

30.10.2012

The letter of Area Manager to the General Manager

Ext.W3

Note File QC6 (9-1)/13

Ext.W4

Note File QC6 (9-1)/13/Vol.I

Ext.W5

28.11.2014

The Reply Notice dated 28.11.2014 issued by the Respondent

Ext.W6

The Written Arguments filed by the Respondent before the Conciliation

Ext.W7

10.08.2015

The Letter of the Area Manager given under RTI Act alongwith enclosure

Ext.W8

The Attendance Register for the period from 10.01.2011 to 07.01.2012

Ext.W9

The Attendance Register for the period from 18.07.2012 to 06.04.2013

Ext.W10

05.03.2015

Letter of General Manager enclosing the Minutes of Meeting

On the Management’s side

Ex.No.

Date

Description

Nil

ubZ fnYyh] 20 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2445-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh /kjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj cSad vkWiQ

cM+kSnk ds izca/ra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/ esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;ky;]

t;iqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 29@1995) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 20-12-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&12012@359@1994&vkbZvkj (ch&II)]

jfo dqekj] MsLd vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 20th December, 2016

S.O. 2445.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 29/1995) of the Central Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur as shown in the

Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Bank of Baroda, and their workmen, received by the

Central Government on 20.12.2016.

[No. L-12012/359/1994-IR (B-II)]

RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer

vuqca/k

dsUnzh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k] t;iqj

dsl ua0 lh-vkbZ-Vh- 29@1995

jSQjSal % Hkkjr ljdkj] Je ea=ky;] ubZ fnYyh dk vkns’k dzekad% ,y&12012@359@94&I.R.(D-II) ubZ fnYyh]

fnukad 15-05-1995

dkywjke tkV iq= Jh dkukjke] eq-iks- djM+] ok;k

[kkpfj;kokl] ftyk & lhdjA ekQZr dkuflag jkBkSM+]

Je lykgdkj] 858 nsohuxj] ';keuxj] iksLV vkWfQl

ds ihNs] U;w lkaxkusj jksM] lks<kyk] t;iqj

---izkFkhZ

5730 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

cuke

ofj"B izcU/kd] cSad vkWQ cMkSnk] vapy dk;kZy;] vkuUn

Hkou] pkSFkh eafty] lalkj pUn jksM] t;iqj

---vizkFkhZ

mifLFkr %

ihBklhu vf/kdkjh% Jhefr 'kqHkk esgrk] vkj-,p-ts-,l-

izkFkhZ dh vksj ls

Jh dku flag jkBkSM+]

vizkFkhZ dh vksj ls

Jh rst izdk'k]

fnukad % 18-07-2016

vf/kfu.kZ;

Hkkjr ljdkj ds Je ea=ky; dh vkKk dzekad ,y&12012@359@94&I.R.(D-II) ubZ fnYyh] fnukad 15-05-1995 ls

fuEu vuqlwph dk fookn vf/kfu.kZ; gsrq bl vf/kdj.k dks fnukad 23-06-1995 dks bl vk'k; dk izkIr gqvk gS fd &

"Whether the action of the management of Bank of Baroda, Jaipur in terminating the services of Shri Kalu

Ram Jat, Peon w.e.f. 06-11-1992 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief is the said workman entitled?"

izkFkhZ dkywjke dh vksj ls LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe bl vfHkdFku dk izLrqr fd;k gS fd mldh fu;qfDr foi{kh ds cSad esa

prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ds dk;Z djus ds fy, 55@&:i;s izfrfnu ds fglkc ls fnukad 03-08-1992 dks dh xbZ FkhA

Jfed fu;qfDr frfFk ls yxkrkj esgur o bZekunkjh ls dk;Z djrk jgkA fnukad 06-11-1992 dks dk;kZy; esa mifLFkr gqvk

rks foi{kh us fnukad 06-11-1992 ls gh ekSf[kd vkns'k ls lsok ls vyx dj fn;k rFkk lsokeqfDr dk dksbZ Li"V dkj.k ugha

crk;kA Jfed us lsok eqfDr ds ckn cSad esa mifLFkr gksdj] dk;Z ij ysus o cdk;k osru o vkWoj VkbZe ds Hkqxrku gsrq

fuosnu fd;k] ijUrq Hkqxrku ugha fd;k x;kA Jfed }kjk fnukad 02-03-1993 dks jftLVMZ ,0 Mh0 iszf"kr dj foi{kh dks

dk;Z ij ysus o cdk;k osru vkfn dk Hkqxrku djus ckcr~ fuosnu fd;k] fdUrq dksbZ lquokbZ ugha dh xbZA Jfed dh lsok

lekfIr ds le; fu;ekuqlkj fMohtu Lrj ij dksbZ ofj"Brk lwph tkjh ugha dh xbZ] tks vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947

ds fu;e 1957 o 1958 ds fu;e 77 vkSj 78 dk ljklj mYy?kau gSA Jfed /kkjk 25 ¼,u½] ¼th½] ¼,p½ vkS/kksfxd fookn

vf/kfu;e dk ykHk izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh gSA Jfed dh lsok lekfIr ds i'pkr~ mlls twfu;j Jfed xkSjh'kadj oxSjg

dk;Z dj jgs Fks vkSj lsok ls Jfed dks vyx djus ds ckn mlds LFkku ij dSyk'k pUn dqekor dks ubZ fu;qfDr ns nh

xbZA foi{kh cSad us vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 25 th ,oa 25 ,p ds izko/kkuksa dk Hkh mYy?kau fd;k gSA cSad esa 80

fnu dk;Z djus okys Jfed dks LFkkbZ dj fn;k tkrk gS] tcfd Jfed us 80 fnu ls vf/kd dk;Z fd;k gSA vr% Jfed dh

fnukad 06-11-1992 dks dh xbZ lsokeqfDr dks voS/k] vuqfpr rFkk 'kwU; djkj fn;k tkosA Jfed dks iqu% lsok esa lHkh ykHkksa

ds lkFk fy, tkus dk vkns'k fn;k tkosA

foi{kh fuxe us LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe dk tokc izLrqr dj fojks/k fd;kA mudk mRrj esa ;g vfHkdFku gS fd Jfed

dh fu;qfDr foi{kh cSad esa dHkh Hkh] fdlh in ij ugha dh xbZ gSA Jfed dks vkdfLed dk;Z dh iwfrZ ds fy, vkdfLed

Jfed ds :i esa j[kk x;k Fkk rFkk fu;ekuqlkj etnwjh dk Hkqxrku fd;k x;k FkkA ,sls Jfed dsoy vkdfLed dk;Z dh

iwfrZ gsrq gh dk;Z ij j[ks tkrs gSa vkSj ,sls dk;Z dh lekfIr ds ckn ,sls Jfedksa dh lsok,a Lor% gh lekIr ekuh tkrh gSA

Jfed us vizkFkhZ cSad esa fofHkUu le;kof/k esa fnukad 29-08-1992 ls ysdj 04-11-1992 rd ek= 76 fnol] fofHkUu vof/k;ksa esa

vkdfLed dk;Z fd;k gS vkSj vkdfLed dk;Z dh ,sot esa cSad }kjk Jfed dks fu;ekuqlkj Hkqxrku iwoZ esa gh dj fn;k FkkA

vizkFkhZ cSad ds LFkkbZ deZpkfj;ksa ds NqV~Vh ij tkus ds dkj.k gqbZ vko';drkvksa ds fy, vkdfLed dk;Z dh iwfrZ gsrq gh

vkdfLed Jfed ds :i esa dk;Z ij j[kk x;k FkkA vizkFkhZ cSad esa LFkkbZ in ds fy, ;ksX;rkuqlkj o cSad ds fu;ekuqlkj

fu;qfDr;kWa dh tkrh gSaA Jfed ds fu;kstu dk;kZy; esa jftLVªs'ku gksus o mldh ;ksX;rk] vk;q laca/kh lHkh rF;ksa dk

fu/kkZj.k djus ds ckn] LFkkbZ fu;qfDr fn, tkus dk izko/kku gSA

foi{kh us ;g Hkh vfHkdfFkr fd;k gS fd tc izkFkhZ dh fdlh izdkj dh lsok eqfDr dh ugha dh xbZ rks ,slh fLFkfr esa

vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e ds vUrxZr fdlh izdkj dk uksfVl fn;k tkuk vko';d ugha Fkk vkSj uk gh mDr izko/kkuksa ds

rgr Jfed ykHk izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh gSA Jfed us vk/kkjghu rF;ksa dks U;k;kf/kdj.k ds le{k dsoy foi{kh dks rax

djus ds m)s'; ls ;g LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe izLrqr fd;k x;k gS] tks fujLruh; gS] fujLr fd;k tkosA

Jfed us vius LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe ds leFkZu esa Lo;a dkywjke tkV dk 'kiFk i= is'k fd;k] ftlls foi{kh fuxe

}kjk izfrijh{kk dh xbZ rFkk nLrkosth lk{; esa vlQy okrkZ izfrosnu fnukad 08-11-1994 dh QksVks izfr izn'kZ McY;w&1]

Mkd jlhn dh QksVksizfr izn'kZ McY;w&2 ,oa lsok esa cgky dj dk;Z ij ysus gsrq izLrqr izkFkZuk i= dh QksVksizfr izn'kZ

McY;w&3 iznf'kZr djok, x,A

foi{kh fuxe us ds0 ds0 BkdkSj dk 'kiFk i= is'k fd;k x;k] ftlls Jfed ds izfrfuf/k us izfrijh{kk dhA

cgl lquh xbZ rFkk i=koyh dk /;kuiwoZd v/;;u fd;k x;kA

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5731

izkFkhZ ds izfrfuf/k dk rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ us fnukad 03-08-1992 ls 06-11-1992 ds e/; cSad esa 80 fnu rd prqFkZ Js.kh

deZpkjh ds in ij dk;Z fd;k gSA fnukad 06-11-1992 dks foi{khx.k us mls ekSf[kd vkns'k ls lsokeqDr dj fn;k] ftldk

dksbZ dkj.k ugha crk;kA mldh ;g lsokeqfDr vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 25 ¼,u½ ¼th½ ¼,p½ vkSj vkS/kksfxd fookn

vf/kfu;e ds vUrxZr cus fu;e ds fu;e 77 vksj 78 dk mYy?kau djrs gq, dh xbZ gSA mldh lsokeqfDr ds le; mlls

dfu"B Jfed xkSjh'kadj vkfn dk;Z dj jgs Fks] mlds ckn mlds LFkku ij dSyk'k dqekor dks ubZ fu;qfDr nh xbZ vksj

izkFkhZ dks dksbZ lsok dk volj ugha fn;k x;kA cSad esa 80 fnu fujUrj dk;Z djus okys Jfed dks LFkkbZ dj fn;k tkrk gSA

izkFkhZ us 80 fnu ls vf/kd dk;Z fd;k gS] blfy, og LFkkbZ gks x;k gS] ,slh fLFkfr esa mldh lsokeqfDr vkns'k vuqfpr ,oa

voS/k gSA mDr lsokeqfDr dks vuqfpr vkSj voS/k ?kksf"kr fd;k tkosA

mudk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd /kkjk 25 ¼th½ vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e ds izko/kkuksa ds vUrxZr izkFkhZ dks ;g izekf.kr

djus dh vko';drk gh ugha gS fd mlus lsokeqfDr ls iwoZ ds ,d o"kZ esa 240 fnu rd fujUrj dk;Z fd;k gSA /kkjk 25

¼th½ vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e ykxw gksus ds fy, rks bruk gh i;kZIr gS fd Jfed ;g vfHkokd ¼Plea½ ys ;k izekf.kr djs

fd mldh NaVuh ds nkSjku fu;kstd us fcuk fdlh dkj.k ds **ckn esa vkus okys Jfed dks igys tkuk gksxk** ds fl)kUr

dk mYya?ku fd;k gSA vius rdZ ds leFkZu esa fuEu fofu'p; izLrqr fd;k &

(2010) 3 Supreme Court Cases 192,

Harjinder Singh Vs Punjab State Warehousing Corporation

mudk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd ;fn dfu"B O;fDr dks lsok es afujUrj j[kk tkrk gS vkSj ofj"B dh NaVuh dj nh tkrh gS

rks ;g NaVuh voS/k gSA bl rdZ ds leFkZu esa fuEu fofu'p; izLrqr fd;k &

RLR 1991 (1) 577,

General Manager, Northern Railway, New Delhi

Vs.

Judge Central Industrial Tribunal & anr.

mudk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ Jfed ls dfu"B Jfed dk;Z jgs Fks vksj izkFkhZ dks lsokeqDr dj fn;k] bl dkj.k

izkFkhZ dh lsokeqfDr voS/k gSA

blds foijhr foi{kh ds izfrfuf/k dk rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ loZizFke rks ;gh izekf.kr ugha dj ldk gS fd mls foi{kh

}kjk prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij fdlh izdkj dh dksbZ fu;qfDr nh xbZ gks vkSj mlds rFkk izkFkhZ ds e/; fu;kstd

fu;ksftr ds laca/k gksA izkFkhZ us vkdfLed dk;Z ds fy, ns; etnwjh ij cSad esa fofHkUu le;ksa ij 76 fnu dk;Z fd;k gS]

ftldk ikfjJfed mls fn;k x;k gSA izkFkhZ foi{kh dh lsok esa ugha Fkk] blfy, mlds lsok i`Fkddj.k dk dksbZ iz'u gh

mRiUu ugha gksrk gS u rks izkFkhZ dk fu;kstu] lk{; ls izekf.kr gqvk gS vkSj u gh izkFkhZ }kjk dfFkr fdlh vU; O;fDr

xkSjh'kadj dk fu;kstu vkSj mldk izkFkhZ ls dfu"B gksuk gh izekf.kr gqvk gSA foi{kh }kjk vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e ds

fdlh Hkh izko/kku dk mYy?kau ugha fd;k x;k gSA izkFkhZ dk LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe fujLruh; gSA

mudk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd tgka ij dk;Z dh vko';drk ds vk/kkj ij fdlh dks dk;Z ij j[kk tkos] ogka lsok lekfIr

dks NaVuh ugha dgk tk ldrkA vius rdZ ds leFkZu esa fuEu fofu'p; is'k fd;k &

AIR 1997 Supreme Court 3657,

Himanshu Kumar Vidyarthi & others Vs State of Bihar & others.

mudk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd izdj.k esa fu;kstd vksj fu;ksftr ds laca/k gh vfLrRo esa ugha vk, Fks vkSj ,slh fLFkfr esa

,slh dksbZ lsok lekfIr NaVuh ugha dgh tk ldrhA vius rdZ ds leFkZu esa fuEu fofu'p; is'k fd;k &

2003 -I- LLJ Kerala 236,

Government Servant Co-operative Society Ltd.

Vs.

Industrial Tribunal, Alappuzha & another.

eSaus rdZ fordZ ij euu fd;k rFkk i=koyh ,oa izLrqr fofu'p;ksa dk /;kuiwoZd v/;;u fd;kA

izkFkhZ us vius LVsVesaV vkWQ dySe esa foi{kh cSad esa fnukad 03-08-1992 ls prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij fu;qfDr

gksuk vfHkdfFkr fd;k gS vkSj fnukad 06-11-1992 dks lsokeqDr fd;k tkuk dgk gSA izkFkhZ dks foi{kh cSad us prqFkZ Js.kh

deZpkjh ds in ij fnukad 03-08-1992 dks fu;ksftr fd;k Fkk] ;g rF; izkFkhZ dks viuh ldkjkRed] fo'oluh; ,oa

nLrkosth izHkko'kkyh (Cogent) lk{; ls izekf.kr djuk FkkA lk{kh dkywjke ¼izkFkhZ½ us vius eq[; dFku esa prqFkZ Js.kh

deZpkjh ds in ij fnukad 03-08-1992 ls fu;qDr fd;k tkuk dgk gS] ijUrq izfrijh{kk esa ;g Lohdkj fd;k gS fd mls dksbZ

fu;qfDr i= ugha fn;k x;k FkkA blus ;g Hkh dgk gS fd mls ekSf[kd j[kk x;k Fkk vkSj ;g Hkh dgk gS fd mlus tc

ukSdjh yxh rc dksbZ izkFkZuk i= izLrqr ugha fd;kA mYys[kuh; gS fd foi{kh cSad ,d lkoZtfud laLFkku gS] tgka prqFkZ

Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij fu;qfDr dh fu;fer izfdz;k gksrh gSA ,sls laLFkku esa fcuk izkFkZuk i= ds izLrqr fd, gq, vkSj fcuk

fu;qfDr i= tkjh fd, prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij fu;qfDr fn;k tkuk laHko gh ugha gSA blh izdkj ls izkFkhZ us viuh

5732 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

lsok lekfIr ds laca/k esa Hkh dksbZ vkns'k izLrqr ugha fd;k gSA izkFkhZ us ,slk vU; dksbZ ys[k i= Hkh izLrqr ugha fd;k gS]

ftlls ;g izdV gksrk gks fd foi{kh ds ;gka fnukad 03-08-1992 dks prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh dk dksbZ fjDr in gks vkSj ml ij

izkFkhZ fu;qDr fd;k x;k gks vkSj mlus mDr fnukad 03-08-1992 ds i'pkr~ foi{kh cSad esa prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij

dk;Z fd;k gksA

vius LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe esa izkFkhZ us ;g vafdr fd;k gS fd lsok lekfIr ds laca/k esa mlls dfu"B Jfed xkSjh'kadj

dke dj jgs Fks] tcfd mlus izfrijh{kk esa ;g dgk gS fd og tc dke djrk Fkk rks vdsyk Fkk vkSj mls ;g Hkh ugha

ekywe fd fdls yxk;k x;kA izfrijh{kk esa ;g Hkh izdV fd;k gS fd mlus vius LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe esa ;g Hkh ugha fy[kk gS

fd mldh fu;qfDr dc gqbZA vkxs blus izfrijh{kk esa ;g dgk gS fd mlds lkFk dke dj jgk Fkk] og xkSjh'kadj FkkA ,d

LFkku ij og Lo;a dk vdsyk gh dk;Z djuk dgrk gS] nwljs LFkku ij xkSjh'kadj dk dk;Z djuk izdV dj jgk gS] ijUrq

mlus dgha ;g ugha crk;k gS fd mDr xkSjh'kadj dc ls fu;qDr Fkk vkSj fdl izdkj ls mlls dfu"B FkkA vius eq[;

ijh{k.k esa blus Lo;a ds lsok i`Fkddj.k ds ckn fnukad 20-11-1995 dks rkjkpan vkSj ckn esa jkds'k 'kekZ dks yxk;k tkuk

vafdr fd;k gS vkSj ;g Hkh dgk gS fd mlds LFkku ij ckn esa dSyk'k dqekor dks j[k fy;k vkSj mls volj ugha fn;k

x;k tcfd izfrijh{kk esa blus ;g dgk gS fd mls ;g ugha irk fd rkjkpan vkSj dSyk'k dks dgka yxk;k x;k vkSj vkxs

Lo;a ;g Lohdkj fd;k gS fd mlus dksbZ izkFkZuk i= LFkkbZ fu;qfDr ds fy, ugha fn;k vkSj ;g Hkh Lohdkjk gS fd LFkkbZ

fu;qfDr ds fu;e cus gq, gSaA

bl lk{kh us ,slk dksbZ ys[k i= izLrqr ugha fd;k] ftlls ;g izdV gksrk gks fd xkSjh'kadj uked deZpkjh cSad esa

dk;Zjr Fkk vkSj blls dfu"B Fkk vkSj dSyk'k dqekor dks lsok esa j[kk x;k gks rFkk rkjkpan vkSj jkds'k 'kekZ dks Hkh fu;qDr

fd;k x;k gksA bl izdkj ls Li"V gS fd izkFkhZ us vius LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe esa tks Hkh vfHkopu fd, gSa] mUgsa og lk{; ls

izekf.kr djus esa og loZFkk vlQy jgk gSA

foi{kh dh vksj ls lk{; esa ds0 ds0 Bkdksj mifLFkr gq, gSa] ftUgksusa izkFkhZ dks vkdfLed :i ls vkdfLed dk;Z dh

iwfrZ ds fy, fu;ekuqlkj ns; etnwjh ij dk;Z djokuk dgk gSA izfrijh{kk esa izkFkhZ dks prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij j[ks

tkus ds lq>ko ls loZFkk bUdkj fd;k gS vkSj ;g Hkh izdV fd;k gS fd izkFkhZ dk dk;Z lkQ lQkbZ djuk] fjdkMZ f'k¶V

(Shift) djuk] ikuh fiykuk vkfn FkkA bl lk{kh us izkFkhZ dks okkmpj ls Hkqxrku djuk dgk gS] vkSj ;g Hkh dgk gS fd

nSfud osru ij dk;Zjr Jfedksa dh dksbZ ofj"Brk lwph ugha cukbZ tkrhA

bl izdkj ls bl lk{kh ds dFkuksa esa Hkh ,slh dksbZ LohdkjksfDr ugha vkbZ gS] ftlls ;g izekf.kr gksrk gks fd izkFkhZ

dkywjke foi{kh cSad esa prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij fu;ksftr fd;k x;k gksA

izkFkhZ us fnukad 06-11-1992 dks viuh lsokeqfDr fd;k tkuk izdV fd;k gS] ijUrq lsokeqfDr dk dksbZ vkns'k izLrqr

ugha fd;k gSA mls ekSf[kd gh gVk;k tkuk dgk gS] ijUrq ;g mYys[kuh; gS fd cSad tSls yksd laLFkku esa dk;Zjr fdlh

deZpkjh dks ekSf[kd vkns'kksa ls gVk;k tkuk laHko gh ugha gSA izkFkhZ us rks ;g Hkh ugha crk;k gS fd mls fdl O;fDr }kjk

mDr fnukad dks gVk;k x;kA

Åij fd, x, foospu ls Li"V gS fd izkFkhZ ;g izekf.kr ugha dj ldk gS fd og foi{kh cSad esa fnukad 03-08-1992

dks prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij fu;qDr gqvk gks vkSj mlus prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds :i esa cSad esa dk;Z fd;k gksA izkFkhZ

vius vkSj cSad ds e/; fu;ksftr vkSj fu;kstd ds laca/k gksuk Hkh izekf.kr ugha dj ldk gS rFkk ;g Hkh izekf.kr ugha dj

ldk gS fd mls fnukad 06-11-1992 dks lsokeqDr fd;k x;kA izkFkhZ ;g Hkh nf'kZr ugha dj ldk gS fd cSad esa 76 fnu rd

vkdfLed dk;Z djus ls og fdl izdkj ls LFkkbZ :i ls fu;qfDr ikus dk vf/kdkjh gks tkrk gSA tc izkFkhZ Lo;a dk foi{kh

ds ;gka fu;kstu gh izekf.kr ugha dj ldk gS rks mlls dfu"B O;fDr;ksa dk cSad esa dk;Z djrs jguk vkSj /kkjk 25 ¼,u½]

¼th½] ¼,p½ vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e rFkk bl vf/kfu;e ds vUrxZr cus fu;e 77 vkSj 78 dk mYy?kau fd;k tkuk Hkh

izekf.kr ugha gks ldk gS vkSj ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk gS fd foi{kh }kjk Åij of.kZr izko/kkuksa dk mYy?kau fd;k x;k gSA

i=koyh ij tks Hkh lk{; gS mlls esjs fopkj ls ;g drbZ izekf.kr ugha gks ldk gS fd izkFkhZ dkywjke tkV foi{kh

cSad esa fnukad 03-08-1992 dks prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij fu;ksftr fd;k x;k gks vkSj mlus prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds :i

esa cSad esa dk;Z fd;k gks vkSj mls fnukad 06-11-1992 dks lsok ls i`Fkd fd;k x;k gksA izkFkhZ ;g Hkh izekf.kr ugha dj ldk

gS fd mlds vkSj cSad ds e/; fu;ksftr vkSj fu;kstd ds laca/k gksA ,slh fLFkfr esa tcfd izkFkhZ mDr rF; izekf.kr gh ugha

dj ldk gS rks og fdlh izdkj dk dksbZ vuqrks"k izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh ugha gSA mldh vksj ls izLrqr LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe

fujLruh; gSA

mi;qZDr foospu ds QyLo:i izdj.k esa fuEu vf/kfu.kZ; ikfjr fd;k tkrk gS %&

vf/kfu.kZ;

**Jfed dkywjke tkV iq= Jh dkukjke] eq-iks- djM+] ok;k [kkpfj;kokl] ftyk & lhdj] ekQZr dkuflag jkBkSM+] Je

lykgdkj] 858 nsohuxj] ';keuxj] iksLV vkWfQl ds ihNs] U;w lkaxkusj jksM] lks<kyk] t;iqj dk foi{kh ofj"B izcU/kd] cSad

vkWQ cMkSnk] vapy dk;kZy;] vkuUn Hkou] pkSFkh eafty] lalkj pUn jksM] t;iqj ds ;gka fu;kstu esa gksuk izekf.kr ugha gksus

ls mldk LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe fujLr fd;k tkrk gSA

izkFkhZ dkywjke tkV fdlh rjg dh dksbZ jkgr ,oa vuqrks"k izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh ugha gSA**

'kqHkk esgrk] U;k;k/kh’k

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5733

ubZ fnYyh] 20 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2446-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh /kjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj cSad vkWiQ

cM+kSnk ds izca/ra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/ esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;ky;]

t;iqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 15@1997) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 20-12-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&12012@202@1996&vkbZvkj (ch&II)]

jfo dqekj] MsLd vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 20th December, 2016

S.O. 2446.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 15/1997) of the Central Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur as shown in the

Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Bank of Baroda, and their workmen, received by the

Central Government on 20.12.2016.

[No. L-12012/202/1996-IR (B-II)]

RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer

vuqca/k

dsUnzh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k] t;iqj

dsl ua0 lh-vkbZ-Vh- 15@1997

jSQjSal % Hkkjr ljdkj] Je ea=ky;] ubZ fnYyh dk vkns’k dzekad % ,y&12012@202@96&I.R.(B-II) ubZ fnYyh]

fnukad 04-04-1997

izdk'k ds0 'ksodkuh }kjk Jh xksfoUn 'ksodkuh]

10@653 Lo.kZ iFk] ekuljksoj] t;iqj

---izkFkhZ

cuke

jhtuy eSustj] cSad vkWQ cMkSnk] jhtuy vkWfQl]

vtesj jhtu] LVs'ku jksM] vtesjA

lgk;d egkizcU/kd] cSad vkWQ cMkSnk ¼jktLFkku tkSu½

vkuUn Hkou] lalkj pUnz jksM] t;iqj

---vizkFkhZx.k

mifLFkr %

ihBklhu vf/kdkjh % Jhefr 'kqHkk esgrk] vkj-,p-ts-,l-

izkFkhZ dh vksj ls

Jh vkj0 lh0 tSu]

vizkFkhZ dh vksj ls

Jh rst izdk'k 'kekZ]

fnukad % 29-06-2016

vf/kfu.kZ;

Hkkjr ljdkj ds Je ea=ky; dh vkKk dzekad ,y & 12012@202@96&I.R.(B-II) ubZ fnYyh] ls fuEu vuqlwph

dk fookn vf/kfu.kZ; gsrq bl vf/kdj.k dks fnukad 14-07-1997 dks bl vk'k; dk izkIr gqvk gS fd &

"Whether the action of the Management of Bank of Baroda, Ajmer in dismissing the services of Shri P.K.

Shivkani vide letter dated 18-03-91 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the said workman is entitled?"

izkFkhZ us LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe bl vfHkdFku dk izLrqr fd;k gS fd izkFkhZ cSad vkWQ cMkSnk dh 'kEHkwx< 'kk[kk esa d`f"k

lgk;d ds in ij inLFkkfir FkkA fnukad 01-02-1990 dks foi{kh dze&1 jhtuy eSustj us mls fuyfEcr fd;k vkSj fnukad

09-05-1990 dks ,d vkjksi fn;kA izkFkhZ us fnukad 22-08-1990 dks vkjksi i=ksa dk mRrj izLrqr dj lHkh vkjksiksa dks vLohdkj

fd;kA vizkFkhZ us izkFkhZ dks tokc dk volj fn, fcuk gh fnukad 09-06-1990 dks voS/k :i ls Jh ds0 ,e0 ekFkqj dks tk¡p

vf/kdkjh fu;qDr dj fn;kA tk¡p vf/kdkjh us fnukad 13-12-1990 dks tk¡p izfrosnu izLrqr fd;k] ftlds vk/kkj ij foi{kh

dze&1 us izkFkhZ dks fnukad 23-01-1991 dks dkj.k crkvks uksfVl fn;k vkSj izkFkhZ dks voxr djok;k fd mls cSad dh lsokvksa

ls c[kkZLr djus dk fu.kZ; fy;k x;k gSA fnukad 22-09-1991 dks bl uksfVl dk foLr`r mRrj izkFkhZ us izLrqr fd;k] ijUrq

foi{kh de&1 us bl tokc] nLrkost vkSj vU; egRoiw.kZ rF;ksa ij fopkj fd, fcuk fnukad 08-03-1991 dks izkFkhZ dks

5734 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

c[kkZLr djus dk vkns'k tkjh dj fn;kA fnukad 08-03-1991 ds bl vkns'k ds fo:) izkFkhZ us fnukad 26-04-1991 dks foi{kh

dze&2 ds ;gka vihy izLrqr dhA ;g vihy Hkh fcuk fopkj fd, gh fnukad 26-08-1991 dks [kkfjt dj nh xbZA

izkFkhZ dk vfHkdFku gS fd mldh lsokeqfDr voS/k vkSj vuqfpr gS( tks tk¡p dh xbZ] og voS/k gS vkSj izkd`frd

U;k; ds fl)kUrksa ds foijhr gSA izkFkhZ dks tokc dk volj fn, fcuk tkWap vf/kdkjh dks fu;qDr fd;k x;k; tk¡p vf/kdkjh

dh fu;qfDr cSad dfeZ;ksa ds ykxw le>kSrs ds vuqlkj ugha dh xbZ( izkFkhZ dks cpko dk leqfpr volj ugha fn;k x;k] mls

cpko izfrfuf/k j[kus dh lqfo/kk ugha nh xbZ] mls vkjksi i= ds leFkZu esa izLrqr nLrkostksa dh izfr;kWa miyC/k ugha djokbZ

xbZ( tk¡p vf/kdkjh us tk¡p izfrosnu esa ,sls nLrkost dks Hkh vk/kkj cuk fy;k x;k tks tk¡p ds nkSjku izLrqr ugha fd,

x,; cSad ds lk{khx.k ls izkFkhZ dks ftjg dk leqfpr volj ugha fn;k x;k( izkFkhZ dks cpko esa lk{; izLrqr djus dk

volj ugha fn;k x;k vkSj bl izdkj ls lEiw.kZ tk¡p voS/k :i ls dh xbZA

izkFkhZ dk ;g Hkh vfHkdFku gS fd tk¡p vf/kdkjh us vkjksi dzekad 3] 4 o 5 ds laca/k esa tks fu"d"kZ fudkys gSa] os

iw.kZr% d;klksa ij vk/kkfjr gSa vkSj tk¡p vf/kdkjh dk fu"d"kZ Hkh iwjh rjg fod`r ¼Perverse½ gSA tk¡p vf/kdkjh vkSj

vuq'kklfud vf/kdkjh us bl rF; ij fopkj gh ugha fd;k fd izkFkhZ ds fo:) ftu dk;ksZa dks ysdj vkjksi yxk, x, gSa] os

mlds drZO; esa ugha FksA vuq'kklfud vf/kdkjh us iwoZ vfHkys[kksa dks vk/kkj cukdj muds ckjs esa izkFkhZ dks lquokbZ dk volj

fn, fcuk] nf.Mr fd;k gS] tks voS/k gSA

izkFkhZ us mDr lHkh vfHkdFku djrs gq, lsokeqfDr vkns'k fnukad 08-03-1991 dks voS/k ?kksf"kr fd, tkus dh izkFkZuk

dh vkSj lsok esa fujUrj ekurs gq,] leLr lsok ykHk fnyk, tkus dk fuosnu fd;kA

foi{khx.k us izkFkhZ ds LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe dk mRrj izLrqr dj fojks/k fd;kA mudk mRrj esa vfHkdFku gS fd izkFkhZ

}kjk fd, x, nqO;Zogkj ds laca/k esa foHkkxh; tk¡p djuk fuf'pr fd;k x;k Fkk vr% mls fuyfEcr dj fu;ekuqlkj vkjksi

i= tkjh fd;k x;k FkkA izkFkhZ us vkjksi i= dk fnukad 13-07-1990 dks vkSj fQj fnukad 21-08-1990 dks tokc izLrqr fd;k

gSA nksuksa tokc ijLij fojks/kkHkklh gSaA foi{kh dze&1 us izkFkhZ ds tokc vkSj tk¡p dh izfdz;k ds nkSjku is'k lk{; vkSj rF;ksa

dk iw.kZ v/;;u djus ds ckn gh c[kkZLrxh dk vkns'k tkjh fd;k gSA vihyh; izkf/kdkjh us Hkh fu/kkZfjr izfdz;k vkSj efLr"d

dk mi;ksx djrs gq, fnukad 26-08-1991 dks vkns'k ikfjr fd;k gSA tk¡p ds nkSjku izkd`frd U;k; ds fl)kUrksa dh ikyuk

dh xbZ gS vkSj Jfed dk cpko dk leqfpr volj iznku fd;k x;k gSA vkjksi i= esa gh ;g vafdr fd;k gS fd izkFkhZ dks

cSad deZpkfj;ksa dh iathc) ml VªsM ;wfu;u ds izfrfuf/k }kjk cpko djus dh vuqefr nh tkosxh] ftldk og lnL; gSA

izkFkhZ us Lo;a gh bl lqfo/kk dk ykHk ugha mBk;k gSA izkFkhZ dks lk{khx.k ls ftjg djus dk iw.kZ volj fn;k x;k Fkk vkSj

lk{; izLrqr djus dk Hkh volj fn;k x;kA izkFkhZ Lo;a us gh bldk mi;ksx ugha fd;kA tk¡p iw.kZr% fu;ekuqlkj vkSj

fof/kiw.kZ dh xbZ gSA mRrj esa foi{khx.k dk ;g Hkh vfHkdFku gS fd ftu dk;ksZa dks ysdj tks vkjksi yxk, x, gSa] os izkFkhZ

dh M~;wVh esa ugha gksuk xyr gSA vuq'kklfud vf/kdkjh us tk¡p ds vfHkys[k ds vk/kkj ij gh fnukad 18-03-1991 dk vkns'k

ikfjr fd;k gSA vihyh; izkf/kdkjh us leLr fjdkMZ dk voyksdu djus ds ckn ldkj.k vkns'k ikfjr fd;k gSA izkFkhZ us

vkS/kksfxd fookn tku cw>dj foyEc ls izLrqr fd;k gSA mDr lHkh dkj.kksa ls LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe fujLruh; gS] vr% fujLr

fd;k tkosA

fnukad 27-08-1999 ds vkns'k }kjk vf/kdj.k us izdj.k esa dh xbZ foHkkxh; tk¡p dks lgh vkSj 'kq) gksuk fu.khZr

fd;k gSA

mHk; i{kdkjksa dh vfUre cgl lquh xbZA

foi{kh ds izfrfuf/k dk rdZ gS fd tc vf/kdj.k us foHkkxh; tk¡p dks mfpr ,oa 'kq) ?kksf"kr dj fn;k gS rks

vf/kdj.k dks tk¡p esa vkbZ lk{; dk iqueZwY;kadu djus vkSj c[kkZLrxh ds vkns'k dks bl vk/kkj ij vikLr djus dk dksbZ

vf/kdkj ugha gS fd lk{;] vkjksiksa dks izekf.kr djus ds fy,] vi;kZIr FkhA vius rdZ ds leFkZu esa fuEu fofu'p; izLrqr

fd;k&

1995 (1) Supreme Court Cases 216,

Government of T.N. & Another

Vs.

A. Rajapandian.

blds foijhr izkFkhZ ds izfrfuf/k dk rdZ gS fd vf/kdj.k dks /kkjk 11 ¼,½ vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e ds izko/kkuksa

ds vUrxZr ;g vf/kdkj gS fd og lk{; dk lgh :i ls ewY;kadu djsA vkS/kksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k lk{; dk iqueZwY;kadu dj

ldrh gS vkSj fn, x, n.M dh ek=k esa Hkh gLr{ksi dj ldrh gSA vius rdZ ds leFkZu esa fuEu fofu'p; is'k fd, &

2008 (119) FLR 96,

Mavji C. Lakum Vs Central Bank of India.

2003 (4) L.L.N. 804,

Ramesh Kumar Vs Rajasthan State Road

Transport Corporation, Jaipur & others.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5735

eSaus mDr rdksZa ij izLrqr fofu'p;ksa ds izdk'k esa euu fd;kA

foi{kh dh vksj ls izLrqr fofu'p; Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 dh /kkjk 14] 15 ds laca/k esa gS] tcfd

orZeku izdj.k vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e ds izko/kkuksa ds vUrxZr gSA oSls Hkh ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us vius fofu'p;

2008 ,Q-,y-vkj- esa vuqPNsn 19 esa ;g Li"Vr% fu.khZr fd;k gS fd tgka tk¡p 'kq) Hkh ikbZ tkos ogka fuf'pr rkSj ij ;g

ugha ekuk tk ldrk fd tk¡p ds nkSjku tks fu"d"kZ fudkys x, gSa] os lgh fu"d"kZ gSa rFkk vkS/kksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k ;fn bl

fu"d"kZ ij igqaprk gS fd tks tk¡p ds nkSjku fudkys x, fu"d"kZ gSa os lk{; ls lefFkZr ugha gSa rks og lk{; dk iquewZY;kadu

dj ldrk gS vkSj n.M dh ek=k ds laca/k esa Hkh gLr{ksi dj ldrk gSA

mDr fufu'p;ksa esa izfrikfnr fl)kUr tks fd vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e ds gh laca/k esa gSa] ds vuqlkj vf/kdj.k

dks ;g ns[kus dk iw.kZ vf/kdkj gS fd tk¡p ds nkSjku tks fu"d"kZ fudkys x, gSa] os fof/kd lk{; ds vk/kkj ij gSa vFkok ugha

vkSj dgha ;s fu"d"kZ fod`r (Perverse) rks ugha gSa] ,slh fLFkfr esa gesa orZeku izdj.k esa Hkh ;gh ns[kuk gSA

izLrqr izdj.k esa fnukad 09-06-1990 dks vkjksi i= izkFkhZ dks fn;k x;k] ftlesa ml ij pkj vk{ksi yxkrs gq,] ikap

vkjksiksa ls vkjksfir fd;k x;kA tk¡p vf/kdkjh dh fu;qfDr ds i'pkr~ tk¡p vf/kdkjh }kjk izdj.k esa tk¡p dj tk¡p izfrosnu

fn;k x;kA bl tk¡p izfrosnu esa izkFkhZ ds fo:) tks nks vk{ksi dze&1 o 2 yxk, x, Fks] mUgsa izekf.kr ugha ik;k x;k vkSj

vk{ksi dze&3 o 4 dks izekf.kr ekus x, gSaA

vk{ksi dze&3 bl vk'k; dk Fkk fd izkFkhZ us fnukad 03-01-1990 dks 2 ih0 ,e0 ds yxHkx 'kEHkwx< 'kk[kk ds gSM

dSf'k;j vkj0 lh0 Vsyj dks ckgj vkus dks dgk vkSj tSls gh og ckgj tkus dks gqvk] izkFkhZ us mls xys ls idM+ fy;k vkSj

mlds 'kjhj ds fofHkUu Hkkxksa ij ekjuk vkjEHk dj fn;kA

pkSFkk vk{ksi tks izekf.kr ik;k x;k] og bl izdkj Fkk fd fnukad 15-01-1990 dks cSad dh 'kEHkwx< 'kk[kk ds 'kk[kk

izcU/kd us izkFkhZ dks xqykciqjk 'kk[kk esa udn jkf'k ys tkdj udn isz"k.k djus dks dgk] ijUrq izkFkhZ us 'kk[kk izcU/kd ds bu

funsZ'kksa dh ikyuk djus ls bUdkj dj fn;k] ftlds dkj.k fnukad 15-01-1990 dks mDr jkf'k udn isz"k.k ugha dh tk ldh

vkSj ckn esa fnukad 16-01-1990 dks gh xqykciqjk 'kk[kk esa udn isz"k.k dh xbZA

tk¡p vf/kdkjh us mDr nksuksa vk{ksiksa dks izekf.kr ekurs gq, izkFkhZ dks fuEu vkjksiksa dk nks"kh ik;k %&

¼1½ cSad 'kk[kk ds ifjlj esa v'kksHkuh; O;ogkj djukA

¼2½ cSad ifjlj esa cyokbZ O;ogkj vkSj d`R; djukA

¼3½ tku&cw>dj mPp vf/kdkjh ds funsZ'kksa dh ikyuk ugha djus okys d`R; djukA

¼4½ cSad ds fgrksa ds fo:) dk;Z djukA

¼5½ ,d cSad deZpkjh ds yk;d O;ogkj ugha djukA

izkFkhZ ds izfrfuf/k dk rdZ gS fd tk¡p vf/kdkjh us izFke vk{ksi dks izekf.kr ekuk gS] og lk{; ds vk/kkj ij ugha

gSA tk¡p ds nkSjku ,slh dksbZ fof/kd lk{; ugha vkbZ gS] ftlls ;g vk{ksi izekf.kr gksrk gksA mudk rdZ gS fd izdj.k esa

dksbZ Lora= lk{kh is'k ugha gqvk gS tcfd f'kdk;rdrkZ ?kVukLFky ij yksxksa dk ,d= gks tkuk dg jgk gSA izdj.k esa dksbZ

izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ Hkh ntZ ugha djokbZ xbZ gS] f'kdk;rdrkZ dk dksbZ fpfdRldh; ijh{k.k djokdj dksbZ fjiksVZ is'k ugha dh

xbZ gSA dsoy f'kdk;rdrkZ ds dFkuksa ds vk/kkj ij ,slk vkjksi izekf.kr ugha gks ldrkA

mudk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd Lo;a f'kdk;rdrkZ ds dFku Hkh fo'oluh; ugha gSaA rFkkdfFkr ekjihV ds i'pkr~ mldk

'kk[kk ds vUnj tkdj dke djuk vkjEHk dj nsus dk dFku] dsoy ekj [kkuk vkSj Lo;a ekjihV dk dksbZ d`R; ugha djuk

vkfn rF; ;gh nf'kZr djrs gSa fd okLro esa f'kdk;rdrkZ ds lkFk ,slh dksbZ ?kVuk izkFkhZ }kjk dkfjr gh ugha dh xbZA

mudk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd vU; lk{kh Jh ek: dks izLrqr fd;k x;k gS] ftlus Lo;a ekjihV gksrs ns[kuk ugha dgk

gSA mudk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd izdj.k esa f'kdk;r rks tk¡p ds nkSjku iznf'kZr gh ugha gqbZ gS] ,slh fLFkfr esa ;gh ekuk tkosxk

fd dksbZ f'kdk;r Fkh gh ughaA vius bu rdksZa ds leFkZu esa fuEu fofu'p; izLrqr fd, &

1999 (81) FLR 630,

Kuldeep Singh Vs The Commissioner of Police & others.

bl fofu'p; esa ;g fu.khZr fd;k x;k fd ewy f'kdk;r dh vuqifLFkfr ;g nf'kZr djrh gS fd dksbZ f'kdk;r Fkh

gh ughaA

2005 LAB. I.C. 467,

Sarvesh Kumar Sharma Bulandshahr

Station Director & Appellate Authority.

Nuclear Power Corpn. of India Ltd. Bulandshahr & others.

5736 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

bl fofu'p; esa ;g fu.khZr fd;k x;k fd tgka vipkjh&deZpkjh }kjk ofj"B vf/kdkfj;ksa ds lkFk ekjihV djus

dk vkjksi gks vkSj dksbZ Lora= lk{kh iznf'kZr ugha gqvk gks] tcfd ?kVukLFky ij dbZ yksx bdV~Bs gks x, gksa rks ogka

ifjoknh ds vdsys ds dFku ij fo'okl djuk lgh ugha gSA

eSaus mDr rdksZa ij i=koyh ij miyC/k lk{; vkSj lkexzh ds izdk'k esa euu fd;kA

foHkkxh; tk¡p ds laca/k esa dh xbZ dk;Zokgh dk vfHkys[k vf/kdj.k esa izLrqr fd;k x;k gS vkSj bl vfHkys[k esa

f'kdk;rdrkZ Jh Vsyj }kjk tks f'kdk;r fnukad 04-01-1990 dks izLrqr dh xbZ tks ,e&6 ds :i esa fpfUgr gS] izLrqr dh

xbZ gSA bl ys[ki= ds laca/k esa izkFkhZ ls Lohd`fr@vLohd`fr ds laca/k esa Hkh iwNk x;k] tSlk fd tk¡p dh dk;Zokgh ds i`"B

6 ij vadu gSA lk{kh vkj0 lh0 Vsyj us vius tk¡p ds nkSjku fd, x, dFku esa ;g f'kdk;r 'kk[kk izcU/kd dks fy[kdj

nsuk Li"Vr% izdV fd;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk gS fd izdj.k esa ewy f'kdk;r izLrqr vkSj iznf'kZr ugha

gqbZ gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa izkFkhZ ds izfrfuf/k dk ;g rdZ Lohdkj ugha fd;k tk ldrk gS fd izdj.k esa dksbZ f'kdk;r gS gh

ughaA

vk{ksi dzekad 3 ds laca/k esa tk¡p dh dk;Zokgh ds nkSjku lk{kh vkj0 lh0 Vsyj tks f'kdk;rdrkZ gS vkSj ftlds

lkFk ;g ?kVuk dkfjr gksuk crk;k x;k gS] ijhf{kr gqvk gS vkSj vU; lk{kh /kehZpUn ek:] fdjkuk epsZUV Hkh ijhf{kr gqvk

gSA lk{kh vkj0 lh0 Vsyj us fnukad 03-01-1990 dks nksigj nks&rhu cts ds chp izkFkhZ Jh 'ksodkuh }kjk Lo;a ds lkFk cSad

ifjlj esa ekjihV fd;k tkuk Li"Vr% izdV fd;k gSA ;g lgh gS fd izdj.k dh dksbZ izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ iqfyl Fkkuk esa

ntZ ugha djokbZ xbZ gSA bl laca/k esa f'kdk;rdrkZ us viuh f'kdk;r esa ;g vafdr fd;k gS fd izkFkhZ us ?kVuk ds fy,

mlds ikao ij fxjdj ekQh ekax yh FkhA f'kdk;r esa mlus ?kVuk ds laca/k esa {ks=h; izcU/kd dh vuqefr ds ckn gh

,QvkbZvkj ntZ djokus dh ckr vafdr dh gSA mYys[kuh; gS fd Lo;a f'kdk;rdrkZ us izkFkhZ }kjk Lo;a dks eqDdksa ls ekjuk

vkSj maxyh ij dsoy ,d [kjksap dk fu'kku vkuk gh izdV fd;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa fpfdRldh; ijh{k.k ugha gksus ek= ls

;g ugha dgk tk ldrk fd blds dFku feF;k gSaA ftl izdkj dh pksVsa bl lk{kh dks dkfjr gqbZ gSa mudh izd`fr ,slh ugha

Fkh fd muds dkj.k f'kdk;rdrkZ cSad dk dke gh ugha dj ldsA ,slh fLFkfr esa ;g rdZ fd f'kdk;rdrkZ] cSad dk dk;Z

bl ?kVuk ds ckn djus yx x;k rks blls ;g nf'kZr gksrk gks fd mlds lkFk ?kVuk dkfjr ugha gqbZ] ugha ekuk tk ldrkA

lk{kh vkj0 lh0 Vsyj ds mDr dFku ds leFkZu esa ,d vU; lk{kh /kehZpUn ek: Hkh tk¡p dh dk;Zokgh ds nkSjku

ijhf{kr fd;k x;k gSA bl lk{kh us vius dFku esa ;g dgk gS fd fnukad 03-01-1990 dks og 2 ls 3 cts 'kke dks cSad ds

lkeus xksnke dh iVjh ij cSBk FkkA Jh 'ksodkuh vkSj Jh Vsyj ckgj vk, vkSj cjkens ds [kEcs ds ikl Jh 'ksodkuh us Jh

Vsyj dh fxjscku idM+ yh; mlus lkspk fd 'kk;n etkd dj jgs gSa] mlus ;g Hkh ns[kk fd 'ksodkuh gkFkkikbZ dj jgs FksA

'ksodkuh lhf<;k¡ mrj x, vkSj Vsyj cSad ds vUnj vk x;sA og mlh oDr cSad esa vk;k rks ns[kk fd Vsyj dh deht QVh

gqbZ Fkh vkSj maxyh ds yxh gqbZ FkhA

;g lk{kh Lora= lk{kh gS] ftldk cSad ls vkSj cSad dfeZ;ksa ls fdlh izdkj dk dksbZ laca/k ugha gSA bl lk{kh dk

;g dFku v[kf.Mr gSA volj nsus ds ckn Hkh blls dksbZ izfrijh{kk izkFkhZ dh vksj ls ugha dh xbZ gSA bl lk{kh ds dFku

ij vfo'okl fd, tkus dk dksbZ dkj.k ugha gSA bl lk{kh us Jh vkj0 lh0 Vsyj ds dFku dk leFkZu djrs gq, Li"Vr%

izkFkhZ }kjk Jh Vsyj dk dkWyj idM+uk] ekjihV djuk] 'kVZ QkM+uk vkfn izdV fd;k gSA

tks lk{; tk¡p ds nkSjku bl vk{ksi ds laca/k esa izLrqr gqbZ gS] mlls mDr vk{ksi] esjs fopkj ls] HkyhHkkafr izekf.kr

gS vkSj bl fof/kd lk{; ds vk/kkj ij tk¡p vf/kdkjh }kjk bl vk{ksi dks izekf.kr ekuus dk tks fu"d"kZ fudkyk x;k gS]

og fdlh Hkh :i esa fod`r (Perverse) vkSj vfof/kd ugha dgk tk ldrk gSA

prqFkZ vk{ksi ds laca/k esa rRdkyhu 'kk[kk izcU/kd vkj0,l0 jkBh ds dFku ys[kc) gq, gSa] ftUgksusa vius dFku esa

;g izdV fd;k gS fd fnukad 15-01-1990 dks mUgksaus Jh 'ksodkuh dks udn isz"k.k ds fy, funsZ'k fn, FksA udn isz"k.k

xqykciqjk cSad esa djuk FkkA bl funsZ'k ij Jh 'ksodkuh us cl }kjk tkus ls euk dj fn;k] izkbZosV thi dh O;oLFkk djok,

tkus dk dgkA cSad ds fu;eksa ds vuqlkj bl udn isz"k.k ds fy, thi dh vko';drk ugha gS] cl }kjk gh udn isz"k.k

fd;k tkos] ysfdu mUgksusa bl ckr dks ugha ekuk vkSj dgk fd ipkl gtkj :i;s udn isz"k.k ds fy, thi dh O;oLFkk

djokbZ tkosA fnukad 15-01-1990 dks udn isz"k.k ugha gks ldkA fnukad 16-01-1990 dks fQj dgk rks Jh 'ksodkuh us ekSf[kd

euk dj fn;kA fnukad 16-01-1990 dks vkj0 lh0 Vsyj eq[; [ktkUph }kjk udn isz"k.k Hkstk x;kA ,d yk[k :i;s dk

udn isz"k.k Hkstk x;k FkkA

izkFkhZ ds izfrfuf/k dk rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ }kjk cM+h udn jkf'k dks ,d LFkku ls nwljs LFkku ij ys tkus ds fy,

izkbZosV thi dh ekax dh xbZ gS] ftls xyr ugha dgk tk ldrkA izkFkhZ us dk;Z djus dks euk ugha fd;kA vius mRrj esa

Hkh izkFkhZ us vafdr fd;k gS fd bl gsrq mlus xkMZ dh vkSj okgu dh O;oLFkk djokus dh ek¡x dh Fkh] tks ugha djokbZ xbZA

mudk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd cSad ds fu;e ds vuqlkj bl isz"k.k ds fy, thi dh vko';drk ugha gksuk Jh jkBh us

izdV fd;k gS] ijUrq ,sls dksbZ fu;e izLrqr ugha fd, x, gSaA ,slh fLFkfr esa ;g vkjksi izekf.kr ugha gksrk gS fd izkFkhZ us

tku&cw>dj mPp vf/kdkjh ds funsZ'kksa dh ikyuk ugha djus okys d`R; fd, gksaA

eSaus bl rdZ ij euu fd;kA

bl vk{ksi dk loZ izFke fnukad 13-07-1990 dks izkFkhZ us tokc fn;k vkSj ;g dgk fd mls fnukad 15-01-1990 dks

xqykciqjk 'kk[kk tkus dk bl izdkj dk dksbZ vkns'k ugha fn;k x;k] tcfd i'pkrorhZ izdze ij blus ;g dgk fd mlus

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5737

lqj{kk xkMZ vkSj thi dh O;oLFkk djokus ds fy, dgk Fkk vkSj O;oLFkk ugha djokus ij og udn isz"k.k gsrq ugha x;kA

i=koyh ij tks lk{; gS] mlls ;g rks izekf.kr gS fd izkFkhZ dks fnukad 15-01-1990 vkSj 16-01-1990 dks udn isz"k.k gsrq

xqykciqjk 'kk[kk tkus dks 'k[kk izcU/kd Jh jkBh }kjk dgk x;k vkSj ;g Hkh izekf.kr gS fd izkFkhZ nksuksa gh fnu mDr udn

isz"k.k ysdj xqykcqijk 'kk[kk ugha x;kA Jh jkBh ds dFkukuqlkj izkFkhZ Jh 'ksodkuh us cl ls tkus ls euk fd;k Fkk vkSj

izkbZosV thi dh O;oLFkk djokus dks dgk FkkA Jh jkBh us ;g ugha dgk gS fd izkFkhZ us lqj{kk xkMZ ds fy, Hkh dgk gksA tks

izfrijh{kk Jh 'ksodkuh }kjk lk{kh Jh jkBh ls dh xbZ gS] mlesa Hkh mlus ;g lq>ko ugha fn;k fd mlds }kjk lqj{kk xkMZ

ekaxh xbZ gks vkSj euk fd;k x;k gksA mlus rks dsoy ;g dgk gS fd 'kk[kk izcU/kd Jh jkBh mls rax djrs gSaA

;g lgh gS cSad dh vksj ls ,slk dksbZ fu;e izLrqr ugha fd;k x;k gS fd mDr udn isz"k.k gsrq thi dh

vko';drk ugha FkhA udn isz"k.k cl ;k thi fdl lk/ku ls fd;k tkos] bl laca/k esa cSad ds dksbZ fyf[kr fu;e gSa] ,slk

fdlh Hkh i{kdkj }kjk ugha crk;k x;kA Jh jkBh us vius dFku esa ;gh dgk gS fd cSad ds fu;e ds vuqlkj bl isz"k.k ds

fy, thi dh vko';drk ugha gS] cl }kjk gh isz"k.k fd;k tkosA tc izkFkhZ dks 'kk[kk izcU/kd us cl }kjk udn isz"k.k djus

dk funsZ'k ns fn;k Fkk rks izkFkhZ dk nkf;Ro Fkk fd og bldh ikyuk djrkA foi{kh dh ,slh dksbZ lk{; ugha gS fd cSad

deZpkjh 'kEHkwx< 'kk[kk ls xqykciqjk ds e/; udn isz"k.k thi }kjk djrs jgs gksaA izkFkhZ dks cl }kjk udn isz"k.k djus ds

funsZ'k nsuk] 'kk[kk izcU/kd Jh jkBh us izdV fd;k gS vkSj izkFkhZ }kjk mDr vkns'k dh ikyuk ugha fd;k tkuk Lohd`r rF;

gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa ;g pkSFkk vk{ksi Hkh tks lk{; vkbZ gS] mlls izkFkhZ ds fo:) izekf.kr gS ij ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk gS

fd bl laca/k esa tk¡p vf/kdkjh dk fu"d"kZ fod`r (Perverse) gksA

izkFkhZ ds izfrfuf/k dk rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ dks tks n.M fn;k x;k gS og mDr vkjksi dks ns[krs gq, vR;f/kd

gS] fo"kekuqikrh (Disproportionate) gSA mudk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ ds iwoZ vkpj.k dks vk/kkj cukdj ;g n.Mkns'k tkjh

fd;k x;k gS ijUrq iwoZ vkpj.k ds laca/k esa dksbZ uksfVl vkSj lquokbZ dk volj izkFkhZ dks ugha fn;k x;k gSA vr% ;g

n.Mkns'k fof/k fo:) gSA vius rdZ ds leFkZu esa fuEu fofu'p; is'k fd, &

2013 (139) FLR 610,

P. Chandrasekaran, Channangkupam (Post),

Gudiyatham Post, Vellore Vs Management of

Palavan Transport Corporation (Metropolitan

Transport Corporation Division I Ltd.) & Another.

2010 (126) FLR 994,

Indu Bhushan Dwivedi Vs State of Jharkhand & another.

2005 (2) RLR 113,

Union of India & ors Vs Vishnu Lal Nai & anr.

1969 (18) FLR (Supreme Court) 159,

M/s. G.E.C.(P.) Ltd., Naini, Allahabad Vs Labour Court, Allahabad & others.

2008 (117) FLR (Supreme Court) 770,

Management, Aurofood Pvt. Ltd. Vs S. Rajulu.

eSaus mDr rdZ ij euu fd;kA

vuq'kklfud vf/kdkjh }kjk tkWap fjiksVZ dh izfr ds lkFk izkFkhZ dks dkj.k crkvks uksfVl nsdj lquokbZ dk volj

nsus ds ckn gh mDr n.Mkns'k ikfjr fd;k gSA izkFkhZ ds fo:) ikap vkjksi] cSad 'kk[kk ds ifjlj esa v'kksHkuh; O;ogkj

djuk] cSad ifjlj esa cyokbZ O;ogkj vkSj d`R; djuk] tku&cw>dj mPp vf/kdkjh ds funsZ'kksa dh ikyuk ugha djus okys

d`R; djuk] cSad ds fgrksa ds fo:) dk;Z djuk vkSj ,d cSad deZpkjh ds yk;d O;ogkj ugha djuk izekf.kr gq, gSa vkSj

bUgha ds vk/kkj ij izkFkhZ dh c[kkZLrxh dk vkns'k fnukad 18-03-1991 dks ikfjr fd;k x;k gSA bl vkns'k esa iwoZ vkpj.k

vkSj iwoZ ds vfHkys[k ds vk/kkj ij n.Mkns'k ikfjr djuk dgha Hkh vafdr ugha gSA ;g vkns'k] vkjksi i= fnukad 09-05-1990

ij dh xbZ tkW¡p vkSj mlesa tks vkjksi izkFkhZ ds fo:) izekf.kr ik, gSa] muds vk/kkj ij gh ikfjr fd;k x;k gSA tSlk fd

Åij of.kZr fd;k x;k gS izkFkhZ ij cSad 'kk[kk ds ifjlj esa v'kksHkuh; O;ogkj djuk] cSad ifjlj esa cyokbZ O;ogkj vkSj

d`R; djuk] tku&cw>dj mPp vf/kdkjh ds funsZ'kksa dh ikyuk ugha djus okys d`R; djuk] cSad ds fgrksa ds fo:) dk;Z

djuk vkSj ,d cSad deZpkjh ds yk;d O;ogkj ugha djus ds xaHkhj vkjksi izekf.kr gq, gSa vkSj mu vkjksiksa ds izdk'k esa ;g

ugha dgk tk ldrk fd tks c[kkZLrxh dk n.Mkns'k fnukad 18-03-1991 dks tkjh fd;k x;k gS] og fo"kekuqikrh

(Disproportionate) gksA

esjs fopkj ls tks n.Mkns'k ikfjr fd;k x;k gS] og mfpr ,oa oS/k gS vkSj mlesa gLr{ksi dk dksbZ vk/kkj ugha gSA

mldk LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe fujLruh; gSA izkFkhZ dksbZ vuqrks"k izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh ugha gSA

mi;qZDr foospu ds QyLo:i izdj.k esa fuEu vf/kfu.kZ; ikfjr fd;k tkrk gS %&

5738 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

vf/kfu.kZ;

**izkFkhZ Jfed izdk'k ds0 'ksodkuh ekQZr Jh xksfoUn 'ksodkuh] 10@653 Lo.kZ iFk] ekuljksoj] t;iqj ds fo:)

foi{khx.k jhtuy eSustj] cSad vkWQ cMkSnk] jhtuy vkWfQl] vtesj jhtu] LVs'ku jksM] vtesj ,oa lgk;d egkizcU/kd]

cSad vkWQ cMkSnk ¼jktLFkku tkSu½ vkuUn Hkou] lalkj pUnz jksM] t;iqj }kjk fnukad 18-03-1991 dks c[kkZLrxh dk n.Mkns'k

ikfjr fd;k tkuk mfpr ,oa oS/k gSA

izkFkhZ Jfed izdk'k ds0 'ksodkuh dksbZ vuqrks"k izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh ugha gSA**

'kqHkk esgrk] U;k;k/kh’k

ubZ fnYyh] 20 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2447-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh /kjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj cSad vkWiQ

bafM;k ds izca/ra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/ esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;ky;]

t;iqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 87@1989) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 20-12-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&12012@106@1989&Mh&II(,)]

jfo dqekj] MsLd vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 20th December, 2016

S.O. 2447.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 87/1989) of the Central Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur as shown in the

Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Bank of India, and their workmen, received by the

Central Government on 20.12.2016.

[No. L-12012/106/1989-D-II(A)]

RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer

vuqca/k

dsUnzh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k] t;iqj

dsl ua0 lh-vkbZ-Vh- 87@1989

jSQjSal % Hkkjr ljdkj] Je ea=ky;] ubZ fnYyh dk vkns’k dzekad % ,y&12012@106@89&IR-D-II(A) ubZ fnYyh]

fnukad 18-08-1989 A

jktw iq= Jh tyflag ¼e`rd nkSjkus okn½

Jhefr ljkst ifRu Lo0 jktw]

f'kon;ky iq= Lo0 jktw]

iisUnz dqekj iq= Lo0 jktw]

leLr tkfr dWaMsjk] fuoklh xzke NksdjokMk]

rglhy oSj] ftyk & Hkjriqj ¼jktLFkku½

---izkFkhZx.k

cuke

nh cSad vkWQ bf.M;k] tfj, jhtuy eSaustj]

cSad vkWQ bf.M;k] lh&63 ch] ljkstuh ekxZ]

lh&Ldhe] t;iqjA

eSustj] cSad vkWQ bf.M;k] NksdjokMk] rglhy

oSj] ftyk & Hkjriqj ¼jktLFkku½

---vizkFkhZx.k

mifLFkr %

ihBklhu vf/kdkjh% Jhefr 'kqHkk esgrk] vkj-,p-ts-,l-

izkFkhZ dh vksj ls

Jh ,e0 ,e0 cSx]

vizkFkhZ dh vksj ls

Jh ';ke O;kl]

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5739

fnukad % 19-07-2016

vf/kfu.kZ;

Hkkjr ljdkj ds Je ea=ky; dh vkKk dzekad ,y&12012@106@89-D-II (A) ubZ fnYyh] fnukad 18-08-1989 ls

fuEu vuqlwph dk fookn vf/kfu.kZ; gsrq bl vf/kdj.k dks fnukad 28-08-1989 dks bl vk'k; dk izkIr gqvk gS fd &

"Whether the action of the management of Bank of India, in terminating the services of Shri Raju, is justified?

If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?"

izkFkhZ jktw dh vksj ls LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe bl vfHkdFku dk izLrqr fd;k gS fd mls fnukad 01-10-1981 dks

foi{khx.k us prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij fu;qfDr nh FkhA mldk dk;Z lQkbZ djus] ikuh Hkjus] ikuh fiykus vkfn Fkk

vkSj cSad ds vUnj djuk Fkk rFkk cSad ds dk;Zdky lekIr gksus rd djuk FkkA mlus fnukad 01-10-1981 ls fnukad 28-02-

1984 rd yxkrkj prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij dk;Z fd;kA mlus vVS.Mj dh vuqifLFkfr esa ,oa cSad esa ?kksf"kr vodk'kksa

ij Hkh iwjs fnu dke fd;kA fnukad 28-02-1984 dks mls cnfu;fr ls vkSj vU; O;fDr;ksa dks ykHk igqapkus ds fy,] fcuk

vkSfpR; ds gVk fn;k x;k vkSj vU; O;fDr;ksa dks fu;qfDr;kWa nh xbZ] ftuesa xqykc [kka iq= ukfte [kka FkkA mls gVkus ls

igys mls dksbZ uksfVl ugha fn;k x;k vkSj u gh eqvkotk fn;k x;k vkSj bl izdkj ls /kkjk 25 ¼,Q½] ¼th½ vkS/kksfxd fookn

vf/kfu;e ds izko/kkuksa dk mYy?kau fd;k x;k gSA izkFkhZ izkr% 10 cts ls 'kke ikap cts rd dke djrk FkkA mlds i'pkr~

Hkh foi{kh dze&2 ds ?kj ij dke djrk FkkA mldh lsok,a euekus <ax ls lekIr dh xbZ gSaA vr% mldh lsokeqfDr dks

voS/k ,oa vuqfpr ?kksf"kr fd;k tkos vkSj iqu% lsok esa fy;k tkos vkSj lHkh ikfj.kkfed ykHk fnyk;s tkosaA

foi{khx.k us LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe dk mRrj izLrqr dj fojks/k fd;kA mudk mRrj esa vfHkdFku gS fd izkFkhZ us cSad

esa deZpkjh ds :i esa dHkh dk;Z ugha fd;kA mlls vkdfLed ¼Casual½ vk/kkj ij dHkh&dHkh cSad esa dqN feuVksa ds fy,

lQkbZ dk dke fy;k tkrk Fkk] ftlds fy, mls mfpr ikfjJfed fn;k tkrk FkkA izkFkhZ ,oa cSad ds e/; dHkh Hkh fu;ksDrk

vkSj deZpkjh ds laca/k ugha jgs gSaA izkFkhZ dks fnukad 28-02-1984 ls nqHkkZoukiwoZd dk;Z ls gVkuk xyr gSA izkFkhZ Qjojh] 1984

esa cSad esa dHkh&dHkh gksus okys vkdfLed dk;Z dks djus ds fy, vkdfLed ¼Casual½ vk/kkj ij j[ks tkus gsrq xkao esa

miyC/k gh ugha FkkA izkFkhZ ls dqN feuVksa ds fy, fnu esa lQkbZ dk;Z ysus ls] vkdfLed dk;Z djokus ls] izkFkhZ dks dksbZ

vf/kdkj izkIr ugha gks tkrs vkSj cSad ds f)i{kh; le>kSrs ds izko/kkuksa ds vuqlkj Hkh bl izdkj dk dk;Z djus ls fu;ksDrk

vkSj fu;ksftr ds laca/k mRiUu ugha gks tkrsA cSad esa vVS.Mj dk dksbZ in ugha gksrk gSA izkFkhZ dks dksbZ uksfVl ;k eqvkotk

/kkjk 25 ¼,Q½ ¼th½ vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e ds vUrxZr ns; ugha gSA izkFkhZ Lo;a gh miyC/k ugha Fkk] vr% ;g dguk

iw.kZr% xyr gS fd mldh lsok,a lekIr dj nh xbZ gksA izkFkhZ vkdfLed dk;Z djrk Fkk] blfy, mls uksfVl nsus dh

vko';drk ugha FkhA izkFkhZ dh dksbZ lsokeqfDr vFkok NaVuh ugha dh xbZA ekeyk vR;Ur foyEc ls mBk;k x;k gSA mDr

lHkh dkj.kksa ls LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe fujLruh; gSA

izkFkhZ us tokc my tokc izLrqr dj fuosnu fd;k fd vko';d ys[k i= foi{kh cSad ds vf/kdkj vkSj dCts esa gSa]

tks muls U;k;kf/kdj.k esa izLrqr djok, tkosaA izkFkhZ us dqN feuVksa ds fy, ugha oju~ iwjs fnu cSad esa lQkbZ dk dk;Z fd;k

FkkA mlds ikfjJfed ds okmpj Hkh foi{kh ds vkf/kiR; esa gSaA og cSad deZpkjh Fkk] blfy, mlds vkSj cSad ds e/;

fu;ksDrk vkSj deZpkjh ds laca/k gSaA izkFkhZ Qjojh] 1984 ds ckn vius xkao esa miyC/k Fkk vkSj og dke NksM+dj ugha x;kA

izdj.k esa vf/kdj.k }kjk fnukad 23-09-1995 dks ,drjQk vokMZ ikfjr fd;k x;k] tks ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky;

ds vkns'k fnukad 05 tqykbZ] 2006 }kjk vikLr fd;k x;kA nksuksa i{kksa dks lquokbZ dk ekSdk fn;k tkdj iqu% vokMZ ikfjr

djus ds funsZ'k vf/kdj.k dks izkIr gq,A

Jfed us vius LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe ds leFkZu esa Lo;a jktw dk 'kiFk i= is'k fd;k] ftlls foi{kh fuxe }kjk

izfrijh{kk dh xbZA

foi{kh fuxe us gjh'k dqekj lq[khtk dk 'kiFk i= is'k fd;k x;k] ftlls Jfed ds izfrfuf/k us izfrijh{kk dhA

izkFkhZ jktw dh fnukad 29-07-2015 dks e`R;q gks tkus ij mlds fof/kd izfrfuf/kx.k dks fnukad 21-08-2015 dks

vfHkys[k ij fy;k x;kA

eSaus mHk; i{kksa dh cgl lquhA

izkFkhZ ds izfrfuf/k dk rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ us fnukad 01-10-1981 ls 28-02-1984 rd fu;fer :i ls foi{kh cSad esa

prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds :i esa dk;Z fd;k gS; mls fcuk fdlh dkj.k ds fnukad 28-02-1984 dks lsok ls i`Fkd dj fn;k x;k

vkSj mlds LFkku ij nqHkkZoukiwoZd vU; O;fDr;ksa dks j[kk x;k gSA izkFkhZ dks dksbZ uksfVl vFkok uksfVl osru rFkk NaVuh dk

eqvkotk ugha fn;k x;kA bl izdkj ls /kkjk 25 ¼,Q½ ¼th½ vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e dk mYy?kau fd;k x;k gSA

mudk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd foi{kh us vius mRrj esa izkFkhZ dk cSad esa dke djuk Lohdkj fd;k gSA /kkjk 2

¼,l½ vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e esa vkdfLed dk;Z djus okys Hkh Jfed dh ifjHkk"kk esa vkrs gSaA

mudk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ dh lsok ls lacaf/kr leLr vfHkys[k foi{kh cSad ds gh vkf/kiR; esa Fks vkSj

U;k;kf/kdj.k }kjk fnukad 25-08-2011 dks mifLFkfr jftLVj izLrqr djus vFkok bl laca/k esa 'kiFk i= izLrqr djus ds

funsZ'k ds i'pkr~ Hkh foi{khx.k }kjk u rks jftLVj izLrqr fd, x, gSa vkSj u gh 'kiFk i=A ,slh fLFkfr esa foi{kh cSad ds

5740 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

fo:) izfrdwy fu"d"kZ ¼Adverse Inference½ fy;k tkosA izkFkhZ us lk{; ls ;g izekf.kr fd;k gS fnukad 01-10-1981 ls

28-02-1984 rd fu;fer :i ls foi{khx.k ds ;gka dk;Z fd;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa mldk lsokeqfDr vkns'k fnukad 28-02-1984

/kkjk 25 ¼,Q½ vkSj ¼th½ vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e dh ikyuk ugha fd, tkus ds dkj.k] voS/k gSA

blds foijhr foi{khx.k ds izfrfuf/k dk rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ us vius vfHkdFku ds leFkZu esa dksbZ ys[k i=h; lk{;

izLrqr ugha dh gSA izkFkhZ dks cSad esa fu;qfDr fn;k tkuk gh izekf.kr ugha gSA foi{kh cSad esa fu;qfDr dh ,d fu;fer izfdz;k

gS] ftlesa fu;kstu dk;kZy; ls vkosnu eaxokdj fu;qfDr;kWa nh tkrh gSaA izkFkhZ us viuh lsokeqfDr dk dksbZ vkns'k Hkh izLrqr

ugha fd;k gSA ,slk dksbZ ys[k i= i=koyh ij is'k ugha gqvk gS] ftlls ;g izekf.kr gksrk gks fd izkFkhZ foi{khx.k ds ;gka

prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds :i esa inLFkkfir Fkk rFkk izkFkhZ vkSj foi{khx.k ds e/; fu;ksftr vkSj fu;ksDrk dk laca/k gksA izkFkhZ

us xqykc [kka jaxjst dh fu;qfDr ds laca/k esa Hkh dksbZ nLrkost is'k ugha fd, gSaA cSad esa lQkbZ dk dqN le; rd dk;Z dj

ysus ek= ls izkFkhZ dks dksbZ vf/kdkj] lsok izkfIr gsrq mRiUu ugha gksrk gS; LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe fujLruh; gSA

mudk ;g Hkh rdZ gS fd ftu rF;ksa dks izkFkhZ dks viuh lk{; ls izekf.kr djuk Fkk] mudk Hkkj foi{khx.k ij ugha

Mkyk tk ldrk vkSj foi{khx.k ds fo:) dksbZ izfrdwy fu"d"kZ ¼Adverse Inference½ ugha fy;k tk ldrkA

eSaus rdZ fordZ ij euu fd;k rFkk i=koyh dk /;kuiwoZd v/;;u fd;kA

izkFkhZ us vius LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe esa fnukad 01-10-1981 dks foi{khx.k }kjk prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij fu;qDr

fd;k tkuk vkSj fnukad 28-02-1984 dks lsokeqDr fd;k tkuk vfHkdfFkr fd;k gSA izkFkhZ us blds e/; dh lEiw.kZ vof/k esa

foi{kh ds ;gka lEiw.kZ cSad ds le; esa prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij fu;fer :i ls dk;Z djuk vfHkdfFkr fd;k gSA izkFkhZ

dks vius LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe esa fd, x, vfHkopuksa dks Lo;a viuh ldkjkRed] fo'oluh; ,oa nLrkosth izHkko'kkyh

(Cogent) lk{; ls izekf.kr djuk FkkA izkFkhZ us fnukad 01-10-1981 dks Lo;a dks foi{kh cSad ds ;gka prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds

in ij fu;qfDr fn;k tkuk izdV fd;k gSA izkFkhZ us viuh lk{; ds 'kiFk i= esa Hkh fnukad 01-10-1981 dks prqFkZ Js.kh

deZpkjh ds in ij fu;qDr fd;k tkuk izdV fd;k gS] ijUrq izfrijh{kk esa blus ;g Lohdkj fd;k gS fd mls dksbZ fu;qfDr

i= ugha fn;k x;k vkSj ;g Hkh dgk gS fd mlus fu;qfDr i= ekaxk Fkk] tks mls ugha fn;k x;kA bl lk{kh us ;g Hkh dgk

gS fd mlus fu;qfDr ds fy, dksbZ izkFkZuk i= Hkh ugha fn;k Fkk vkSj og d{kk nks&rhu rd i<k fy[kk FkkA bl izdkj Li"V

gS fd izkFkhZ us viuh fnukad 01-10-1981 dks prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij fu;qfDr dks izekf.kr djus ds fy, dksbZ ys[k

i=@fu;qfDr i= izLrqr ugha fd;s gSaA mYys[kuh; gS fd foi{kh laLFkku ,d yksd laLFkku gS] ftlesa fu;fer inksa ij HkrhZ

djus dh vkSj fu;qfDr fn, tkus dh fuf'pr izfdz;k gSA Lo;a izkFkhZ ds vuqlkj mlus fu;qfDr gsrq dksbZ izkFkZuk i= gh izLrqr

ugha fd;k gS] ,slh fLFkfr esa ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk fd mls prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij cSad esa fu;qfDr iznku dh xbZ

gksA izkFkhZ us rks vius LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe vkSj dFku esa ;g Hkh vafdr ugha fd;k gS fd mls D;k osru cSad }kjk fn;k tkrk

Fkk ;k fdruk ikfjJfed fn;k tkrk FkkA izkFkhZ] cSad esa fu;ksftr Fkk vkSj mls cSad ls osru vkfn fn;k tkrk Fkk bl rF;

dks izekf.kr djus ds fy, Hkh mlds }kjk dksbZ ys[k i= izLrqr ugha fd;k x;k gSA tgka rd izkFkhZ ds izfrfuf/k ds bl rdZ

dk iz'u gS fd foi{khx.k ds fo:) nLrkost izLrqr ugha djus ds laca/k esa foijhr vk'k; fy;k tkos bl laca/k esa ;g

mYys[k fd;k tkrk gS fd foi{khx.k }kjk ys[k i= izLrqr ugha djus ls izkFkhZ dk tks izkFkfed nkf;Ro vius Lo;a ds ekeys

dks viuh lk{; ls izekf.kr djus dk gS] og lekIr ugha gks tkrkA ;gka ;g mYys[kuh; gS fd Lo;a izkFkhZ us viuh

izfrijh{kk esa ;g Lohdkj fd;k gS fd mlus fu;qfDr ds fy, dksbZ izkFkZuk i= ugha fn;k vkSj u gh mls dksbZ fu;qfDr i= gh

tkjh gqvk] ,slh fLFkfr esa ;g izekf.kr ugha gS fd izkFkhZ prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds :i esa fnukad 01-10-1981 dks foi{kh cSad ds

;gka fu;qDr gqvk gks vkSj izkFkhZ vkSj foi{kh cSad ds e/; fu;ksftr vkSj fu;kstd dk laca/k jgk gksA

izkFkhZ us vius LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe esa fnukad 28-02-1984 dks viuh lsokeqfDr foi{khx.k }kjk fd;k tkuk crk;k gS

vkSj bl lsokeqfDr dks pqukSrh nh gSA ;g ,d egRoiw.kZ rF; gS fd tks funsZ'k izkIr gqvk gS] mlesa lsokeqfDr dh dksbZ rkjh[k

vafdr gh ugha gSA ;g rF; blfy, Hkh egRoiw.kZ gS fd izkFkhZ us viuh lsok eqfDr dk dksbZ vkns'k foi{khx.k }kjk fudkyk

tkuk izdV gh ugha fd;k gS] oju~ ;gh dgk gS fd mldh lsokeqfDr rks fnukad 28-02-1984 dks ekSf[kd vkns'k }kjk dh xbZA

nkSgjkus dh dher ij iqu% ;g mYys[k fd;k tkrk gS fd foi{kh cSad tSls yksd laLFkku esa ekSf[kd lsokeqfDr fd;k tkuk

laHko gh ugha gSA

foi{kh cSad us vius mRrj esa ;g vfHkdfFkr fd;k gS fd izkFkhZ }kjk fnu esa dqN feuVksa dk lQkbZ dk;Z gh cSad esa]

vkdfLed dk;Z ds rkSj ij] dHkh&dHkh fd;k tkrk Fkk] ftldk mls ikfjJfed fn;k tkrk FkkA Lo;a izkFkhZ us Hkh okmpj

}kjk Hkqxrku fd;k tkuk Lohdkj fd;k gS] ijUrq blus vius LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe esa dgha Hkh ;g vafdr ugha fd;k gS fd mls

fdrus :i;s osru@ikfjJfed fn;k tkrk FkkA izfrijh{kk esa ;gh dgk gS fd 300@&:i;s izfrekg feyrs Fks] ijUrq cSad }kjk

bls fdlh Hkh jkf'k ds Hkqxrku ds laca/k esa blds }kjk dksbZ ys[k i= izLrqr ugha fd;k x;kA

bl izdkj ls izkFkhZ us viuh cSad esa prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij fu;qfDr gksus] bl in ij dk;Z djus] bl in

dk osru izkIr djus vkSj fnukad 28-02-1984 dks lsoki`Fkd fd;k tkus ds laca/k esa dksbZ lk{; izLrqr ugha dh gS] vkSj buls

lacaf/kr vius vfHkopuksa dks izekf.kr ugha fd;k gSA

izkFkhZ us vius LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe esa viuh txg fdlh xqykc [kka dks fu;qDr fd;k tkuk dgk gS] ijUrq bl xqykc

[kka dk Hkh dksbZ fu;qfDr i= vkfn izLrqr ugha fd;k gSA bl izdkj ls izkFkhZ viuh lk{; ls vius LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe esa

of.kZr vfHkopuksa dks izekf.kr ugha dj ldk gSA

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5741

foi{kh dh vksj ls lk{kh gjh'k dqekj lq[khtk dk 'kiFk i= izLrqr gqvk gSA izfrijh{kk esa bl lk{kh us ;g dgk gS

fd Jfed us NksdjokMk 'kk[kk esa dke fd;k gSA NksdjokMk 'kk[kk esa dk;Z djus dks foi{kh cSad dh bl vk'k; dh

LohdkjksfDr ugha ekuk tk ldrk fd izkFkhZ us cSad esa fnukad 01-10-1981 dks prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij fu;qfDr ikdj]

dk;Z fd;k gksA

mi;qZDr foospukuqlkj i=koyh ij tks lk{; gS] mlls ;g drbZ izekf.kr ugha gks ldk gS fd izkFkhZ jktw foi{kh cSad

ds ;gka fnukad 01-10-1981 dks prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij fu;ksftr fd;k x;k vkSj mls fnukad 28-02-1984 dks lsok

i`Fkd fd;k x;kA izkFkhZ o foi{kh ds e/; fu;ksftr o fu;kstd dk laca/k izekf.kr ugha gqvk gSA tc izkFkhZ ;g rF; izekf.kr

gh ugha dj ik;k gS rks izkFkhZ fdlh izdkj dk vuqrks"k izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh ugha gSA izkFkhZ dh vksj ls izLrqr LVsVesaV

vkWQ DySe fujLruh; gSA

mi;qZDr foospu ds QyLo:i izdj.k esa fuEu vf/kfu.kZ; ikfjr fd;k tkrk gS %&

vf/kfu.kZ;

**Jfed jktw iq= Jh tyflag ¼e`rd nkSjkus okn½] 02 Jhefr ljkst ifRu Lo0 jktw] 03 f'kon;ky iq= Lo0 jktw

,oa 04 iisUnz dqekj iq= Lo0 jktw ] leLr tkfr dWaMsjk] fuoklh xzke NksdjokMk] rglhy oSj] ftyk & Hkjriqj ¼jktLFkku½

dk foi{khx.k nh cSad vkWQ bf.M;k] tfj, jhtuy eSaustj] cSad vkWQ bf.M;k] lh&63 ch] ljkstuh ekxZ] lh&Ldhe] t;iqj

,oa eSustj] cSad vkWQ bf.M;k] NksdjokMk] rglhy oSj] ftyk & Hkjriqj ¼jktLFkku½ ds ;gka fu;ksftr gksuk izekf.kr ugha

gqvk gSA

vr% izkFkhZ jktw fdlh rjg dh dksbZ jkgr ,oa vuqrks"k izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh ugha gSA mlds }kjk izLrqr LVsVesaV

vkWQ DySe fujLr fd;k tkrk gSA**

vokMZ vkt fnukad 19-07-2016 dks [kqys U;k;ky; esa fy[kk;k tkdj lquk;k x;k tks dsUnz ljdkj dks izdk’kukFkZ

fu;ekuqlkj Hkstk tkosA

'kqHkk esgrk] U;k;k/kh’k

ubZ fnYyh] 20 fnlEcj] 2016

dk-vk- 2448-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh /kjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vksfj;UVy

cSad vkWiQ dkelZ ds izca/ra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/ esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; vkS|ksfxd

U;k;ky;] t;iqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 30@1989) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 16-12-2016 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&12011@73@1988&th&II(,)]

jfo dqekj] MsLd vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 20th December, 2016

S.O. 2448.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 30/1989) of the Central Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur as shown in the

Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Oriental Bank of Commerce, and their workmen,

received by the Central Government on 16.12.2016.

[No. L-12011/73/1988-G-II(A)]

RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer

vuqca/k

dsUnzh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kf/kdj.k] t;iqj

dsl ua0 lh-vkbZ-Vh- 30@1989

jSQjSal % dsUnz ljdkj] Je o fu;kstu foHkkx] t;iqj dh vf/klwpuk dzekad ,y-&12011@73@88&th 2¼,½ fn- 23-2-89

jktLFkku cSad ,EiykbZt+ ;wfu;u] ijokuk gkÅl]

ek/kksckx] tks/kiqj

---izkFkhZ

cuke

vksfj;sUVy cSad vkWQ dkWelZ] {ks=h; dk;kZy;] t;iqj

---vizkFkhZ

mifLFkr %

ihBklhu vf/kdkjh % jktk jke oekZ] vkj-,p-ts-,l-

5742 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

izkFkhZ dh vksj ls

Jh ts- ,y- 'kkg]

vizkFkhZ dh vksj ls

Jh txr vjksM+k]

fnukad vokMZ % 30-1-2001

vokMZ

dsUnz ljdkj] Je ea=ky; ubZ fnYyh }kjk fuEu fookn bl U;k;kf/kdj.k dks fu.kZ;kFkZ Hkstk x;k gS%

“Whether the action of the management of Oriental Bank of Commerce in terminating the services of the

workmen mentioned in the Annexure and not considering them for further employment while recruiting fresh

hands under Sec. 25 H of the I.D. Act is justified? If not, to what relief are the concerned workman entitled?"

vuSDlpj

1- Jh txnh'k izlkn ehuk

2- Jh ';keyky vkgwtk

3- Jh lSeu

4- lqJh dkUrk BDdj

5- Jh gseUr dqekj 'kekZ

6- Jh clUr dqekj

7- lqJh uhfyek tSu

8- Jh vrhd vgen

9- Jh larks"k dqekj 'kekZ

10- Jh enu yky

11- Jh ctjax yky

12- Jh lqjs'k dqekj 'kekZ

13- Jh fodze flag

14- Jh ?ku';kenkl 'kekZ

15- Jh yfyr dqekj 'kqDyk

16- Jh galjkt raoj

17- Jh jktdqekj uk;j

18- Jh vk'kkjke xkSM+

19- Jh t;izdk'k 'kekZ

20- Jh fd'ku ehuk

21- lqJh mfeZyk 'kekZ

22- Jh Hkwjkey 'kekZ

izkFkhZ jktLFkku cSad ,EiykbZt+ ;wfu;u tks/kiqj }kjk LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe izLrqr fd;k gS] ftlesa mYys[k fd;k x;k

gS] fd cSad us fofHkUu 'kk[kkvksa esa nh xbZ lwph ds vuqlkj deZpkfj;ksa dks fu;qDr fd;k rFkk n'kkZ;s vuqlkj mudks cSad lsok

esa j[kkA cSad djhc djhc lHkh deZpkfj;ksa dks dksbZ fu;qfDr i= ugha fn;k u gh lsok lekfIr dk vkns'k fn;kA cSad us

'kkL=h vokMZ ds vuqPNsn 495 o 522 ¼4½ dk mYy?kau fd;kA lwph esa n'kkZ;s x;s lHkh deZpkfj;ksa dks ukSdjh ls fudky dj

cSad us mudh txg nwljs deZpkfj;ksa dh fu;qfDr dhA bl izdkj cSad us /kkjk 25&th vf/kfu;e ,oa 25 ¼,p½ vf/kfu;e dk

Li"V mYy?kau fd;k gSA cSad us deZpkfj;ksa dks u rks uksfVl fn;k u gh uksfVl ds ,ot+ esa 14 fnu ds osru dk Hkqxrku

fd;kA bl izdkj cSad vkS0 fookn fu;e 1947 ¼ftls ckn esa fu;e dgk tk;sxk½ dh /kkjk 76] 77 o 78 dk mYy?kau fd;k

gSA izkFkhZ ;wfu;u us mijksDr rF;ksa dk mYys[k djrs gq, izkFkZuk dh gS fd vizkFkhZ cSad dks funsZ'k fn;s tk;sa] fd bu leLr

deZpkfj;ksa] ftuds uke Åij n'kkZ;s x;s gSa] mUgsa mUgha fnukadksa ls ftu fnukadksa dks mUgsa vafre ckj lsok ls i`Fkd fd;k x;k

gS] cSad lsok esa cgky djus ds vkns'k iznku fd;s tk;saA ;g Hkh izkFkZuk dh gS fd mudks fu;ekuqlkj osru ,oa HkRrs iqu% lsok

esa ysus rd ds Hkqxrku djus ds funsZ'k Hkh cSad dks fn;s tk;saA

vizkFkhZ cSad us LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe dk tokc izLrqr dj mYys[k fd;k gS] fd izkFkhZ ;wfu;u }kjk tks fookn mBk;k

x;k gS] og cgqr nsjh ls mBk;k x;k gSA mudk ;g Hkh tokc gS] fd bu deZpkfj;ksa esa ls vf/kdka'k us dsoy 59 ls 89 fnu

dk gh cSad esa dk;Z fd;k gSA vr% ;wfu;u dk DySe izFke rkSj ij gh fujLr fd;k tk;sA vizkFkhZ cSad dk ;g Hkh tokc gS]

fd vizkFkhZ cSad esa DydZ ds laoxZ dh fu;qfDr cSafdax lfoZlst+ fjD:VesaV cksMZ ¼ch-,l-vkj-ch-½ ds }kjk dh tkrh gS] vkSj cksMZ

}kjk vkosndksa dk fyf[kr VSLV ysus ds i'pkr mudk lk{kkRdkj fy;k tkrk gS vkSj blds i'pkr gh cSad esa fu;qfDr nh

tkrh gSA cSad }kjk lh/ks rkSj ij tks fu;qfDr dh tkrh gS] og fu;fer fu;qfDr ugha gksrh gSA ftu deZpkfj;ksa us izLrqr

LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe ds vk/kkj ij viuk DySe is'k fd;k gS] mUgksaus Dysjhdy dsMj esa dksbZ VSLV ikl ugha fd;k gS vkSj os

fdlh Hkh fu/kkZfjr izfdz;k ds ckn fu;qfDr ugha gq, gSaA cSad us ,sls deZpkjh ftUgksaus 90 fnu dh vof/k rd dke fd;k gS]

mudks cSad ds vR;ko';d dke dks fuiVkus ds fy, bUxst fd;k x;k gS vkSj fu/kkZfjr dk;Z lekIr gksus ds i'pkr mudh

lsok,a Lo;a gh lekIr gks xbZA ,sls deZpkfj;ksa dh f}i{kh; le>kSrs ds vuqlkj fdlh izdkj dk vf/kdkj bl izdkj dk DySe

mBkus ds fy, ugha gksrkA vizkFkhZ cSad dk ;g Hkh tokc gS] fd vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 25&,p ds izko/kku bl izdj.k ij

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5743

fcYdqy ykxw ugha gksrs] D;ksafd bu deZpkfj;ksa dks cSad us ,d fu/kkZfjr vof/k ds fy, gh fu;qDr fd;k Fkk vkSj mUgksaus 240

fnu dh vof/k dk dk;Z Hkh iwjk ugha fd;k gSA vr% bu deZpkfj;ksa ij NaVuh ds izko/kku ykxw ugha gksrs gSaA vizkFkhZ cSad dk

;g Hkh dguk gS] fd izkFkhZ ;wfu;u dk ;g dFku fd mUgksaus 'kkL=h vokMZ ds iSjk 495 o 522 ¼4½ dk mYy?kau fd;k gS] bl

ekeys esa ykxw ugha gksrkA vr% izkFkhZx.k fdlh Hkh izdkj dh jkgr izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh ugha gSaA vr% izkFkhZx.k }kjk izLrqr

DySe dks fujLr fd;k tk;sA

izkFkhZ ;wfu;u }kjk izLrqr DySe ds leFkZu esa orZeku fookn esa bl U;k;kf/kdj.k ds le{k dsoy Jfed enu yky

iztkir] calr dqekj] dkUrk BDdj ,oa ctjax yky us gh vius 'kiFk i= izLrqr fd;s gSa] ftuls vizkFkhZ ds izfrfuf/k us

ftjg dh gSA vU; fdlh Hkh Jfed us DySe ds leFkZu esa dksbZ lk{; izLrqr ugha dh gSA vr% ;g vokMZ dsoy mijksDr

pkjksa izkFkhZx.k ds laca/k esa gh ikfjr fd;k tk jgk gSA

vizkFkhZ us vius tokc ds leFkZu esa Jh fnyhi dksBkjh] Jh ujs'k dqekj tqustk o ds-lh- fot;oxhZ; ds 'kiFk i=

izLrqr gq, gSa] ftuls izkFkhZ ;wfu;u ds izfrfuf/k us ftjg dh gSA blds i'pkr~ eSaus fo}ku izfrfuf/k izkFkhZ o vizkFkhZ dh cgl

lquh] i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;kA

izkFkhZ ;wfu;u }kjk izLrqr LVsVesaV vkWQ DySe ds laca/k esa Jfed enu yky us vius 'kiFk i= esa ;g dgk gS] fd

mldh fu;qfDr vizkFkhZ cSad dh ljnkj 'kgj 'kk[kk esa fnukad 13-10-86 dks DydZ ds in ij gqbZ Fkh] mlus fnukad 9-1-87

rd dk;Z fd;k bl izdkj mlus dqy 74 fnu dk;Z fd;kA mldk dk;Z lnSo larks"kizn jgk] mls dksbZ fu;qfDr vkns'k ugha

fn;k x;k rFkk ekSf[kd vkns'k }kjk mls fnukad 10-1-87 dks lsok eqDr dj fn;kA mldh txg jktsUnz dqekj pkS/kjh dks j[k

fy;k o ckn esa mls Hkh lsok eqDr dj fn;k vkSj ckn esa u;s deZpkjh vLFkkbZ rkSj ij DydZ ds in ij j[ks tkrs jgs gSaA cSad

ds dk;Z esa yxkrkj o`f) gksrh jgh gSA LVkQ dh deh Fkh] ftldh iwfrZ LFkkbZ fu;qfDr u dj FkksM+h&2 vof/k ds fy, vLFkkbZ

fu;qfDr nsdj dh tkrh FkhA vLFkkbZ deZpkfj;ksa dks nks rhu ekg dke djus ds ckn gVk nsrs FksA mudh txg u;s deZpkjh

j[k ysrs gSaA ;g dze cSad esa dbZ o"kksZa ls py jgk gSA vLFkkbZ deZpkfj;ksa dks yxkrkj blfy, ugha j[kk tkrk gS] fd os 240

fnu iwjs ugha dj ldsaA enu yky us vius 'kiFk i= esa ;g Hkh dgk gS] fd mldh lsok eqfDr ds ckn ls gh og csjkst+xkj

gSA mls lsok eqDr djus ds iwoZ ofj"Brk lwph ugha fudkyhA

izkFkhZ clUr dqekj us vius dFkuksa esa ;g dgk gS] fd foi{kh cSad dh lqtkux<+ ftyk pw: 'kk[kk esa 5-6-87 dks

prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ds in ij fu;qDr fd;k Fkk ftlds ckcr~ fu;qfDr vkns'k ugha fn;kA mldk dk;Z larks"kizn jgkA fnukad

1-9-87 dks lsok ls i`Fkd dj fn;k vkSj bl izdkj dqy 85 fnu dk;Z fd;kA mls lsok ls eqDr djus ds ckn mldh txg

jkepUnz] lenz O;kl] lquhy dqekj ckduhoky dks ubZ fu;qfDr;ka nh xbZA mUgsa Hkh vLFkkbZ ihvkWu ds in ij fu;qDr fd;k

x;k rFkk mUgsa lsok eqDr djus ds ckn vU; deZpkjh j[ksA mudh fu;qfDr djus ls igys mls lsok esa vkus gsrq lwpuk ugha

nhA vU; rF;ksa ds laca/k esa bl Jfed us Hkh enu yky Jfed ds vuq:i gh dFku fd;s gSaA

Jfed dkUrk BDdj us vius 'kiFk i= esa ;g dgk gS] fd foi{kh cSad dh xaxkuxj 'kk[kk esa 84&85 esa mlus 80

fnu vLFkkbZ DydZ ds in ij dk;Z fd;kA mls Hkh dksbZ fu;qfDr vkns'k ugha fn;k x;k vkSj mlus tuojh 1986 ds izkjEHk esa

ekSf[kd vkns'k ls lsok ls i`Fkd dj fn;kA mldh lsok eqfDr ds ckn Hkh foi{kh cSad dh xaxkuxj 'kk[kk esa og mifLFkr

gksrh jgh] ysfdu mls lsok esa ugha fy;kA mldh lsok eqDr djus ds ckn Hkh cSad esa vLFkkbZ fyfid j[ks tks txnh'k pUnz]

tldj.k flag] jkeizrki] fouksn cCcj] jktdqekj] tqxy fd'kksj] yfyrk lsBh] ?ku';kenkl 'kekZ Fks] ftudh fu;qfDr djus ls

iwoZ mls dksbZ lwpuk ugha nh xbZ vkSj vc Hkh os xaxkuxj 'kk[kk esa vLFkkbZ DySd ds in ij dk;Z dj jgs gSaA

Jfed ctjax yky us vius 'kiFk i= esa ;g dgk gS] fd mldh fu;qfDr foi{kh cSad dh lqtkux<+ 'kk[kk esa ekg

Qjojh] 1985 esa DydZ ds in ij dh xbZ Fkh vkSj mlus 80 fnu dk;Z fd;k rFkk mls fcuk fdlh fyf[kr vkns'k ds ekg ebZ

1985 esa lsok eqDr dj fn;k rFkk mldh txg jkt dqekj ukbZ dks DydZ ds in ij j[kk x;kA mlus 80 fnu dke fd;k]

fQj ts- ih- 'kekZ us flrEcj 1985 ls twu 1987 rd 88 fnu dk;Z fd;k] latho xqIrk us ebZ] 1986 ls vxLr] 1986 rd

dk;Z fd;k gSA fo".kq nRr 'kekZ us twu] 1985 ls flrEcj] 85 rd 80 fnu dk;Z fd;k gS] yfyr dqekj }kjk Hkh vLFkkbZ rkSj

ij DydZ ds in ij 55 fnu dk;Z fd;k gSA izkFkhZ dk dguk gS] fd mldh lsok eqfDr ds ckn cSad esa dksbZ us dksbZ O;fDr

vLFkkbZ rkSj ij DydZ ds in ij dk;Z djrk jgk gSA

10-

vizkFkhZ cSad dh vksj ls fnyhi dksBkjh] ujs'k dqekj tqustk rFkk ds- lh- fot;oxhZ; us vius 'kiFk i=kksa esa dze'k%

Jfed clUr dqekj] dkUrk BDdj rFkk enu yky dh fu;qfDr cSad dh 'kk[kkvksa esa ,oath :i ds :i esa ,oa vLFkkbZ dk;Z

o`f) ds dkj.k gh vLFkkbZ :i ls dk;Z djus gsrq j[kk x;k Fkk ftudh mUgsa lwpuk nh xbZ FkhA ;g dk;Z iw.kZ :is.k vLFkkbZ

Fkk vkSj mudh lsok,a fuf'pr vof/k dh lekfIr ds ckn Lor% gh lekIr gks xbZA bu lkf{k;ksa us ;g Hkh dgk gS] fd cSad esa

LFkkbZ fu;qfDr djus dk vf/kdkj fdlh Hkh vf/kdkjh dks ugha gS vkSj fyfid laoxZ esa fu;qfDr Hkkjr ljdkj ds fn'kk funsZ'kksa

ds rgr cSafdx lsok HkrhZ cksMZ ds ek/;e ls fuf'pr izfdz;k ds vuqlkj gksrh gSA bu lkf{k;ksa us ;g Hkh mYys[k fd;k gS] fd

f)i{kh; le>kSrs dh /kkjk 207 o 208 ds vuqlkj cSad dks dk;Z fuiVkus ds fy, vLFkkbZ O;oLFkk djus dk vf/kdkj gSA lk{kh

fnyhi dksBkjh us ;g Hkh dgk gS] fd prqFkZ Js.kh deZpkjh ,oa v/khuLFk laoxZ esa fu;kstu jkst+xkj dk;kZy; ds ek/;e ls

fuf'pr izfdz;k ds vuqlkj gh fu;qfDr gksrh gSA

11-

vizkFkhZ cSad dh vksj ls izLrqr bu lkf{k;ksa ds dFkuksa ls ;g Hkyh Hkkafr izekf.kr gS] fd Jfed dkUrk BDdj] ctjax

yky] clUr dqekj rFkk enu yky mudh cSad dh fofHkUu 'kk[kkvksa esa vLFkkbZ rkSj ij fu;qDr fd;s x;sA izkFkhZx.k dkUrk

BDdj] ctjax yky] enu yky dh fu;qfDr dfu"B fyfid o clar dqekj dh fu;qfDr ihvkWu ds in ij gqbZ FkhA bu

5744 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 24, 2016/PAUSA 3, 1938

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Jfedksa us mDr cSad dh 'kk[kkvksa esa vius 'kiFk i=ksa ds vuqlkj dze'k% 80 fnu] 85 fnu] 74 o 85 fnu dk;Z djuk crk;k

gSA vizkFkhZ us izkFkhZx.k }kjk crkbZ xbZ bl dk;Z vof/k dks bUdkj ugha fd;k gSA vizkFkhZ ds lk{kh fnyhi dksBkjh] ujs'k dqekj

tqustk] ds- lh- fot;oxhZ; us vius dFkuksa esa dsoy ;g dgk gS] fd cSad esa vLFkkbZ dk;Z dh o`f) gksus ds dkj.k bu Jfedksa

dks vLFkkbZ rkSj ij ,d fuf'pr vof/k gsrq j[kk Fkk vkSj fuf'pr vof/k dh lekfIr ij mudk dk;Z lekIr gks x;kA eSaus

i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;k] ftlesa bu pkjksa izkFkhZx.k dh fu;qfDr fdlh fuf'pr vof/k ds fy, dh xbZ gks] ,slk dksbZ

izys[k i=koyh ij ugha gSA mHk; i{k us ;g Lohdkj fd;k gS] fd bu Jfedksa dh fu;qfDr ekSf[kd vkns'kksa ls dh xbZ vkSj

ekSf[kd vkns'k ls gh mudks gVk fn;k x;kA bl laca/k esa tks egRoiw.kZ fcUnq gS] og ;g gS] fd D;k bu Jfedksa dks dk;Z ls

eqDr fd;s tkus ds i'pkr muds LFkku ij vLFkkbZ :i ls mlh laoxZ esa vizkFkhZ cSad }kjk vko';d dk;Z esa o`f) gksus ij

vU; O;fDr;ksa dks vLFkkbZ rkSj ij fu;qfDr nh xbZ gS\ rFkk ,slk djus ls iwoZ izkFkhZx.k dks dksbZ uksfVl ugha fn;k x;k vkSj

bl izdkj /kkjk 25 ¼,p½ vf/kfu;e ds izko/kkuksa dk mYy?kau fd;k x;k\

12-

tSlk fd Åij izkFkhZx.k dkUrk BDdj] ctjax yky] clar dqekj o enu yky ds dFkuksa dk mYys[k fd;k x;k gS]

ftUgksaus vius 'kiFk i=ksa esa ;g dgk gS fd mudks vizkFkhZ cSad us ekSf[kd vkns'k ls lsok eqDr dj fn;k vkSj muds LFkku ij

u;s Jfedksa dks vLFkkbZ rkSj ij fu;qDr dj fn;kA bu lkf{k;ksa us vius 'kiFk i= esa ;g Hkh dgk gS] fd mudh lsok eqfDr

ds ckn mudh txg vizkFkhZ cSad us vLFkkbZ rkSj ij tksuls Jfed fy;s muds ukeksa dk Hkh mYys[k fd;k gS] ftudk fd

o.kZu Åij fd;k x;k gSA izkFkhZ Jfedksa ds bu dFkuksa dks ugha ekuus dk dksbZ dkj.k ugha gS] D;ksafd izkFkhZx.k }kjk fd;s x;s

bu dFkuksa ds laca/k esa vizkFkhZ ds fo}ku izfrfuf/k us dksbZ ftjg ugha dh gSA bl rF; dks Li"V :i ls bUdkj Hkh ugha fd;k

gS] cfYd bl rF; ds laca/k esa vufHkKrk t+kfgj dh gS rFkk vizkFkhZ ds lkf{k;ksa us vius dFkuksa esa ;g Hkh ugha dgk fd izkFkhZ

Jfedksa dks fu;qfDr nsus gsrq mUgsa dksbZ uksfVl fn;k gksA

13-

tgka rd izkFkhZ Jfedksa dks vLFkkbZ rkSj ij fu;qfDr nsus dk iz'u gS] tSlk fd Åij mYys[k fd;k x;k gS] bl rF;

dks Lo;a izkFkhZx.k Hkh Lohdkj djrs gSa] ysfdu tgka rd fuf'pr vof/k dj iz'u gS] pwafd i=koyh esa dksbZ fu;qfDr i= bl

rF; dk is'k ugha fd;k x;k gS fd mUgsa fdlh fuf'pr vof/k ds fy, gh fu;qDr fd;k vkSj og dk;Z lekIr gksus ds ckn

mudh lsok vof/k dks vkxs ugha c<+k;k] vr% mudh lsok,a lekIr dj nh xbZA ,slh fLFkfr esa eq>s fo}ku izfrfuf/k vizkFkhZ ds

bl rdZ dks vLohdkj djus esa dksbZ fgpfdpkgV ugha gS] fd izkFkhZ Jfedksa dk ekeyk vkS/kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk

2¼00½ ¼ch ch½ ds vUrxZr NaVuh dh ifjHkk"kk esa ugha vkrk gSA

14-

izkFkhZ ds fo}ku izfrfuf/k us vius rdksZa ds leFkZu esa fuEu U;k; n`"VkUr izLrqr fd;s gSa %

ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk fjV la0 532 larks"k dqekjh o vU; cuke iatkc jkT; o vU; esa ikfjr

fu.kZ; fnukad 2-5-88

1998 TT ,y- ,y- ts- ist 112 ¼eku0 bykgckn mPp U;k0½ vksjh;sUV cSad vkWQ dkWelZ cuke ;wfu;u vkWQ

bf.M;k

1990 ,y-,y-vkj- ist 513 ¼eku0 iatkc o gfj;k.kk mPp U;k;ky;½ cychj flag cuke dq:{ks= dks0

vkWijsfVo cSad fy0 o vU;A

1987 ySc- vkbZ- lh- 1361 ¼eku0 xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky;½ xqtjkr ,l-,e-Vh- dkiks0 fy0 cuke nhid nslkbZ

vkj- ,y- vkj- 1991 ¼2½ 691 ¼eku0 jktLFkku mPp U;k0½ lw;Z izdk'k 'kekZ cuke jktLFkku VSDlV cqd

cksMZ] t;iqjA

1997 T ,y-,y-ts- 379 ¼eku0 enzkl mPp U;k0½ ,e- ds- inekorh cuke bULVhV;wV vkWQ gksVy eSusteSaV]

dsVfjax VSdukWykth ,.M vIykbt U;wVªh'ku] enzklA

1996 TT ,y-,y-ts- ist 216 ¼mPpre U;k;ky;½ lsUVªy cSad vkWQ bf.M;k cuke ,l- lR;e o vU;A

15-

ekuuh; enzkl mPp U;k;ky; ds fofu'p; ,y-,y-ts- 1997 ¼1½ ist 379 ¼lqijk½ esa izfrikfnr fl)kUr ,slh

ifjfLFkfr esa bl ekeys ds rF;ksa ij iw.kZ:is.k ykxw gksrk gS] ftlesa ;g izfrikfnr fd;k x;k gS] fd ;fn fdlh vkns'k esa

fu;qfDr fuf'pr vof/k dh ugha gS rks ,slh fu;qfDr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 2¼00½ ¼ch ch½ ds izko/kkuksa dks vkdf"kZr ugha djsxhA

blds vykok izLrqr ekeys esa] tSlk fd Åij foospu fd;k tk pqdk gS] izkFkhZ Jfedksa dh lsok,a lekIr djus ds i'pkr cSad

}kjk muds LFkku ij u;s Jfedksa dks Hkh vLFkkbZ rkSj ij fu;qfDr nh gS] tks fd muls dfu"B Fks ysfdu mudh txg tks u;s

Jfed muds laoxZ esa fu;qDr fd;s x;s] muls iwoZ bu izkFkhZx.k dks vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 25&,p ds vUrxZr dksbZ uksfVl ugha

fn;kA vr% esjh jk; esa izLrqr ekeys esa vizkFkhZ cSad }kjk vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 25&,p ds izko/kkuksa dk iw.kZ:is.k mYy?kau fd;k

tkuk izekf.kr gksrk gSA

16-

vizkFkhZ ds fo}ku izfrfuf/k }kjk muds rdksZa ds leFkZu esa izLrqr U;k; n`"VkaUrksa 197 ¼4½ ,l-lh-lh- ist 391 fgeka'kq

dqekj fo/kkFkhZ cuke~ LVsV cSad vkWQ fcgkj o vU;] 1994 TT ,y-,y-ts- ¼,l-lh-½ ist 977 ek/;fed f'k{kk ifj"kn] ;w-ih-

cuke vfuy dqekj feJk] 1995 ¼2½ vkj-,y-vkj- ¼jkt0½ ist 272 jktho dqekj 'kekZ cuke jktLFkku jkT; o vU; rFkk

1992 ¼3½ McY;w-,y-lh- 533 jkeizrki cuke jktLFkku jkT; o vU; dk Hkh eSaus llEeku xaHkhjrkiwoZd v/;;u fd;k fdUrq

mijksDr U;k; n`"Vkar izLrqr ekeys ds rF;ksa o ifjfLFkfr;ksa ij iw.kZ :is.k ykxw ugha gksrs gSaA

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % fnlEcj 24] 2016@ikS"k 3] 1938

5745

17-

izkFkhZx.k us viuh lk{; esa ;g iwjh rjg Li"V ugha fd;k gS fd muds LFkku ij tks ubZ fu;qfDr;ka dh xbZ gSa] mu

uo fu;qDr Jfedksa us vizkFkhZ cSad esa fdrus fdrus fnu rd dk;Z fd;kA ,slh fLFkfr esa bl laca/k esa dsoy ;gh fu"d"kZ

fudkyk tk ldrk gS] fd cSad ds fjdkMZ ds vuqlkj mijksDr pkjksa Jfedksa ds LFkku ij tks u;s Jfed mlh laoxZ esa fu;qDr

vLFkkbZ rkSj ij fd;s x;s] mUgksaus ftruh vof/k rd ¼vFkkZr izkFkhZx.k ls dfu"B Jfedksa us½ vizkFkhZ cSad esa dk;Z fd;k ml

vof/k rd dk 50 izfr'kr osru izkFkhZx.k lacaf/kr in dk izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh ekus tkus ;ksX; gSaA ;fn vc Hkh izkFkhZx.k

ls dfu"B deZpkjh vLFkkbZ rkSj ij ,sls iz;kstu ds fy, dk;Z dj jgs gksa vFkok j[ks tkrs gksa rks izkFkhZx.k dks iqu% lsok esa

mlh :i esa fu;qDr djus gsrq izkFkZfedrk ds vk/kkj ij dUlhMj fd;k tkosA

18-

mijksDr foospu ds vk/kkj ij bl ekeys esa fuEu vokMZ ikfjr fd;k tkrk gS%

**vkSjh,.Vy cSad vkWQ dkWelZ ds izcU/kra= }kjk Jfedx.k enuyky iztkir] dkUrk BDdj] ctjax yky o

clUr dqekj dks lsok ls i`Fkd djus ds ckn muds LFkku ij u;s O;fDr;ksa dks fu;qDr djus ls iwoZ pkjksa

izkFkhZx.k dks /kkjk 25&,p vf/kfu;e ds vUrxZr iqu% fu;ksftr djus gsrq dUlhMj ugha fd;k tkuk mfpr ,oa

oS/k ugha gSA

mijksDr pkjksa izkFkhZx.k ds LFkku ij ftu u;s dfu"B Jfedksa dks cSad }kjk vLFkkbZ rkSj ij dk;Z dh izd`fr

ds vuqlkj fu;qDr fd;k tkrk jgk vkSj ftruh ftruh vof/k ds fy, mUgksaus dk;Z fd;k] ml vof/k ds osru

dk 50 izfr'kr pkjksa izkFkhZx.k vius vius laoxZ esa izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh gSaA

;fn vizkFkhZ cSad esa izkFkhZx.k ls dfu"B Jfed vc Hkh dk;Z dj jgs gSa rks cSad dks funsZ'k fn;s tkrs gSa] fd

izkFkhZx.k enu yky iztkir] dkUrk BDdj] ctjax yky o clUr dqekj dks Hkh vkdfLed dk;Z gsrq iqu% mlh

:i esa fu;qfDr fn;s tkus ds fy, fu;ekuqlkj dUlhMj fd;k tk;s] tSls igys fd;k x;k FkkA

DySe dh lwph esa mfYyf[kr 'ks"k Jfedksa }kjk pwafd dksbZ lk{; izLrqr ugha dh xbZ gS] vr% muds laca/k esa uks

fMLI;wV vokMZ ikfjr fd;k tkrk gSA

19-

vokMZ vkt fnukad 30-1-2001 dks [kqys U;k;ky; esa fy[kk;k tkdj lquk;k x;k tks dsUnz ljdkj dks izdk’kukFkZ

fu;ekuqlkj Hkstk tkosA

jktk jke oekZ] U;k;k/kh’k

CORRIGENDUM

New Delhi, the 21st December, 2016

S.O. 2449.—In partial modification of this Ministry’s Notification No. L-12012/05/2016- IR(B-II) dated

16/11/2016 in Award I.D. No. 14/2015, management of Bank of Baroda be read as Central Bank of India and file

Number as L-12012/05/2015 - IR(B-II).

[No. L-12012/05/2015-IR (B-II)]

RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer

Uploaded by Dte. of Printing at Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064

and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054. ALOK

KUMAR

Digitally signed by

ALOK KUMAR

Date: 2017.01.10

16:28:09 +05'30'