3417 GI/2017

(3319)

jftLVªh la

(,u) 04@0007@2003µ05

REGD. No. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05

izkf/dkj ls izdkf'kr

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

lkIrkfgd

WEEKLY

]

ubZ fnYyh]

twu 4

—

twu

] 2017] 'kfuokj@

T;s

—

T;s

] 193

No. 23]

NEW DELHI, JUNE 4—JUNE 10, 2017, SATURDAY/ JYAISTHA 14—JYAISTHA 20, 1939

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)

foÙk

ea=kky;

(

jktLo

foHkkx)

(¯gnh vuqHkkx

)

ubZ fnYyh]

] 2017

392

—

dsUn

zh;

ljdkj]

jktHkk"kk (la?k ds 'kkldh; iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx) fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e 10 ds

mi&fu;e (4) ds vuqlj.k esa]

jktLo foHkkx ds v/hu

iz/ku vij egkfuns

kd dk

dk;kZy;] jktLo vklwpuk funs

kky;

]

fnYyh

vkapfyd bdkbZ dks]

ftl

80 izfr'kr ls vf/d deZpkfj;ksa us ¯gnh dk dk;Zlk/d Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS]

dks

vfèklwfpr djrh gS A

¹iQk

bZ&11017@

@201

&¯gnh&

(Mhvksvkj&Mhvksvkj)

vkuan dqekj] mi funs

'kd

(

jktHkk"kk

)

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department of Revenue)

(HINDI SECTION-2)

New Delhi, the 2nd June, 2017

S.O. 1392.—In pursuance of Sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Language (Use for Official Purposes of the

Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies Office of the Principal Additional Director General,

3320

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Delhi Zonal Unit under the Department of Revenue, where more than 80% staff

have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi.

[F. No. E-11017/2/2017- Hindi-II (DOR-DOR )]

ANAND KUMAR, Dy. Director (O.L.)

fo|qr

ea=kky;

ubZ fnYyh] 1 twu

] 2017

1393

-—

dsUnz

ljdkj]

jktHkk"kk (la?k ds 'kkldh; iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx) fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e 10 ds

mi&fu;e (4) ds vuqlj.k esa]

fo|qr ea=kky; ds iz

klfud fu;a=k.kk/hu ,uVhih

lh fyfeVsM ds if'peh {ks=k&2 eq[;ky;] pkSFkk ry]

eSXusVks vkWfiQtks] eSXusVks nk eky] ykHkkaMh] thbZ jksM] jk;iqj&492001 (NÙkhlx<+)]

ftl

80 izfr'kr deZpk

jhoa`n

us ¯gnh dk

dk;Zlk/d Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS]

dks ,rn~}kjk

vfèklwfpr djrh gS A

¹la

11017@10@2013&

¯gnhº

vatw HkYyk] la;qDr lfpo

(

iz'kk

)

MINISTRY OF POWER

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2017

S.O. 1393.—In pursuance of Sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Languages (Use for Official Purposes of the

Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notify WESTERN REGION-II HEADQUARTER, 4^th Floor,

Magneto Offizo, Magneto the Mall, Labhandi, GE Road, Raipur-492001(CG) of the NTPC Ltd. under the

administrative control of Ministry of Power, where 80% of the staff have acquired working knowledge of Hindi.

[No. 11017/10/2013-Hindi]

ANJU BHALLA, Jt. Secy. (Adm.)

वाणिज्य एवं उद्योग मंत्रालय

(वाणिज्य णवभाग)

नई दिल्ली, 31 मई, 2017

का.आ. 1394.—केन्द्रीय सरकार, णनयाात (गुिवत्ता णनयंत्रि एंव णनरीक्षि) णनयम, 1964 के णनयम 12, के उपणनयम (2) के

साथ पठित,णनयाात (गुिवत्ता णनयंत्रि एंव णनरीक्षि) अणिणनयम, 1963 (1963 का 22) की िारा 7 की उपिारा (1) द्वारा प्रित्त

शणियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैससा णमनरल्स लैब सर्वासेज प्राइवेट णलणमटेड, प्लॉट सं. 28-8-141, पहली मंणजल, थॉमसन गली, पुराने

डाकघर के पास,णवशाखापत्तनम– 530024, आन्द्र प्रिेश, को इस अणिसूचना के राजपत्र में प्रकाशन की तारीख से तीन वर्ा की अवणि के

णलए भारत सरकार के शासकीय राजपत्र भाग-II, खंण् ड-3, उप खंण् ड(ii) में दिनांक 20 दिसम्बर, 1965 की अणिसूचना सं. का.आ. 3975

के तहत प्रकाणशत अणिसूचना मे उपाबद्ध अनुसूणचयों में णवणनर्िाष्ट खणनज और अयस्क समूह-।, अथाात् लौह अयस्क का णनयाात से पूवा

णनम्नणलणखत शतों के अिीन णवशाखापत्तनम पत्तन में उक् त अयस् क का णनरीक्षि करने के णलए एक अणभकरि के ुपप में मान्द्यता िेती है,

अथाात् :

(i)

यह अणभकरि, शासकीय राजपत्र भाग-II, खंण् ड-3, उप खंण् ड(ii) में दिनांक 20 दिसम्बर, 1965 में प्रकाणशत अणिसूचना सं.

का.आ. 3977 में णवणनर्िाष्ट खणनज और अयस्क समूह-। का णनयाात (णनरीक्षि) णनयम, 1965 के णनयम 4 के अिीन णनरीक्षि

की पद्धणत की जााँच करने के णलये णनयाात णनरीक्षि पठरर्ि् द्वारा णनणमत्त नामणनर्िाष्ट अणिकाठरयों को पयााप्त सुणविाएं िेगी;

और

(ii)

3321

(ii)

यह अणभकरि, इस अणिसूचना के अिीन अपने कायो के पालन में णनिेशक (णनरीक्षि और गुिवत्ता णनयंत्रि) णनयाात णनरीक्षि

पठरर्ि द्वारा समय-समय पर णलणखत रूप में दिए गए ऐसे णनिेशों से आबद्ध होगा।

[फा.सं. के.-डी.ओ.सी.-16/14(7)/2017 - णनयाात णनरीक्षि]

संतोर् कुमार सारंगी, संयुि सणचव

MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY

(Department of Commerce)

New Delhi, the 31st May, 2017

S.O. 1394.—In exercise of the powers conferred by the sub-section (1) of section 7 of the Export (Quality

Control and Inspection) Act, 1963 (22 of 1963) read with sub-rule (2) of rule 12 of the Export (Quality Control and

Inspection) Rules, 1964, the Central Government hereby recognizes M/s. Minerals Lab Services Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 28-

8-141, First Floor, Thomson Street, near old Post Office, Visakhapatnam – 530001, Andhra Pradesh, as an agency

(hereinafter referred to as the said agency), for a period of three years from the date of publication of this notification,

for the inspection of Iron Ore specified at serial number 2 under the heading Minerals and Ores – Group I, in the

Schedule to the notification number S.O. 3975, dated the 20^thDecember, 1965, published in the Gazette of India,

Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii), dated the 20^thDecember, 1965, prior to export of the said Ore at

Visakhapatnam Port, subject to the following conditions, namely: -

(i)

the said agency shall give adequate facilities to the officers nominated by the Export Inspection Council in this

behalf to carry out the inspection as per procedure specified under rule 4 of the Export of Minerals and Ores -

Group I (Inspection) Rules, 1965, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-

section (ii) vide notification number S.O. 3977, dated the 20^thDecember, 1965;

(ii)

the said agency in the performance of its function under this notification shall be bound by such directions as the

Director (Inspection and Quality Control), Export Inspection Council, may give in writing from time to time.

[F.No. K-DoC-16/14(7)/2017- Export Inspection]

SANTOSH KUMAR SARANGI, Jt. Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 1 जून, 2017

का.आ. 1395.—केन्द्रीय सरकार, णनयाात (गुिवत्ता णनयंत्रि एवं णनरीक्षि) णनयम, 1964 के णनयम 12, के उपणनयम (2) के

साथ पठित, णनयाात (गुिवत्ता णनयंत्रि एंव णनरीक्षि) अणिणनयम, 1963 (1963 का 22) की िारा 7 की उपिारा (1) द्वारा प्रित्त

शणियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैससा सुपठरटेंडेंस कंपनी इंणडया प्रा॰ णल॰, िवार सं॰ 22-69-12/1, वसन्द्ता राव मागा, वडा-24, रीडडंग रूम

के पास, णवशाखापत्तनम– 530001, आन्द्र प्रिेश को इस अणिसूचना के राजपत्र में प्रकाशन की तारीख से तीन वर्ा की अवणि के णलए

अणिसूचना सं॰ का.आ.3975 के तहत प्रकाणशतर अणिसूचना मे उपाबद्ध अनुसूणचयों में णवणनर्िाष्ट खणनज और अयस्क समूह-।, क्रम सं. िो

पर णनर्िाष्ट लौह अयस्क को णनयाात से पूवा णनम्नणलणखत शतों के अिीन णवशाखापत्तनम पत्तन पर णनरीक्षि करने के णलए एक अणभकरि

के रूप में मान्द्यता िेती है, अथाात् :

(i)

यह अणभकरि, शासकीय राजपत्र भाग-II, खंण् ड-3, उप खंण् ड (ii) में दिनांक 20 दिसम्बर, 1965 में प्रकाणशत अणिसूचना सं.

का.आ. 3977 में णवणनर्िाष्ट खणनज और अयस्क समूह-। का णनयाात (णनरीक्षि) णनयम, 1965 के णनयम 4 के अिीन णनरीक्षि की

पद्धणत की जााँच करने के णलये णनयाात णनरीक्षि पठरर्ि् द्वारा णनणमत्त नामणनर्िाष्ट अणिकाठरयों को पयााप्त सुणविाएं िेगी; और

(ii)

पठरर्ि द्वारा समय-समय पर णलणखत रूप में दिए गए ऐसे णनिेशों से आबद्ध होंगी ।

[फा.सं. के-डीओसी-16/14(8)/2017- णनयाात णनरीक्षि]

संतोर् कुमार सारंगी, संयुि सणचव

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2017

S.O. 1395.—In exercise of the powers conferred by the sub-section (1) of section 7 of the Export (Quality

Control and Inspection) Act, 1963 (22 of 1963), read with sub-rule (2) of rule 12 of the Export (Quality Control and

Inspection) Rules, 1964, the Central Government hereby recognises M/s Superintendence Company of India Private

3322

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Limited, Door no. 22-69-12/1, Vasantha Rao Street, Ward-24, Near Reading Room, Visakhapatnam- 530001, Andhra

Pradesh, as an agency (hereinafter referred to as the said agency), for a period of three years from the date of

publication of this notification, for the inspection of Iron Ore specified at serial number 2 under the heading Minerals

and Ores Group-I, in the Schedule to the notification number S.O. 3975, dated the 20^thDecember, 1965, prior to export

of said Ore at Visakhapatnam Port, subject to the following conditions, namely: -

(i)

the said agency shall give adequate facilities to the officers nominated by the Export Inspection Council in this

behalf to carry out the inspection as per the procedure specified in rule 4 of the Export of Minerals and Ores -

Group I (Inspection) Rules, 1965, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-

section (ii) vide notification number S.O. 3977 dated the 20^thDecember, 1965;

(ii)

the said agency in performance of its function as specified in this notification shall be bound by such directions

as the Director (Inspection and Quality Control), Export Inspection Council may give in writing from time to

time.

[F.No. K-DoC-16/14(8)/2017- Export Inspection]

SANTOSH KUMAR SARANGI, Jt. Secy.

dks;yk ea=ky;

ubZ fnYyh] 2 twu] 2017

1396

कोयला िारक क्षेत्र, (अजान और णवकास) अणिणनयम 1957 (1957 का 20) (णजसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उि

अणिणनयम कहा गया है) की िारा 9 की उप-िारा (1) के अिीन जारी और भारत सरकार के कोयला मंत्रालय की अणिसूचना संखयांक

का.आ. 1224(अ), तारीख 20 अप्रैल, 2017, जो भारत के राजपत्र, असािारि, भाग II, खण्ड 3, उप-खण्ड (ii), तारीख 20 अप्रैल,

2017 में प्रकाणशत की गई थी, उि अणिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्िात भूणम (णजसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उि भूणम कहा गया है) में

या उस पर के अणिकार, उक् त अणिणनयम की िारा 10 की उप-िारा (1) के अिीन, सभी णवल् लंगमों से मुक् त होकर, आत् यंणतक रूप से

केन्द् रीय सरकार में णनणहत हो गए है ;

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार का यह समािान हो गया है दक सेंट्रल कोलफील््स णलणमटेड, रााँची, झारखंड (णजसे इसमें इसके पश्चात

सरकारी कंपनी कहा गया है), ऐसे णनबंिनों और शतों, णजन्द्हें केन्द्रीय सरकार इस णनणमत्त अणिरोणपत करना उणचत समझे, का अनुपालन

करने के णलए रजामंि है ।

अतः, अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उि अणिणनयम की िारा 11 की उप-िारा (1) द्वारा प्रित्त शणियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह

णनिेश िेती है दक इस प्रकार णनणहत उि भूणम में या उस पर के पूवोि सभी अणिकार केन्द्रीय सरकार में इस प्रकार णनणहत बने रहने के

बजाए, तारीख 20 अप्रैल, 2017 से णनम्नणलणखत णनबन्द्िनों और शतों के अिीन रहते हुए सरकारी कंपनी में णनणहत हो जाएंगे, अथाात् :-

(1)

सरकारी कंपनी, उि अणिणनयम के उपबंिों के अिीन यथा अविाठरत प्रणतकर, ब्याज, नुक्साणनयों और वैसी ही मिों

की बाबत दकए गए सभी संिायों की केन्द्रीय सरकार को प्रणतपूर्ता करेगी;

(2)

सरकारी कंपनी द्वारा शता (1) के अिीन, उि सरकारी कंपनी द्वारा केन्द्रीय सरकार को संिेय रकमों का अविारि

करने के प्रयोजनों के णलए उि अणिणनयम की िारा 14 के अिीन एक अणिकरि का गिन दकया जायेगा तथा ऐसे

दकसी अणिकरि और उि अणिकरि की सहायता करने के णलए णनयुि व्यणियों के संबंि में उपगत सभी व्यय, उि

सरकारी कंपनी द्वारा वहन दकए जाएंगे और इसी भांणत इस प्रकार णनणहत उि भूणम में या उस पर के अणिकारों के

संबंि में या अपीलों इत्यादि णवणिक कायावाणहयों के संबंि में उपगत, सभी व्यय भी सरकारी कंपनी द्वारा वहन दकए

जाएंगे ;

(3)

सरकारी कंपनी, केन्द्रीय सरकार या उसके पििाठरयों की ऐसे दकसी अन्द्य व्यय के संबंि में क्षणतपूर्ता करेगी जो इस

प्रकार णनणहत उि भूणम में या उस पर के अणिकारों के बारे में केन्द्रीय सरकार या उसके पििाठरयों द्वारा या उनके

णवुपद्ध दकन्द्हीं कायावाणहयों के संबंि में आवश्यक हो ;

(ii)

3323

(4)

सरकारी कंपनी को, केन्द्रीय सरकार के पूवा अनुमोिन के णबना, उि भूणम और उि भूणम में या उसके पर के अणिकारों

के बारे में, इस प्रकार णनणहत अणिकारों को दकसी अन्द्य व्यणि को अंतठरत करने की शणि नहीं होगी; और

(5)

सरकारी कंपनी, ऐसे णनिेशों और शतों का पालन करेगी, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार द्वारा, जब कभी आवश्यक हो, उि भूणम

के णवणशष्ट क्षेत्रों के णलए दिए जाएं या अणिरोणपत दकए जाएं।

[Qk- la- 43015@22@2017&,y, ,.M vkbZvkj]

vkj- ,l- ljkst] voj lfpo

MINISTRY OF COAL

New Delhi, the 2nd June, 2017

S.O. 1396.—Whereas on the publication of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of

Coal, number S.O. 1224 (E), dated the 20^th April, 2017, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II,

Section 3, Sub-section (ii), dated the 20^th April, 2017, issued under sub-section (1) of section 9 of the Coal Bearing

Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), the land and the

rights in or over the said land described in the Schedule appended to the said notification (hereinafter referred to as the

said land) vested absolutely in the Central Government free from all encumbrances under sub-section (1) of section 10

of the said Act;

And whereas, the Central Government is satisfied that the Central Coalfields Limited, Ranchi, Jharkhand

(hereinafter referred to as the Government company) is willing to comply with such terms and conditions as the Central

Government thinks fit to impose in this behalf.

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 11 of the said Act, the

Central Government hereby directs that the said land and the rights in or over the said land so vested shall, with effect

from 20^th April, 2017, instead of continuing to so vest in the Central Government, vest in the Government company,

subject to the following terms and conditions, namely:-

(1)

the Government company shall reimburse the Central Government all payments made in respect of

compensation, interest, damages, and the like, as determined under the provisions of the said Act;

(2)

a Tribunal shall be constituted under section 14 of the said Act, for the purpose of determining the amounts

payable to the Central Government by the said Government company under condition (1), and all expenditure

incurred in connection with any such Tribunal and persons appointed to assist the said Tribunal shall be borne

by the said Government company and similarly, all expenditure incurred in respect of all legal proceedings

like appeals, etc. for or in connection with the rights in or over the said land, so vested shall also be borne by

the Government company;

(3)

the Government company shall indemnify the Central Government or its officials against any other

expenditure that may be necessary in connection with any proceedings by or against the Central Government

or its officials regarding the rights in or over the said land so vested;

(4)

the Government company shall have no power to transfer the said lands and the rights in or over the said land

so vested, to any other person without the prior approval of the Central Government; and

(5)

the Government company shall abide by such directions and conditions as may be given or imposed by the

Central Government for particular areas of the said lands as and when necessary.

[F. No. 43015/22/2017-LA & IR]

R. S. SAROJ, Under Secy.

ubZ fnYyh] 2 twu] 2017

1397

dks;yk /kkjd {ks= ¼vtZu vkSj fodkl½ vf/kfu;e] 1957 ¼1957 dk 20½ ¼ ftls blesa blds i’pkr~ mDr

vf/kfu;e dgk x;k gS½ dh /kkjk 9 dh mi&/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu tkjh] Hkkjr ds jkti=] Hkkx AA] [kaM 3] mi&[kaM ¼AaAa½] rkjh[k] 30 ekpZ

2017 esa izdkf’kr Hkkjr ljdkj ds dks;yk ea=ky; dh vf/klwpuk la[;kad dk- vk- 1004¼v½] rkjh[k 30 ekpZ] 2017 ds izdk’ku ij]

mDr vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa of.kZr Hkwfe ¼ftls blesa blds i’pkr~ mDr Hkwfe dgk x;k gS½ vkSj Hkwfe esa ;k ml ij ds lHkh

vf/kdkj] mDr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 10 dh mi&/kkjk ¼a1½ ds v/khu] lHkh foYyaxeksa ls eqDr gksdj] vkR;afrd :i ls dsUnzh; ljdkj esa

fufgr gks x,(

3324

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

vkSj] dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ;g lek/kku gks x;k gS fd lkmFk bZLVuZ dksyQhYM~l fyfeVsM] lhir jksM] Mkd?kj la[;k 60]

ftyk& fcykliqj&495006]NRrhlx<+ ¼ftls blesa blds i’pkr~ ljdkjh dEiuh dgk x;k gS½] ,sls fuca/kuksa vkSj ’krkasZ dk tks dsUnzh;

ljdkj bl fufeRr vf/kjksfir djuk mfpr le>s] vuqikyu djus ds fy;s rS;kj gS(

vr%] vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] mDr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 11 dh mi&/kkjk ¼1½ }kjk iznRr ’kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] ;g funs’k

nsrh gS fd bl izdkj fufgr mDr Hkwfe;ksa esa ;k Hkwfe;ksa ij ds lHkh vf/kdkj rkjh[k 30 ekpZ] 2017 ls dsUnzh; ljdkj esa bl izdkj

fufgr cus jgus dh ctk;] fuEufyf[kr fuca/kuksa vkSj ’krkasZ ds v/khu jgrs gq,] ljdkjh dEiuh esa fufgr gks tk,axs] vFkkZr~ %&

¼1½

ljdkjh dEiuh] mDr vf/kfu;e ds mica/kksa ds v/khu ;Fkk vo/kkfjr izfrdj] C;kt] uqdlkfu;ksa vkSj oSlh gh enksa dh ckcr~

fd, x, lHkh lank;ksa dh dsUnzh; ljdkj dks izfriwfrZ djsxh(

¼2½

ljdkjh dEiuh }kjk ’krZ ¼1½ ds v/khu] dsUnzh; ljdkj dks lans; jdeksa dk vo/kkj.k djus ds iz;kstu ds fy;s mDr

vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 14 ds v/khu ,d vf/kdj.k dk xBu fd;k tk,xk rFkk ,sls fdlh vf/kdj.k vkSj ,sls vf/kdj.k dh

lgk;rk djus ds fy;s fu;qDr O;fDr;ksa ds laca/kksa esa mixr lHkh O;;] ljdkjh dEiuh }kjk ogu fd;s tk;saxs vkSj bl

izdkj fufgr mDr Hkwfe esa ;k ml ij ds vf/kdkjksa ds fy;s ;k mlds laca/k esa lHkh fof/kd dk;Zokfg;ksa ftlds varxZr vihy

Hkh gS] dh ckcr mixr lHkh O;; Hkh blh izdkj ljdkjh dEiuh }kjk ogu fd;s tk;saxs(

¼3½

ljdkjh dEiuh] dsUnzh; ljdkj ;k mlds in/kkfj;ksa dh] ,sls fdlh vU; O;; ds laca/k esa] {kfriwfrZ djsxh tks bl izdkj

fufgr mDr Hkwfe esa ;k ml ij ds vf/kdkjksa ds ckjs esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj ;k mlds in/kkfj;ksa }kjk ;k muds fo:) fdUgha

dk;Zokfg;ksa ds laca/k esa vko’;d gks(

¼4½

ljdkjh dEiuh dks] dsUnzh; ljdkj ds iwoZ vuqeksnu ds fcuk] mDr Hkwfe vkSj mlds vf/kdkj dks fdlh vU; O;fDr dks

varfjr djus dh ’kfDr ugha gksxh( vkSj

¼5½

ljdkjh dEiuh] ,sls funs’kksa vkSj ’krksZa dk] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj }kjk] tc dHkh vko’;d gks] mDr Hkwfe ds fof’k"V {ks=ksa ds

fy;s fn, tk,a ;k vf/kjksfir dh tk,] ikyu djsxhA

[Qk- la- 43015@19@2017&,y, ,.M vkbZvkj]

vkj- ,l- ljkst] voj lfpo

New Delhi, the 2nd June, 2017

S.O. 1397.—Whereas on the publication of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of

Coal, number S.O. 1004(E), dated the 30^th March, 2017 published in the Gazette of India, Part II, Section 3, Sub-

section (ii), dated the 30^th March, 2017 issued under sub-section (1) of section 9 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition

and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), the lands and all rights in or over the

land described in the Schedule appended to the said notification (hereinafter referred to as the said land) vested

absolutely in the Central Government free from all encumbrances under sub-section (1) of section 10 of the said Act;

And whereas the Central Government is satisfied that the South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road, P.

B. No. 60, District-Bilaspur-495006, Chhattisgarh (hereinafter referred to as the Government Company) is willing to

comply with such terms and conditions as the Central Government thinks fit to impose in this behalf;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 11 of the said Act, the

Central Government hereby direct that all the rights in or over the said lands so vested shall with effect from the

30^th March, 2017 instead of continuing to so vest in the Central Government, shall vest in the Government Company,

subject to the following terms and conditions, namely:-

(1)

The Government Company shall reimburse to the Central Government all payments made in respect of

compensation, interest, damages and the like as determined under the provisions of the said Act;

(2)

A Tribunal shall be constituted under section 14 of the said Act for the purpose of determining the amounts

payable to the Central Government by the Government Company under condition (1) and all expenditure

incurred in connection with any such Tribunal and persons appointed to assist the Tribunal shall be borne by the

Government Company and similarly, all expenditure incurred in respect of all legal proceedings, including

appeals, for or in connection with the rights in or over the said lands, so vested, shall also be borne by the

Government Company;

(3)

The Government Company shall indemnify the Central Government or its officials against any other

expenditure that may be necessary in connection with any proceedings by or against the Central Government or

its officials regarding the rights in or over the said lands so vested;

(4)

The Government Company shall have no power to transfer the said lands and the rights to any other persons

without the prior approval of the Central Government; and

(ii)

3325

(5)

The Government Company shall abide by such directions and conditions as may be given or imposed by the

Central Government for particular areas of the said lands as and when necessary.

[F. No. 43015/19/2017-LA & IR]

R. S. SAROJ, Under Secy.

,oa

jkstxkj ea=kky;

ubZ fnYyh] 1

twu

] 2017

1398

—

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;kstdksaaaaaa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsU

nzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua

1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

199

6) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks

2017

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la

,y&20012@1

199

5&vkbZvkj (lh

)º

flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2017

S.O. 1398.—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 (Ref. No. 03 of 1996) as shown in 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 25.05.2017.

[No. L-20012/11/1995-IR (C-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. 03/1996

Employer in relation to the management of Lodna Colliery of M/s. BCCL

AND

Their workmen

Present : Shri R. K. Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances:

For the Employers

None

For the workman

None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated : 27/04/2017

AWARD

By order No. L-20012/11/1995-IR(C-I) dated 27/12/1995, 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:

3326

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the management of Lodna colliery in superannuating Sri Ishrail w.e.f.

26/08/1993 is justified? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to ?”

After receipt of the reference, both parties are noticed. But appearing for certain dates 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] 1 tw

u] 2017

1399

—

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

çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksaaaaaa 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 132@1995) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 25

2017

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la

,y&20012@504@1994&vkbZvkj (lh

)º

flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2017

S.O. 1399.—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 (Ref. No. 132 of 1995) as shown in Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to

the management of M/s. TISCO and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 25.05.2017.

[No. L-20012/504/1994-IR (C-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. 132/1995

Employer in relation to the management of M/s. TISCO Ltd. Jamadoba

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 : 27/04/2017

AWARD

By order No. L-20012/504/1994-IR(C-I) dated 4/5-12-1995, 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 M/s TISCO in not giving employment to the dependant

of the deceased workman late Ram Nandan Singh because his name had not been enrolled in the

company register, is justified? If not, what is the relief admissible in this case?”

(ii)

3327

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] 1 twu] 2017

1400

—

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;kstdksaaaaaa 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 267@1994) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 25

2017

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la

,y&20012@221@1992&vkbZvkj (lh

)º

flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2017

S.O. 1400.—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 (Ref. No. 267 of 1994) as shown in 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 25.05.2017.

[No. L-20012/221/1992-IR (C-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. 267/1994

Employers in relation to the management of Patherdih Coal Washery of M/s. BCCL

AND

Their workmen

Present : Shri R. K. Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances:

For the Employers

Shri D.K. Verma, Advocate

For the workman

Shri S.P. Rakshit, Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated : 21/04/2017

AWARD

By order no. L- 20012 /221/1992 /IR (C-I) dated 16/11 /94, the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour

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

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

SCHEDULE

“Whether 157 workmen, as per list enclosed, which has been submitted by the secretary,

Dhanbad colliery Kramchari Sangh, Patherdih Coal Washery Branch, Dhanbad, have ever

worked with the contractor of Patherdih Coal Washery in Transportation of middling grade

slurry. If not, who are the workman who have actually worked in the said job.?

“Whether the action of the management of Patherdih Coal Washery under Central Coal

Washery Organisation of M/S Bharat Coking Coal Limited in not regularising/departmentalising

the workmen who have actually worked as per (i) above in view of Director (Personnel), BCCL’s

letter No. DP/PS/91/C/5 dt. 10.09.91 is justified? If not what relief these workmen are entitled

to?”

3328

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

LIST OF WORKMEN

SL.

No.

Name & Father’s /Husband

Name

Age

Permanent Address

Present Address

Anil Manjhi , S/o- Sri Sraban

Manjhi

Vill. Parbad, Ghatbeda , P.S

Balrampur ( Bengal) , Dist.

Purulia

Patherdih Coal Washery

Jhopadi , P.O- Patherdih Coal

Washery P.S. Jorapokhar Dist.

Dhanbad.

Maheshwari Devi , W/o- Anil

Manjhi

-do-

Kale Mahali , S/O- Budhu Mahali

Vill. Patheragoda , P.O.

Kalidhe , P.S. Kashipur , Dist.

Purulia (Bengal)

Patherdih Coal Washery

Manjhi Jhopadi ( Dhanbad)

Bedani Mahali , Husband- Kalo

Mahali

-do-

Tara Muni Kisko Father- Late

Ram Kisko

Vill- Marjangalpur , P.O.

Hathikund, P.S. Huda, Dist.

Purulia (Bengal)

-do-

Ram Balak Yadav, Father- Dukhi

Yadav

Patherdih hat Talla ( Mngeria

Khatal) P.O. Patherdih , Dist,

Dhanbad

Patherdih Hat Talla (Mungaria

Khatal) P.O. Patherdih,

Dist. Dhanbad

Ananda Bauri Father- Basu Bauri

Vill & P.O- Sendurpur , P.S. &

Dist- Purulia ( Bengal)

Patherdih Coal washery

Dhanbad

Gayatri Bauri

-do-

Bhudi Baurin Father –Basu Bauri

-do-

Bhaskar Bauri Father- Rasik

Bauri

-do-

Khikhu Barui Father- Rasik Bauri

-do-

Sikhu Bauri Father- Rasik Bauri

-do-

Nagender Bauri Father- Lalu

Bauri

-do-

Shankar Bauri S/o Vilas Bauri

Vill. Palma , P.O.

Hudakeshavpur , P.O. Huda ,

Diat. Purulia (Bengal)

Patherdih Coal Washery

Manjhi Jhopadi ( Dhanbad)

Gurupado Bauri , Father – Vilas

Bauri

-do-

Ambuj Mahato, Father Aklu

Mahato

-do-

Rashmuni Murmu , Father Jhari

Murmu

Vill. Bhuiadih, P.O.

Gamharkudi, P.S. Kashipur,

Dist. Purulia (Bengal)

Paterdih Coal Washery

Kumhar Jhopadi (Dhanbad)

Chand Muni Murmu S/O Gosai

Murmu

-do-

Shiv Bachan Singh Father-

Banjhu Singh

Vill- Kulmanpur , P.O. Shivpur

(Murar) , Dist. Baxur (Bhojpur)

Bihar

Patherdih Coal Washery

Dhanbad

Suresh Kumar Singh (

Supervisor) Father- Ram Bihari

Singh

Vill. Nandan , P.O. Nandan P.S.

Dumrao , Dist. Baxur (Bhojpur)

-do-

(ii)

3329

Ramayan Singh (Superviser)

Father-Vishwanath Singh

Bokaro Steel City Sec. 6-A , Qr.

No. 3382

Mohan Bazar- Patherdih

Dhanbad

Birender

Kumar

Singh

(Superviser) Father- Sakaldeep

Singh

Vill. Baswani ( Marohi Tola)

Maya Dalipur , P.O. Chorahi ,

Dist- Baxur ( Bhojpur) Bihar

-do-

Surender Singh Father – Jairam

Singh

Vill. Nandan , P.O. Nandan ,

P.S. Dumrao B Bhojpur) Bihar

Mohan Bazar- Patherdih

Dhanbad

Avdesh singh , father- Ramparikh

Singh

-do-

Shohan Singh , Father- Rishimuni

Singh

Vill. Nandan, P.O. Nandan P.S.

Bumrao, Dist. Baxur ( Bhojpur)

Patherdih Coal washery

Dhanbad

Baijnath Choudhary, Father-

Batai Choudahry

-do-

Surender Singh Father- Shyam

Bihari Singh

Vill. Nahasi , P.O. Bagaa, P.s.

Sandeh, Dist. Aara ( Bhojpur)

-do-

Anil Mumar Pandey, Father-

Laxmi Narayan Pandey

Vill. & P.O.- Shri Rampur , P.S.

Topchanchi , Dist. Dhanbad

-do-

Sunil Kumar Chetrapal Father-

Jagdish Prasad Bauri

Vill. Bulanbarari No. 6

Ghawada , P.O. Bhulanorarari ,

P.S. Porapokhar, Dist.Dhanbad

Basant Kumar Singh Father- Shri

Dasrath Singh

Vill.Sonpura, P.O.+P.S

Eatkhori Dist. Hazaribagh

Sudamdih river side,Dhanbad

Ghirender kumar Singh , Father-

Shri Dasrath Singh

Vill.

Purani,

P.O.

Karani

(Bhaya Eatkhori) P.S. Eatkhori ,

Dist. Hazaribagh

-do-

Jagdish Singh , Father- Daroga

Singh

Vill. Keshdihara, P.O. Paar ,

P.S. Sandesh , Dist. Aara

(Bhojpur) Bihar

Patherdih Coal washery

Dhanbad

Shiv Janam Yadav , father Shiv

Bachan yadav

Vill. Gaighat, P.O. Gaighat ,

P.S. Brahampur Dist. Bauxer

(Bhojpur)

Domgarh Sindri,Dhanbad

Madan Yadav Father-

Ramchander Yadav

Vill- Hasnagar, P.O.-Haldi ,

P.S+Dist- Balia ( U.P)

-do-

Ramashish Singh , Father- Raj

Vallabh Singh

Vill. Maidpur, P.O. Naidpur ,

P.S. Brahampur, Dist. Bauxer

(Bhojpur) Bihar

-do-

Kashi Yadav , Father- Doine

Yadav

Vill. Gaighat, P.O. Gaighat ,

P.S. Brahampur Dist. Bauxer

(Bhojpur)

-do-

Yamaharaj Yadav Fathe –Daroga

Yadav

Vill. Dhurhupur, P.O. Dhllupur,

P.S. Brahampur, Dist. Baxer

(Bhojpur)

Shambhu Yadav , Father- Sipahi

Yadav

-do-

Gupteshwar Yadav Father- Sipahi

Yadav

-do-

3330

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Birender Yadav Father- Daroga

yadav

-do-

Rajkishore singh Father-

Rajballabh Singh

-do-

Brij Kishore Singh , Father- Raj

Ballabh Singh

Vill & P.O. Gandpur P.s.

Brahapur, Dist. Bauxer

(Bhojpur) Bihar

Sri Sushil Singh , Father- Changi

Singh

Vill.& Post & Shahpur , Dist.

Bhojpur ( Bihar)

Shri Rameshwar Singh , Father-

Suchit Singh

Vill. & Post- dulhinganj , P.S.

Jagdishpur , Dist. Aara

(Bhojpur) Bihar

Kameshwar Singh Father- Suchit

Singh

-do-

Laxman Singh Father- Bhudali

Singh

-do-

Ramji Singh Father- Bhudali

singh

-do-

Sheopujan Prasad , Father- Doda

Prasad

Vill. & P.O.– Sonbarasa , P.S.

Shahpur, Dist. Bauxer

(Bhojpur) Bihar

---

Subash Kumar , Father- Bhallu

Kumbhakar

Vill. Noonudih, P.O. Patherdih ,

Dist. Dhanbad ( Bihar)

Manmohan Acharya , Father-

mritunjya Acharya

Vill. Parsabnia , P.O. Jenagora

P.S-Baliapur,Dist-Dhanbad

Jaideo Vir Father- Polaram Vir

Vill. Keshra, P.O. Kenduadih ,

Post-+Dist- Bakuda, WB

---

Rampado Bouri , Father- Rango

Bouri

Vill. & P.O. Sindurpur P.S. &

Dist. Purulia ( W,Bengal)

Manik Bouri father- Roopa Bouri

Vill. Rangamatia Raja basti

P.O. Saharpur Dist. Dhanbad

Haripado Mahto s/o- Jitu Mahto

Vill. Tityadih, P.O. Jognabad ,

P.S.Kashipur Dist. Purulia

(WB)

Hareram Singh Father- Jangali

Singh

Vill. Dihara, P.O. Aayena P.S.

nawanagar, Dist. Bhojpur

Shivji Singh s/o- Kashinath

Singh

-do-

Vinod Kumar Singh

Father- Baleshwar Singh

-do-

Ashok Kumar Singh S/O-Ram

Bali Singh

-do-

Surender Kumar Singh , Father-

Rameshwar Singh

-do-

Jawahar Singh Yadav Father- Shri

Devdhari Singh

N.A

Vill.Mohan Bazaar,P.O.

Patherdih , Post- Jorapokhar,

Dist. Dhanbad

Ramnath Singh ( Superviser)

-do-

(ii)

3331

Father- Late Kripal Singh

Vishwanath Singh Father- Late

Kripal singh

-do-

Manoj Kumar Vishwakarma S/O-

Laxmi Narayan Viswakarma

-do-

Suryakant Sharma S/o Subedar

Singh

Vill. Qr. No. 1831 D, Traffic

Colony, patherdih, Dist. Dhan.

Radhey Shayam Singh Father-

Tejdhari Sigh

Vill. Chakia, P.O. Kurkuri Dist.

Patna (Bihar)

C/O Tejdhari Singh, Railway

out House ( Training house)

Deepak Kumar Singh Father-

Tejdhari Singh

-do-

Ramesh Kumar Singh S/o Late

Ram Ekbal Singh

Lt. Ram Ekbal Singh, Rupastola

Cheddi Singh, P.O. Athmal

Gola , Dist. Patna ( Bihar)

Awadesh Kumar Singh , S/o Late

Vikrama Singh

Vill. & P.O. Raghunathpur Dist.

Bhojpur ( Bihar)

Jannath Hussain Father- junail

Avadih

Vill. Sate Avanti Purani Kot

P.O. Sato Avanti Chaprang

Dist. Rohtas ( Bihar)

Patherdih Coal washery

(Dhanbad)

Matlub Ansari

Vill. Utrolli, P.O. utrolli , Dist.

Gajipur ( U.P)

-do-

Gholtu Rai Father- Visu Rai

Vill. Patherdih Pandey Basti,

P.O. Patherdih, P.S. jorapokhar

, Dist. Dhanbad

Manpuran Rai Father- Kailash

Rai

Vill. Ramdih, P.O. Ajin Joda ,

P.S. & Dist. Purulia ( W.B)

Fatik Bouri father- Sanru Bouri

Vill. Banbadian, P.O.

bhagabandh, P.S., Pada Dist .

Purulia ( West Bengal)

Ashtami Bourin Husband- Mnilal

Bouri

Vill & P.O. Sendurpur, Dist

&P.S. Chasnal, Dist. Dhanbad

Ashok Bouri Father- Shambhu

Bouri

Vill.-Chasnall,Indra chok South

Colony P.O+P.S- Chasnall Dist-

Dhanbad

---

Ramkumar Kumbhkar , Father-

Basudeo Kumbhkar

Vill. Bhatdih, P.O. Patherdih

Coal washery Dist. Dhanbad

Umesh Chander Pandey Father-

Jagdish Pandey

Vill. Atkadih, P.O. Atka, P.S.

Bagodar , Dist. Giridih

Sanjay Kumar Pandey Father-

Sohan Chander Pandey

Vill. Shrirampur ( tola badaki

Tand) P.O. Shrirampur , P.S.

Topchanchi , Dist. Dhanbad

Sandip Kumar Pandey Father-

Sohan Chander Pandey

-do-

Subrat Kumar Sarkar Father-

Sajal Kant Sarkar

Vill. Gaigada, P.O. Bagudatha,

P.S. Patamtha Dist.

Singhbhoom

Patherdih Coal washery

Railway Tyep-II, 13 Dhanbad

Sameer Kumar Data Father-

Banku Bihari Data

Vill. Katujdi Danga, P.O.

Kenduadih, Dist. Bakuda (WB)

3332

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Dasrath Danto Father- Yogendra

nath Danto

Vill. Banomalipur, P.O. Lodna,

P.S. Oanda , Dist. Bakuda,(WB)

Dharamdas Manjhi Father- Durga

manjhi

Vill. Chapudi, P.O. Annara R.S.

, P.S. pada Dist. Purulia ( WB)

Patherdih Coal washery ( nai

Jhopadi) Dhanbad

Radhav Rai Father- Sripati Rai

Vill. Dosardih, P.O. Annada,

R.S. Dist. Purulia ( WB)

Patherdih Coal washery ( Rai

Jhopadi) Dhanbad

Sitaram Yadav Father- Baiju

Yadav

Vill. Sahmalpur, P.O. Kazara,

P.S. Suryagarh , Dist. Munger

Patherdih Coal washery Qr.

No. –F 12, Dhanbad

Domal Bouri , Father- Moti Lal

Bouri

Vill. Dhoba Kashibedia, P.O.

Rokani Pada,Dist. Purulia WB

Ghirain Bouri Father- Susari

Bouri

Vill. Dosardih, P.O. Annara

R.S. Dist. Purulia ( West

Bengal)

Dilip Bouri Father- Sahdeo Bouri

-do-

Shammapado Bouri Father-

Kistopado Bouri

-do-

Vidhyasagar Yadav Shri Rajnath

Ram

Vill. Purana Kathar, P.O.

Chokia , P.S. Krishna Bamh,

Dist. Bauxer ( Bhojpur) (Bihar)

Suresh Yadav Father- Mahavir

Ram

-do-

Pramod Kumar Singh Father-

Shri Dharamdeo Singh

Vill. Khaimkaran Sirsa, P.O.

Sarai Bux , P.S. Amnor, Dist. –

Chappra ( Bihar)

Sudamdih Coal washery , P.O.

Sudamdih, Qr. No. M- 142

Dist. Dhanbad

Nandlal Singh Father- Mukhdeo

Singh

Vill. Pipara, P.O. Shri Rheda ,

PS. Nokha, Dist. Rohtas (Bihar)

Sudamdih River Side P.O.

Sudamdih, Dist. Dhanbad

Jamuna Bourin husband- jitu

Bouri

Vill. Bhulan bararee No. 6

Ghawada P.O. Bhulan Bararee,

P.S. Jhorapokhar

Dist. Dhanbad

Chhabilal Bouri Father- Lalit

Bouri

-do-

Chittranjan Bouri Father- Lalit

Bouri

-do-

Shri Sitaram Bouri Fatheri- Sura

Bouri

Vill. Bulanbaree No. 6,

Ghawada, P.O. Bhulan Bararee

P.S. Joraphokhar, Dist. Dhan.

Vijay Modi Father- Nakul Modi

-do-

Ashok Modi Father- Uanu Modi

-do-

100

Chamku Rai Father- Sitaram Rai

-do-

101

Sarala Rai W/O- Vishwanath Rai

-do-

102

Srikant Rai Father- Hari Rai

-do-

103

Sani Bhuia father- Singeshwar

Bhuia

-do-

104

Ajit Acharya Father- Mritunjya

Acharya

Vill. Parasbanian, P.O.

Jeenagora, P.S.Baliapur, Dhan

(ii)

3333

105

Ratilal Mahto Father- late. Baga

Ram Mahato

-do-

106

Bashudeo Gorai Fatheri – Late

Gowardhan Gorai

-do-

107

Duryodhan Mahato Father-

Gowardhan Mahto

Vill. Brahaman Badari ( Modi

Vimitha) , P.S. Bhulan bararee

P.O., Jorapokhar, Dist. Dhanbad

108

Raj Kishor Mahato Father-

Gowardhan Mahto

-do-

109

Ganesh Rai Father- Ruplal Rai

Vill. Pandeybasti, P.O.

Patherdih, P.S. Jorapokhar

Dist. Dhanbad

110

Gopal Rai Father- Haradhan Rai

-do-

111

Vikodar Kaisndi Father- Dharm

kalindi

Vill. Bhulan Bararee no. 6. P.O.

Bhulan Bararee P.S.

Jorapokhar, Dist. Dhanbad

112

Yudhistar Mahto Father- Abhaya

Mahto

Vill. Kalazar, P.O. Sanaijodi,

P.S. Kashipur , Dist.Purulia

(W.B)

Patherdih Coal washery, Qr.

No. F- 141 , Dist. Dhanbad

113

Satyander Singh Father- Ramayas

Singh

-do-

114

Bijender Singh Father- Ramayas

Singh

-do-

115

Vinod Muramu , Father- Chhutu

Muramu

Vill. Kadoita, P.O. Chandra,

P.S. Chandan kuyari , Dist.

Dhanbad

116

Ajit Manjhi , Father- Chhutu

Muramu

Vill. Dwari Mohan, P.O.

Lipaina, P.S. – Pada Dist.

Purulia ( West Bengal)

117

Haru Bouri , Father- Jaidai Bouri

Vill. Bhulan bararee No. 6.

Ghawada, P.O. Bhulan Baree

P.S. Jorapokhar, Dist . Dhanbad

118

Geeta Bouri Father- Suku Bouri

Paterdih Coal washery Bhaga

Ghawada, P.O. Patherdih Dist.

Dhanbad

119

Charu Wala Ghatwarin

-do-

120

Sukari Ghatwarin Husband-

Jairam Ghatwar

Vill. Bhulan bararee No. 6

Ghawada, P.O. Bhulan baree

P.S. Jorapokhar, Dist. Dhanbad

121

Fulmani Ghatwarin husband-

Chhuto Ghatwar

-do-

---

122

Kameshwar Pandit Father-

Ramkrit Pandit

Vill. Chakchitahi. P.O.

Rodabandh, P.S. Baliapur, Dist.

Dhanbad.

123

Arjun Pandey Father- Mohan

Pandey

Vill. Kaimo, P.O. Loram, P.S.

Eatkhori Dist. Hazaribagh

Patherdih Coal wahsery

Dhanbad

124

Seadhya Devi husband- Basudeo

Goral

Vill. Parasbania, P.O. Chilhar,

P.S. Sahar Dist. Ara ( Bhojpur)

3334

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

125

Angad Singh Father- Gaya Singh

Vill. Kamria, p.O. Chilhar, P/s.

Sahar Dist. Aara ( Bhojpur)

Patherdih Coal washery

126

Pramthan bouri Father- bousu

bouri

Vill. Sandurpur, P.O. Sendurpur

P.S. Purulia, Dist. Purulia (

West Bengal)

-do-

127

Bhanu Bourin Husband- Mahesh

Bouri

Vill. Jhapada ,P.O. Jhapada,

P.S. Pada Dist. Purulia (W.B)

-do-

128

Bablu Bouri

-do-

129

Surender Prasad Sah Father- Late

Dwarika Prasad Sah

Vill. Nunoodih, P.O. Patherdih

P.S. Sudamdih, Dist. Dhanbad

130

Subodh Ram Father- Hari Ram

Vill. Bhulan Bararee No. 6

Goda, P.O. Bhulan Saree P.S.

Jorapokhar, Dist. Dhanbad

131

Suma Bhuia W/O- Sani Bhuia

-do-

132

Ahilaya Rai husband- Jairam Rai

-do-

133

Rajendra Yadav Father-

Vishwanath Yadav

Vill. Nimanij, P.O. Nimaij P.S.

Brahampur , Dist. Bauxer (

Bhojpur)

Chasnalla, Dhanbad

134

Ameresh Kumar Uraf Ganga

Sagar

Vill. Kharbania, P.O. Bailhari

P.S. kouran Sarai Dist. Bauxer

(Bhojpur)

Bus Stand, Patherdih Dhanbad

135

Madhusudan Haro ( Supervisor)

Vill. Tasara Basti, P.O. Moti

Nagar , P.S. Sindari Dist. Dhan.

136

Dayanad Prasad Father- Laldhari

Prasad

Vill. Falka, P.O. Jamalpur, P.S.

Jamalpur, Dist. Munger

Patherdih Coal washery

Dhanbad

137

Bulu kumar Mishra Father-

Srikant Mishra

Vill. Karnamepur, P.O.

Karnamepur , P.S. Brahampur,

Dist. Bauxer (Bhojpur)

Sudamdih, Dhanbad

138

Rammani Pandit Father Sahdeo

Pandit

Vill. Lalchah, P.O. Kathara

Dist. Allahabad ( U.P)

Sudamdih main Colony

Dhanbad

139

Najama Khatoon Father- Md.

Hussain

Vill. Asurbandh ( Bhailatand),

P.O. Deoli P.S. Parmal, Dist.

Purulia ( west Bengal)

Baterdih Coal washery

Dhanbad

140

Anant Kumar Mahatha Father-

Rampad Mahatha

Vill. Pathahdih, P.O. Galgaltand

P.S. Chandan kiyari, Dist.

Dhanbad ( Bokaro)

141

Satyender urf. Shalilash

Vill. Madia, P.O. Salsala,P.S.

Nawanagar

-do-

142

Thandi Bourin

Vill. Sindurpur, P.O. Sindurpur,

, P.S.&Dist. – Purulia (WB)

-do-

143

Jiwan Mahato Father- Govinda

Mahato

Vill. Kusumjodia, P.O.

Kusumjodia P.S. huda, Dist.

Purulia ( west Bengal )

-do-

144

Mathur Mahato , Father- jhari

mahato

Vill. Kalha Jhor, P.O. Sona Jodi

P.S. Kashipur,

Dist.Purulia(WB)

-do-

145

Umesh Kumar Singh

Vill. Munda Majhona, P.O.

Dasholi Dist. Siwan

-do-

(ii)

3335

146

Jhirangu Yadav ( Brangu Yadav

(Supervisor) Father. Sipahi Yadav

Vill. Ghuruhpu, P.O. Gaighat

P.S. Srahampur, Dist. Bauxer

(Bhojpur)

Domgarh Sindri, Dhanbad

147

Md. Mustak Ansari Father. Lat.

Abdul Latif

Vill. Baganpur, P.O. Bararee,

P.S. jorapokhar , Dist. Dhanbad

148

Anil kumar Ojha father-

Rameshwar Ojha

Vill. & P.O. – Kharhatand, p.s,

Simrch , Dist-. Bauxer Bhojpur

Patherdih Coal washery

Dhanbad

149

Manoj kumar Ojha

Vill. & P.O- kharhatand, P.S.

Simri, Dist. Bhojpur

Patherdih Coal washery

Dhanbad

150

Bnaglrath urf, jyotish Singh

Father-Brij Bihari Singh

Vill. Amsari, P.O. Dumrao,

Dist. Dhanbad

151

Ajay kumar Singh , Father-

Ayodhya Singh

Vill. Amsari, P.O. Dumrao,

Dist. Bauxer ( bhojpur)

Chasnalla, Dhanbad

152

Sriprakash Singh , Father Late.

Janardan Singh

Vill. P.O. Chasnall, P.S.

Jorapokha Dist. Dhanbad

153

Ravinder kumar Das (Supervisor)

Father- Kulpati Das

Ravinder kumar , C/O Parashar

Trading mirazapur Chowk,

Durbhanga 846004

Domgarh, Sindri Dhanbad

154

Ram kewal Sao Father- Shiv

Charan Sao

Vill.Bibipur, P.O. kurkuri, Dist.

Patna

Mohan bazaar, Patherdih

155

Gurupadeo manjhi , Father-

Shankar Manjhi

Vill. & P.O. fusrabandh, P.S.

Pada Dist. Purulia (WBl)

Patherdih Coal washery

Dhanbad

156

Sagar Modi , Father- Deuo modi

Vill. Dwari Mohan, P.O.

lipniya, P.s. Pag , Dist. Purulia

(W.B)

-do-

157

Mahesh Bouri Father- dholu

Bauri

Vill. & P.O. Jhapada, P.S. Pada

Dist. Purulia

-do-

The case is received from Ministry of Labour on 24.11.1994. The workman files written statement on

12/17.01.1995. But the management files their written statement on 26.09.1995. One witness examined on behalf of

the management . But three witnesses examined on behalf of the workman. Documents of workman marked as exhibit

W-1 to W-55.

The case of the Sponsoring Union is that the in process of washing small coal particles escape from washery in

the form of slurry along with water and the same are deposited in the slurry ponds constructed for their storage by the

washery. A large amount of coal remaing in the prohibited area with in the premises of washery. This coal is known as

middling dirty slurry which is between 10% to 20% of the coal brought to the washery. Middling coal is despatched in

Thermal power plants, and others particles but fine slurry is despatched to Steel Plants. But when the pond are full, the

slurry overflows and mixed with river water of Damodar. After the water is soacked by the soil the small particles of

coal get deposited in the river bed. Therse particles are collected and sold to diffarent bulk purchasers for making of

briquetes which are sold for energy and fuel purpose.

It is further submitted by the Sponsoring Union that all such activity of extracting or obtaining mineral, comes

within the scope of irrespactive of the fact whether such activity is carried out on earth surface or on levels of each,

extracting or lifting of slurry deposited in river bed or on land falls within the expression of mining operations this

process is a permanent and regular nature of job.

5. It is further submitted by the Sponsoring Union that before 17^th August 1990 the state of Bihar used to give lease of

the land and make sattlement with different persons/parties for obtaining slurry on payment of royalty to the state,

which was challanged in the High Court and ultimately in the Hon’ble Supreme Court by M/s. BCCL it is held that

slurry was coal and obtaining/extracting slurry was mining operation and also that the state of Bihar has no jurisdiction

under the law of levy royalty or settle land on lease hold basis and M/s. BCCL is the owner of the slurry.

3336

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

It is also submitted that the washery used to get the middling grade slurry of the washery transported by

contractors who were employed from time to time for transporting of middling grade slurry. These concerned workmen

were used to be employed by contractors. It is also mentioned that contractors were changed but the workmen were not

changed by different contractors. Although the workmen were working through contractor employee of the Patherdih

coal Washery and were employed for the work of the Washery. The contractors have comaflage and payment were

made to the workmen through Contractors.

The concerned workmen have been employed in the coal washery for transporting of middling grade slurry

since 1988 and they have each completed 240 or more attendance in one clender year till 1991. They have been

working under the supervision and control of the management. But the management retrenched the workmen concerned

without complying the provision of 25 of the I.D Act.

The workmen were employed by the Patherdih Coal washery through Shivpur Kharikabad Kalajore Sramik

Sahyog Samiti Ltd . which is a Co-operative Society registered under Co-operative simits Act and those workmen

enter the plant premises for transporting of middling grade slurry.

It is also submitted by the Sponsoring Union that the Patherdih coal washery who were employed in fine coal

Slurry removal were departmentalised 184 workmen by different Office orders but did not consider the case of

middling grade slurry workmen concerned.

10.

On the other hand the case of the management is that there is no employer-employee relationship ever existed

between the management and the concerned persons named in the list enclosed to the order of reference.

11.

It is also submitted by the management that Patherdih Coal Washery, transport of middlings was not being

effected through any contractor. Washery contractor were engaged different workers on transport of middling from the

washery to the railway siding.

12.

They deployed the tripping trucks or dumpers on the job of transportation of middlings for the purpose of

loading the middling into truck or dumper. They generally deploy contract labour and some places they deploy pay

loaders for doing the job of loading of middling into the dumper. It is also submitted that all concerned workmen are

not the genuine workmen of any contractor and most of them are job seekers only. Their demand for their

regularisation on the roll of the company is without any merit and they are not entitled to any relief.

13.

Short point to be decided in the case is whether the contract workmen are to be regularised in the BCCL or not.

14.

The claim of the workmen and Sponsoring Union that the workmen were engaged in removing slurry of the

mines and have been rendering services regularly. On the other hand the management submitted that they taking into

account the length service and genuinely of the workmen regularised 142 workmen and rest are not real workmen nor

fulfill the creteria fixed by them.

15.

Here before me workmen also failed to prove from which previous year they completed 240 days works in the

management they failed to produce, any identity card either signed by the contractor or management. they have filed

the photocopy of attendance sheet which are illegible and doubtful. Since the identity of the worman is doubtful and

they unable to produce any appointment letter , identity Card and salary slip , this Tribunal is not convinced that the

workmen rendered service to BCCL for more than 240 days in a calender year so that they will be regularise.

16.

It appears from records that the order of reference relate to 157 workmen but during proceeding of this case the

Sponsoring Union files only 46 workmen’s photograph with their affidavit alongwith voter I.D Card, and the Union

also submits that rest workmen’s documents are not available. The voter I.D card is not relevant for this purpose.

17.

On perusal of cross-examination WW-1 it is says that the workmen were working in the colliery through

Kalajor Co-operative Society, but I have no idea regarding that Co-operative Society. whereas in the Cross -

examination of WW-2 says that I do not have any appointment letter, ID Card or pay slip of the management. But it is a

fact that the pay slip I have filed of Co-operative Society. I have not filed any paper that I am member of Co-operative

Society.

18.

The cross-examination of WW-3 is very contradictory, he says that I enrolled as Advocate in Dhanbad Bar in

2004 as regular student of Dhanbad Law College. He passed in 2003, but he also says that he passed BA as regular

student in 2006. He say that, I was a member of that society from 1988 but I have no Identity Card. On close scrutiny, it

is found that he was 39 years as on 21.08.2014 that on calculation, in 1988 he was only 13 years on that point of time,

and he says he was working in slurry pond of washery. It creates doubt. Evidence of all the witnesses of the sponsoring

Union are very contradictory with each other.

19.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I hold that the 157 workmen, as per list enclosed with

order of reference ,have not worked with the contractor of Patherdih Coal Washery in Transportation of middling grade

slurry continuously, and the action of the management of Patherdih Coal Washery under Central Coal Washery

(ii)

3337

Organisation of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited in not regularising/departmentalising the workmen is fair & justified.

Hence they were not entitled to get any relief, as they failed proved their claim.

This is my Award.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 1 twu] 2017

1401

—

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;kstdksaaaaaa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljd

kj vkS|ksfxd

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua

1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 58@1995) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 25

2017

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la

,y&20012@177@1994&vkbZvkj (lh

)º

flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2017

S.O. 1401.—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 (Ref. No. 58 of 1995) as shown in 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 25.05.2017.

[No. L-20012/177/1994-IR (C-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. 58/1995

Employers in relation to the management of Block II Area of M/s. BCCL

AND

Their workmen

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 : 20.04.2017

AWARD

By order No. L-20012/177/1994-IR(C-I) dated 12.06.1995, 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, M/s. BCCL, P.O. Nawagarh

(Dhanbad) in denying to promote S/Shri Darogi yadav and 9 others, Fitter helpers ( as per annexure

below ) in Gr. D and subsequent Gr. C is justified? If not, to what relief are the concerned workmen

entitled?”

3338

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

Shri Darogi Yadav,

2. Rameshwar Pd. Singh

3. Shyamal Pd. Singh

4. Mahender Gahlot

5. Bijoy Kr. Paswan

6. Nandkishore Pd.

Krishnamurari Pd. Yadav

8. Ramesh Kr. Mondal

9. Chanderashekhar Pd.

10. Lakhanlal

After receipt of the reference, both parties are noticed. But appearing for certain dates by the workmen, 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] 1 twu] 2017

1402

—

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

ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksaaaaaa

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 11@2002) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 25

2017

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la

,y&20012@

439

2001

&vk

bZvkj (lh

)º

flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2017

S.O. 1402.—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 (Ref. No. 11 of 2002) as shown in Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the

management of M/s. CCL and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 25.05.2017.

[No. L-20012/439/2001-IR (C-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. 11/2002

Employer in relation to the management of Regional Workshop of M/s. CCL

AND

Their workmen

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 : 25.04.2017

AWARD

By order No. L-20012/439/2001-IR(C-I) dated 10/01/2002, 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:

(ii)

3339

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the management of Regional repair workshop of M/s CCL Tapin north to

pay less pay than his juniors to sh. Iliyash Topo is justified? If not, to what relief is the workmen

concerned entitled ?”

After receipt of the reference, both parties are noticed. But none appearing on behalf of the workman. 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] 1 twu] 2017

1403

—

vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ,vj

bf.M;k fyfeVsM ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksaaaaaa vkSj muds deZdkjk

sa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua

1] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 1@48 vkWiQ 2003) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj

dks 25

2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la

,y&11012@11@2003&vkbZvkj (lh,

)º

flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2017

S.O. 1403.—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,

Mumbai (Ref. No. 1/48 of 2003) as shown in Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to

the management of M/s. Air India Ltd. and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on

25.05.2017.

[No. L-11012/11/2003-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, MUMBAI

PRESENT : Justice Surendra Vikram Singh Rathore, Presiding Officer

REFERENCE NO. CGIT-1/48 OF 2003

Parties:

Employers in relation to the management of Air India Ltd

And

Their workman (Shri A.J. Texeria)

Appearances :

For the Management

Mr. Lancy D’Souza, Adv.

For the workman

Mr. M.B. Anchan,

State

Maharashtra

Mumbai, dated the 1st day of March, 2017

ORDER ON APPLICATION DATED 22.5.2007 FILED ON 13.6.2007 BY THE MANAGEMENT OF AIR

INDIA ARISING OUT OF REF. NO. CGIT-1/48 OF 2003.

By means of the aforesaid Reference the following question was referred.

“Whether the action of the management of Air India Ltd in dismissing Shri A.J. Texeria w.e.f. 2001 is legal

and justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?”

During the pendency of the instant Reference referred above, an application was filed on behalf of the Air India

stating therein that the Dismissal Order has been upheld by the National Industrial Tribunal and Enquiry Proceedings

3340

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

have been replaced by the National Industrial Tribunal holding de novo enquiry, thus the Reference is not maintainable

and it be rejected.

Objections on behalf of the workman to this application have also been filed wherein it is admitted that the

Dismissal Order has been upheld by the National Industrial Tribunal and the Enquiry Proceedings have been replaced

by the de novo enquiry. On behalf of the workman a decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of

G.M.Tank vs. State of Gujarat 2006 SCC page 1121 has been relied upon and on the strength of this case law, it is

submitted that the above reference is maintainable as the workman has been acquitted in criminal case.

A brief history of the earlier Approval Application is that an Application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 was moved on behalf of the Management for Approval of the action of imposing the punishment of

Dismissal from Service. It transpires from the perusal of the record that by Judgment Part-I dated 14.1.2004 the

Departmental Enquiry was set aside. However, option was given to the Company to prove the charges before the

Tribunal. Thereafter, a de novo enquiry was held before this Tribunal and vide Judgment dated 5.3.2004 (due to

mistake date of judgment was mentioned as 5.2.2004 which was corrected by the Order of the Tribunal dated

21.4.2004) the Tribunal reached to the conclusion that the charges framed against the workman stands proved and

accordingly granted approval to the Order dated 1.3.2001 under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act. During pendency of the

above Approval Application, instant Reference was made on 18.8.2003. Statement of Claim and Written Statement of

the Company were filed. Thereafter the above mentioned Application was moved which is under consideration.

Submission of the learned counsel for the Management is that it is not a case where the Tribunal approved the

Enquiry conducted by the Department but Tribunal has itself conducted de novo Enquiry and has found the charges to

be proved. Therefore, it is submitted that this Tribunal is not sitting in Appeal against its own Order whereby the

Dismissal Order was approved.

In reply to the citations referred in the objections filed on behalf of the workman, learned counsel for the Air

India has drawn the attention of this Tribunal towards several Case Laws which shall be dealt with at the relevant part

of this Order.

In the case of G.M.Tank (supra), relied upon by Learned Counsel for workman the allegation against G.M.Tank

was that he was found in possession of the property disproportionate to his known sources of income. An enquiry was

conducted in this regard and simultaneously a criminal case was also registered under the Prevention of Corruption

Act. The Criminal case and Departmental Enquiry were based on the same set of evidence.G.M.Tank was held guilty

while he was acquitted on the strength of the same evidence in the criminal case. The witnesses who were examined in

the Departmental Enquiry were the same who were examined in the Criminal Trial and after appreciation of the

evidence the criminal court acquitted the accused. In that perspective, the Honourable Apex Court has concluded in

paragraph 32 as under:

“On the basis of the same charges and the evidence, the Department passed an order of dismissal on

21.10.1982 whereas the Criminal Court acquitted him on 30.1.2002. However, as the Criminal Court

acquitted the appellant on 30.1.2002 and until such acquittal, there was no reason or ground to hold the

dismissal to be erroneous, any relief monetarily can be only w.e.f. 30.1.2002. But by then, the appellant had

retired, therefore, we deem it proper to set aside the order of dismissal without back wages. The appellant

would be entitled to pension.”

Now we come to the facts of the instant case. In this case, the Departmental Enquiry was set aside and a de

novo enquiry was conducted by this Tribunal itself. In the said de novo enquiry A.S.I. Mahadeshwar who had recorded

the confession of the workman made a panchanama of the same and also made recovery of 21 Ball Bearings which

were used in the Boeing Aircraft wheels from the house of the workman which was the property of Air India. He has

also recorded several statements and he has also deposed that the said Ball Bearings were given by the accused to one

Mahesh Parab for sale.Since Mahesh Parab could not get any suitable buyer, therefore, he returned the said stolen

property to the accused. Apart from this one, Siddharth Banerjee, an Officer who had lodged the F.I.R in this case was

also examined.On the basis of evidence of A.S.I. Mahadeshwar in the Departmental Enquiry,this Tribunal found the

workman to be guilty.

Now, coming to the criminal case, in criminal case under section 381 IPC one Girish Sitaram Choudhary was

examined who has not supported the case of prosecution.The copy of the judgment has been filed on behalf of the

workman whichshows that the notices were issued to Siddharth Banerjee and other witnesses but their presence could

not be procured. So for want of evidence,the workman was acquitted in Case No. 947/P/99 vide judgement dated

2.2.2011 and was acquitted under Section 381 IPC. In the other connected case one ArjunAwad, Nilesh Sony and

VasantShinde, and Ramesh Kulkarni were examined who have not supported the case of prosecution so their evidence

was not material.The evidence of PW-5 Vilas Gangavane who had investigated the case has been discarded because

the panchanama and other papers were not properly proved and accordingly he was acquitted for the offence under

Sections 380, 447, 448 IPC. Therefore, it is clear from the facts of the instant case that the witness examined in the

(ii)

3341

criminal case and the Departmental Enquiry were entirely different and were not the same as was in the case of

G.M.Tank. Therefore, in the facts of the instant case, the case law of G.M.Tank is of no help to the workman as the

facts are different.

10.

Now we come to the case law relied upon by the Management. In the case of Bengal Bhatdee Coal Company vs.

Ram Prabesh Singh & Ors 1963 I LLJ 291.The facts were as under:

In the reference under S.10 of the Industrial Disputes Act of the industrial dispute in regard to the dismissal

of the concerned workmen the industrial tribunal did not find that the domestic enquiry was improper or

unfair. However, on the following facts the industrial tribunal fund that the concerned workmen were

victimized and that the punishment of dismissal was disproportionate to the misconduct leveled against

them and consequently it directed reinstatement of the concerned workmen but without back wages. The

industrial tribunal found that the concerned workmen had nearly put 10 years of clean service. Some of

them were protected workmen and some of them were active members of the trade union and the

relationship of the employer and the union was not cordial. Further under the standing orders the

misconduct entailed punishment of fine, suspension or dismissal of the workmen. Hence the extreme

punishment of dismissal was disproportionate to the misconduct and hence unconscionable.

In this factual background Hon’ble Apex Court has observed as under:-

“In the present appeal, the appellant contends that there was no evidence to justify the conclusion of the

tribunal that the dismissals were an act of unfair labour practice or victimisation. We are of opinion that this

contention of the appellant must prevail. The tribunal was. not unaware of the fact that where a domestic

inquiry is held properly, the tribunal does not sit in appeal on the findings of the domestic tribunal and it can

only interfere with the punishment inflicted as a result of the domestic inquiry where there is want of good

faith or basic error or violation of the principles of natural justice, or where the findings are perverse or

baseless or the case is one of victimisation or unfair labour practice. We have already indicated that the

tribunal did not find that there was any basic error or violation of the principles of natural justice in the

holding of the inquiry; nor did it find that the findings of the inquiry officer were perverse or baseless. It

could hardly do so in the face of its own approval of the action taken on applications made to it under s. 33

(2) (b) of the Act, for if it had found that the inquiry was not proper, it would not have approved of the action

taken against the workmen by the appellant when it was approached under s. 33 (2) (b). We must therefore

proceed on the assumption that the inquiry was held properly and the inquiry officer who held the inquiry

was justified on the evidence before him in coming to the conclusion which he did, namely, that the charges

had been proved.” (emphasis added)

11.

In the case of Indian Airlines, Mumbai vs. Prakash R. Parab 2006 I CLR 938 – Bombay High Court

An application was simultaneously moved under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before

the National Industrial Tribunal seeking approval of the action taken. The approval was granted on 9th May,

1999 holding that the action taken by the petitioner-company in dismissing the respondent was proper.

Dispute then were taken in conciliation. A reference was made to the National Tribunal in the matter of the

industrial dispute, of dismissal. A preliminary issue was framed as to the validity of the enquiry. The

Learned Tribunal by its order dated 28th May, 2002 was pleased to hold, as stated earlier, that the enquiry

conducted was not fair and proper and is vitiated and accordingly directed the petitioner to lead evidence de

novo before it.”

In these perspective, Honourable Bombay High Court observed in paragraph 6 as under:

“The law as settled is that an enquiry if not conducted in compliance with the provisions of the standing

orders and other rules applicable and in violation of the principles of natural justice and fair play, the

enquiry would stand vitiated. Therefore, the National Tribunal while considering the application for

approval has to apply the same test which the National Tribunal has to consider on a reference made to it

and while answering the pending issue, whether the enquiry conducted was fair and proper. That being the

case it can safely be said that it was not open or within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to once again answer

the same issue as it would be bound by the principle of issue estoppel. The principle of estoppel would

require that the party against whom the issue is answered by a competent forum would be estopped in

raising the same issue which was raised in the earlier proceedings between the same parties and dealing

with the same issue. The second contention therefore also will have to be held in favour of the petitioner by

holding that it was not within the jurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal to once again answer the very same

issue.” (underlined by me)

12.

In the case of Lalla Ram vs. Management of D.C.M. Chemical Works Ltd 1978 Lab. I.C. 716 – Supreme Court,

the Honourable Apex Court has considered the scope of enquiry by the Tribunal and has observed in para 12 as under:

3342

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

“The position that emerges from the above quoted decisions of this Court may be stated thus : In

proceedings under section 33(2)(b) of the Act, the jurisdiction of the industrial Tribunal is confined to the

enquiry as to (i) whether a proper domestic enquiry in accordance with the relevant rules/Standing Orders

and principles of natural justice has been held; (ii) whether a prima facie case for dismissal based on legal

evidence adduced before the domestic tribunal is made out; (iii) whether the employer had come to a bona

fide conclusion that the employee was guilty and the dismissal did not amount to unfair tabour practice and

was not intended to victimise the employee regard being had to the position settled by the decisions of this

Court in Bengal Bhatdee Coal Co, v. Ram Probesh Singh(1), Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd. v. Ram Naresh

Kumar(2), Hind Construction & Engineering Co. Ltd. v. Their Workmen(3), Workmen of Messrs Firestone

Tyre& Rubber Company of India (P) Ltd. v. Management &Ors(4), and Eastern Electric and Trading Co. v.

BaldevLal(5) that though generally speaking the award of punishment for misconduct under the Standing

Orders is a matter for the management to decide and the Tribunal is not required to consider the propriety

or adequacy of the punishment or whether it is excessive or too severe yet an inference of mala fides may in

certain cases be drawn from the imposition of unduly harsh, severe, unconscionable or shockingly

disproportionate punishment;

(iv) whether the employer has paid or offered to pay wages for one month to the employee and (v) whether

the employer has simultaneously or within such reasonably short time as to form part of the game

transaction applied to the authority before which the main industrial dispute is pending for approval of the

action taken by him. If these conditions are satisfied, the Industrial Tribunal would grant the approval which

would relate back to the date from which the employer had ordered the dismissal. If however, the domestic

enquiry suffers from any defect or infirmity, the tabour authority will have to find out on its own assessment

of the evidence adduced before it whether there was justification for dismissal and if it so finds it will grant

approval of the order of dismissal which would also relate back to the date when the order was passed

provided the employer had paid or offered to pay wages for one month to the employee and the employer

had within the time indicated above applied to the authority before which the main industrial dispute is

pending for approval of the action taken by him.

13.

In the case of Divisional Controller, Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation vs. M.G.VittalRao (2012) 1

Supreme Court Cases (L&S) 171), the Honourable Apex Court has considered the effect of acquittal in criminal case

and the result of the Departmental Enquiry.After considering large number of case laws on this point Hon’ble Apex

Court has concluded in paragraph 24 and 25 as under:

“24. Thus, there can be no doubt regarding the settled legal proposition that as the standard of proof in

both the proceedings is quite different, and the termination is not based on mere conviction of an employee

in a criminal case, the acquittal of the employee in criminal case cannot be the basis of taking away the

effect of departmental proceedings. Nor can such an action of the department be termed as double jeopardy.

The judgment of this Court in Capt. M. Paul Anthony (supra) does not lay down the law of universal

application. Facts, charges and nature of evidence etc. involved in an individual case would determine as to

whether decision of acquittal would have any bearing on the findings recorded in the domestic enquiry.

“25. Once the employer has lost the confidence in the employee and the bona fide loss of confidence is

affirmed, the order of punishment must be considered to be immune from challenge, for the reason that

discharging the office of trust and confidence requires absolute integrity, and in a case of loss of confidence,

reinstatement cannot be directed. (Vide: Air India Corporation Bombay v. V.A. Ravellow, AIR 1972 SC

1343; Francis Kalein& Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Their Workmen, AIR 1971 SC 2414; and Bharat Heavy Electricals

Ltd. v. M. Chandrashekhar Reddy &Ors., AIR 2005 SC 2769).”

In this case Hon’ble Apex Court has also considered the case of G M Tank (supra)

14.

In the light of the aforementioned principle of law, the facts of instant case were considered. A denovo enquiry

was conducted by this Tribunal itself and on the basis of evidence of the arresting witness and on the basis of

documents prepared by him, this Tribunal held that the Workman to be guilty while the said witness was not even

examined in the criminal case. Apart from it, this reference was made in the year 2003.The objections on behalf of the

Air India were raised in the year 2007. Judgment of acquittal in Criminal case was pronounced in the year 2011 and

reply to the objections was filed in the year 2015. In the facts of the instant case, this Tribunalhas itselfheld an enquiry

and found the workman to be guilty on application for approval of the Dismissal Order. Now the same question is

raised in this Reference. In my considered opinion this Tribunal is not sitting in Appeal against the enquiry conducted

by itself.Even otherwise keeping in view the fact that the witnesses examined in criminal case were different and the

documents were not properly proved in criminal case therefore the acquittal of the workman would not render him any

help to the workman. It is also a case of loss of confidence. The workman hadstolen 21 Ball Bearings which was the

property of the Air India and the same were recovered from his house. Memo of recovery was prepared and his

confession was also recorded. Standard of proof in a criminal case and Departmental Enquiry are entirely different.

(ii)

3343

Since this Tribunal has itself found the workman to be guilty and in the said de novo enquiry workman was given full

opportunity to defend him.Therefore, in my considered opinion there is no use in keeping this reference pending as it

would amount to sitting in Appeal against the conclusion of the Enquiry conducted by this Tribunal itself. Hence this

Application deserves to be allowed and it is hereby allowed.

15.

Accordingly, this Reference is hereby answered as under:

“The action taken against the workman is hereby confirmed as no other view or conclusion can be

arrived at by this Tribunal. Hence, there is no use in keeping this old Reference pending and accordingly

this Application is hereby stands disposed of and the Reference is answered in affirmative”.

JUSTICE S. V. S. RATHORE, Presiding Officer

BEFORE THE HON’BLE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, AT MUMBAI

REFERENCE NO. CGIT-1/48 OF 2003

Employers in relation to the

…

First Party

Management of Air India Ltd.

V/s

Their Workman (A. J. Texeria)

…

Second Party

APPLICATION FOR DISMISSAL OF THE AFORESAID REFERENCE

MAY IT PLEASE THIS HON’BLE COURT :

The First Party submits as under :

The First Party submits that the First Party has made an Approval Application being Approval Application No.

NTB-28 of 2001 and the Hon’ble Tribunal vide its Order dated 5^th day of February, 2004, has granted approval

to the Dismissal Order dated 01.03.2001.

The Dismissal Order has been upheld by the National Industrial Tribunal and the enquiry proceedings have been

replaced by National Industrial Tribunal’s de-novo enquiry and thus, the reference is not maintainable.

In view of the said judgement, the present reference may be rejected.

Place : Mumbai

Date : 22.05.07

For Air India

B. D. ADSUL,

Asst. General Manager (Admin.)

Engineering Admin.

Air India

ubZ fnYyh] 1 twu] 2017

1404

—

vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 1

4) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj lhlh,y

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

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua

1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 35@1996) dks çdkf'kr

djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 25

2017

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la

,y&20012@178@1995&vkbZvkj (lh

)º

flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2017

S.O. 1404.—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,

3344

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Dhanbad (Ref. No. 35 of 1996) as shown in Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the

management of M/s. CCL and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 25.05.2017.

[No. L-20012/178/1995-IR (C-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. 35/1996

Employer in relation to the management of Saunda D Colliery of M/s. CCL

AND

Their workmen

Present : Shri R. K. Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances:

For the Employers

None

For the workman

None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated : 22/02/2017

AWARD

By order No. L-20012/178/1995-IR(C-I) dated 26/07/1996, 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 Saunda D Colliery of M/s CCL in terminating the services

of Sh. Sarjoo Bedia, Ex- Loader and refusing to take him back in service alongwith full back wages

is justified or not ? If not, what is the proper relief the concerned workman is entitled to?”

After receipt of the reference, both parties are noticed. But appearing for certain dates 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] 1 twu] 2017

1405

—

kS|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;kstdksaaaaaa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksf

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua

1] /uckn ds

iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k

@1996) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 25

2017

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la

,y&20012@

@1995&vkbZvkj (lh

)º

flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2017

S.O. 1405.—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 (Ref. No. 10 of 1996) as shown in 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 25.05.2017.

[No. L-20012/23/1995-IR (C-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

(ii)

3345

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. 10/1996

Employer in relation to the management of Loyabad Colliery of M/s. BCCL

AND

Their workmen

Present : Shri R. K. Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances:

For the Employers

None

For the workman

None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated : 21/04/2017

AWARD

By order No. L-20012/23/1995-IR(C-I) dated 29/01/1996, 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 Loyabad Colliery of M/s BCCL in superannuating

Shri Moti Mallah, Miner Loader w.e.f. 01/07/1992 is justified? If not, to what relief Shri Mallah is

entitled?”

After receipt of the reference, both parties are noticed. But appearing for certain dates 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] 1 twu] 2017

1406

—

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;kstdksaaaaaa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksf

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua

1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 12@1996) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsU

nzh; ljdkj dks 25

2017

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la

,y&20012@22@1995&vkbZvkj (lh

)º

flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2017

S.O. 1406.—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 (Ref. No. 12 of 1996) as shown in 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 25.05.2017.

[No. L-20012/22/1995-IR (C-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. 12/1996

3346

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Employer in relation to the management of K.O.C.P., Kusunda Area of M/s. BCCL

AND

Their workman

Present : Shri R. K. Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances:

For the Employers

None

For the workman

None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated : 21/04/2017

AWARD

By order No. L-20012/22/1995-IR(C-I) dated 29/01/1996, 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 management of Dhansar/ KOCP under Kusunda Area No. VI of M/s. BCCL is

justified in not allowing the re-assessment of the age of Shri Rampati Mahato, Haulage Operator? If

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

After receipt of the reference, both parties are noticed. But appearing for certain dates 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] 1 twu] 2017

1407

—

vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa

dsUnzh; ljdkj lhlh,y

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

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua

1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 41@2015) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dk

s 25

2017

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la

,y&20012@92@2015&vkbZvkj (lh

)º

flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2017

S.O. 1407.—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 (Ref. No. 41 of 2015) as shown in 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 25.05.2017.

[No. L-20012/92/2015-IR (C-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. 41/2015

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

AND

Their workman

Present : Shri R. K. Saran, Presiding Officer

(ii)

3347

Appearances:

For the Employers

Shri D.K. Verma, Advocate

For the workman

Shri K.K. Pandey, in person

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated : 26/04/2017

AWARD

By order No.-L-20012/92/2015 IR (C-I), dated. 17/09/2015 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 Basudeopur colliery under Sijua Area of M/s. BCCL in

dismissing Sri K.K.Pandey, Ex- PR-M/Loader from the service vide letter dated 15.09.2004 is fair

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

The case is received from the Ministry of Labour on 01.10.2015 After receipt of reference , both parties are

noticed. The workman files their written statement on 12.02.2016. And the management also files their written

statement -cum-rejoinder on 06.09.16. Thereafter rejoinder and document filed by both side. The point involved in the

reference is that the workman has been dismissed from his services on absentism.

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

long absence.

During preliminary hearing it is revealed that the case is dismissal of workmen for long absence. But he has

already out of service for 13 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 as

general mazdoor. But the workman be kept under probation for a period two years. Therefore the question of giving

back wages does not arise at all.

This is my award.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 1 twu] 2017

1408

—

vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 194

7 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj chlhlh,y

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

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua

1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 37@2015

) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 25

2017

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la

,y&20012@75@2015&vkbZvkj (lh&

)º

flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2017

S.O. 1408.—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 (Ref. No. 37 of 2015) as shown in 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 25.05.2017.

[No. L-20012/75/2015-IR (C-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. 37/2015

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

3348

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

AND

Their workman

Present : Shri R. K. Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances:

For the Employers

Shri D.K. Verma, Advocate

For the workman

Shri B.B. Pandey, Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated : 26/04/2017

AWARD

By order No.-L-20012/75/2015 IR (C-I), dated. 26/08/2015 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 Keshalpur Colliery under Katras Area of M/S BCCL in

dismissing Sri Naina Deswali, Ex- M/Loader from the service w.e.f 31.07.96 as fair and justified? To

what relief the concerned workman is entitled to?”

The case is received from the Ministry of Labour on 07.9.2015 After receipt of reference , both parties are

noticed. The workman files their written statement on 23.11.2015. And the management also files their written

statement -cum-rejoinder on 28.06.16. Thereafter document filed by both side. The point involved in the reference is

that the workman has been dismissed from his services on absentism.

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

long absence.

During preliminary hearing it is revealed that the case is dismissal of workmen for long absence. But he has

already out of service for 21 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 as

general mazdoor. But the workman be kept under probation for a period two years. Therefore the question of giving

back wages does not arise at all.

This is my award.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 1 twu] 2017

1409

—

vkS|ksfxd fook

n vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj lhlh,y

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

vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua

1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ l

a[;k 170@1997) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 25

2017

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la

,y&20012@214@1996&vkbZvkj (lh,e&

)º

flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2017

S.O. 1409.—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 (Ref. No. 170 of 1997) as shown in Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to

the management of M/s. CCL and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 25.05.2017.

[No. L-20012/214/1996-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

(ii)

3349

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. 170/1997

Employer in relation to the management of M/s. CCL Ranchi

AND

Their workmen

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 : 24/04/2017

AWARD

By Order No. L-20012/214/1996-IR(C-I) dated 18/09/1997, 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 demand of the Union that Sh. M.S. Verma is entitled for placement in Technical Grade

‘E’ is Justified? If so, Whether S/Shri M.S. Verma, P.K. Choudhary, Tripurari Prasad, Bajendra

Prasad, Ramesh Kumar Dwivedi, Sahdeo Manjhi were eligible for notional seniority as per cadre

scheme? If so. To what relief are these workmen entiled?”

After receipt of the reference, both parties are noticed. But appearing for certain dates by the workmen, 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] 1 twu] 2017

1410

—

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

ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksaaaaaa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds c

hp] 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 58@1992) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 25

2017

dks çkIr gqvk FkkA

¹la

,y&20012@39@1992&vkbZvkj (lh,e&

)º

ag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2017

S.O. 1410.—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 (Ref. No. 58 of 1992) as shown in Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the

management of M/s. CCL and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 25.05.2017.

[No. L-20012/39/1992-IR (CM-I)]

M. K. SINGH, Section Officer

3350

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, DHANBAD

In the matter of a complaint u/s 33(a) of ID ACT, 1947

Complaint No. 6/2013

(Arising out of Ref. No. 58/92)

Ministry Order No. 20012/39/92-IR (C-1)

Binod Rajak & 58 Ors

…Complainants

Vrs.

Project Officer, Swang Washery M/s. CCL

…Opposite Party

Present : Shri Rajan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer

Appearances :

For complainant

Shri D. Mukherjee, Advocate

For Opposite Party

Shri D.K. Verma, Advocate

Industry :- Coal

Dated 21/04/2017

AWARD

This complaint is filed by the complainant collectively in behalf of all the 58 workmen. After receipt of the

complainant, both parties are noticed. The complaint Mahendra Rajak files an application U/s. 33A of the I.D. Act, that

during the pendency of the lis Reference No. 58 of 1992, the management/Opp. Party has started disciplinary

proceedings against them without permission of the Tribunal, and seek redress to restore their job.

It is also submitted by the complainant the award of Ref. 58 of 92 passed on 03.10.1995 in which Opp.

Party/management is directed to regularise the services of the concerned workmen w.e.f. 11.12.1990. The award was

confirmed by the single bench of High Court, Division Bench as well as confirmed by Hon’ble Supreme Court being

reporting in L.L.N. 2001 (4) 135 and the judgement was delivered in 30.08.2001.

It is further submitted by the complainant that ultimantely seeing no other alternative the management/Opp.

Party agreed to provided service to the concerned workmen with intention not to provide employment to the concerned

workmen. The judgement of the Hon’ble Suprement Court after determining the exact age of persons still then the so-

called medical officer determined the exact age of the persons, then the concerned workmen were issued chargesheet

by management in the year 2012 in the alleged ground of giving false information regarding age by invoking clause

26.9 of the standing order.

During the pendency of LC Application No. 10 of 2003 which is also arising out of Ref. 58/92, the management

changed the service condition of the concerned workmen by issuing chargesheet and by conducting enquiry and the

management is contemplating to dismiss the concerned workmen from service that too without taking any prior

approval of the Tribunal so that the complainant prays to quash the chargesheet and not to proceed the enquiry and not

to dismiss the workmen from services till the pendency of the case as mentioned above.

On the other hand management submitted that the lis i.e. reference case aleady been exhausted after it is

travelling to High Court to Apex Court and the management implemented the award as per the memorandum of

settlement.

It was the settlement that as per identification of Union leader, the workmen will be taken to job and some of

them have been taken. It further submitted that serious, allegation received, that the workmen appointed as per award

were not real beneficiary. Many fake persons entered into job in the name of persons in the award even changing their

names and father names for which the management started disciplenary enquiry against many and stop giving

employment to rest.

It is also submitted by the Opp.Party that the complainant were submitted perscribed format and claimed

themselves as beneficiaries of the award. After implementation of the award the opp/Party received complaints from

the various corner regarding the complainant that the complainant are not the real workmen concerned of Ref. Case No.

58/92 and are not bona fide beneficiary, accordingly the opp/party consitituted a committee for examination of disputed

indentity of the applicant.

The committee after examination the matter submitted its report mentioning theirin that the complainats

submitted false information regarding their name, father’s name, address. And age etc and fraudulent obtained

(ii)

3351

employment inCCL. Accordingly proceeded for misconduct under and fraudulently obtained employment in CCL.

Accordingly Proceeded for misconduct under clause 26.9 and 26.22 of the certified standing order, the opp/party issued

charge sheets to applicats. The issuance of chargesheet for commission of misconduct is not change of service

condition of an employee.

During the penency of the case one Mahendra Rajak tried to intervene stating that he is real beneficiary and not

the persons who is in job as Mahendra Rajak. Though he was not impleaded as party, the Management was asked to

enquire into the matter. During the final hearing the socalled intervener filed the order of the management that said

Mahendra Rahak was dismissed from job on the ground of impersonator and fraud. This being the situation there is

malafides in giving appointment also.

10.

But from the case it reveals that the M.O.S. has not been entered into in clean hands and which is the out come

of ingenuness and fraudulent act. Though this Tribunal thought that the MOS was genuine now it not like that. The case

is of 1992, question of impersonation is primafacie seen.

11.

Hence the management is directed to remove all the workman who are in employment on the basis of MOS

pending enquiry. As directed by Highier Court all parties may approach this Tribunal for proper identification and to

restore Indistrial peace. For this delicate issue, the Tribunal also proceeded to spot for a circuit and to hear the matter

and also took evidence as adduced by the parties, there.

12.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I hold that the application filed by the complainant is

rejected. The Opp. Party is to act upon the award soon after it is published in the official gazettee, since fraud has no

legs to stand for a longer time.

This is my award.

R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 2 twu

] 2017

1411

-—

dsUnz

ljdkj]

ktHkk"kk (la?k ds 'kkldh; iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx) fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e 10 ds mi&fu;e

(4) ds vuqlj.k esa]

Je vkSj jkstxkj ea=kky; ds iz

kldh; fu;a=k.kk/hu fuEufyf[kr dk;kZy;ksa dks]

uds

80 izfr'kr

ls vf/d

deZpk

fj;ksa

us ¯gnh dk dk;Zlk/d Kku izkIr dj fy;k

gS]

,rn~}kjk vfèklwfpr djrh gS %

k[kk dk;kZy;] deZpkjh jkT; chek fuxe] NsgjVk] iatkc

[kku lqj{kk mi&egkfuns

d dk dk;kZy;] cSaxyq#] dukZVd

¹la

bZ&11016@1@2017&jk

Hkk

nsosUæ ¯lg] vk£Fkd lykgdkj

New Delhi, the 2nd June, 2017

S.O. 1411.—In pursuance of Sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Languages (Use for Official Purposes of the

Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies following offices under the administrative control of the

Ministry of Labour and Employment, more than 80% Staff whereof have acquired working knowledge of Hindi.

01.

ESIC Branch Office, Chheharta, Punjab

02.

O/o Deputy Director General of Mines Safety, Bengaluru, Karnataka

[No. E-11016/1/2017-RBN]

DEVENDER SINGH, Economic Adviser

ubZ fnYyh] 7

twu

] 2017

412

—

deZpkjh jkT; chek vf/fu;e] 1948 (1948 dk 34) dh /kjk 1 dh mi&/kjk (3) }kjk iznRr 'kfDr;ksa dk

iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUnzh; ljdkj ,rn~}kjk 1 tqykbZ] 2017 dks ml rkjh[k ds :i esa fu;r djrh gS] ftl

s mDr vf/fu;e ds vè;k;

(/kjk 44 o 45 ds flok; tks igys g

h izo`Ùk

gks

pqdh gS) rFkk vè;k; V

vkSj VI

¹/kjk 76 dh mi&/kjk (1) vkSj /kjk 77] 78]

79 vkSj 81 ds flok; tks igys gh izo`Ùk dh tk pqdh gSaº ds micaèk gfj;k.kk jkT; ds fuEufyf[kr ftyksa esa izo`Ùk gksaxs] vFkkZr

~ %

—

3352

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 10, 2017/JYAISTHA 20, 1939

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ftyk

rsgkckn] Ikyoy] fHkokuh] pj[kh nk

njh] ftan] fljlk] >Ttj] fglkj] lksuhir] jksgrd] esokr (uqg)] egsUnzx<+]

xqM+xk

o] fjokM+h] vackyk] ikuhir] djuky] dq:{ks=

] dSFky] iapdqyk ,oa ;equk uxj ds laiw.kZ {ks=

(

igys ls O;kIr {ks=k

ksa dks

NksM+dj)¸

¹la

,l&38013@10@2017&,l

vt; efyd] v

oj lfpo

New Delhi, the 7th June, 2017

S.O. 1412.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the Employees’ State

Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st July, 2017 as the date on which the

provisions of Chapter-IV (except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force) and Chapter-V and

VI [except sub-section (1) of Section 76 and Sections 77, 78, 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force] of

the said Act shall come into force in the following entire districts (including already implemented areas) in the State of

Haryana namely:-

“Whole district of Fatehabad, Palwal, Bhiwani, Charkhi Dadri, Jind, Sirsa, Jhajjar, Hisar, Sonepat, Rohtak,

Mewat (Nuh), Mahendragarh, Gurgaon, Rewari, Ambala, Panipat, Karnal, Kurukshetra, Kaithal, Panchkula and

Yamuna Nagar excluding the area which are already implemented”

[No. S-38013/10/2017-S.S.-I]

AJAY MALIK, Under Secy.

Uploaded by Dte. of Printing at Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-11:0064

and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-11:0054.

ALOK KUMAR

Digitally signed by ALOK KUMAR

Date: 2017.06.29 11:13:12 +05'30'