5621 GI/2017
(7229)
jftLVªh la- Mh- ,y- (,u) 04@0007@2003µ05
REGD. No. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05
izkf/dkj ls izdkf'kr
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
lkIrkfgd
WEEKLY
la- 38]
ubZ fnYyh] flrEcj 17—flrEcj 23] 2017] 'kfuokj@Hkkæ 26—vkf'ou 1] 1939
No. 38]
NEW DELHI, SEPTEMBER 17—SEPTEMBER 23, 2017, SATURDAY/BHADRA 26— ASVINA 1, 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)
िव मंालय
िव मंालय
िव मंालय
िव मंालय
(िवीय सेवाएं िवभाग
िवीय सेवाएं िवभाग
िवीय सेवाएं िवभाग
िवीय सेवाएं िवभाग)
नई दली, 12 िसतबर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2200
2200
2200
2200.—भारतीय टेट बक अिधिनयम, 1955 (1955 का 23) क धारा 19 के खड (ड.) ारा द शि"य# का
योग करते &ए, के()ीय सरकार, एत*ारा, सु,ी अंजुिल िचब दु0गल के थान पर ,ी राजीव कुमार, सिचव, भारत सरकार, िव
मं4ालय, िव ीय सेवाएं िवभाग को त5काल भाव से और अगले आदेश# तक, भारतीय टेट बक के के()ीय िनदेशक मंडल म8 िनदेशक के
9प म8 नािमत करती है।
[फा.सं. 7/2/2012-बीओ-I]
=ानोतोष राय, अवर सिचव
7230
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Department of Financial Services)
New Delhi, the 12th September, 2017
S.O. 2200.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (e) of section 19 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955
(23 of 1955), the Central Government hereby nominates Shri Rajiv Kumar, Secretary, Government of India, Ministry
of Finance, Department of Financial Services, as Director on the Central Board of Directors of State Bank of India with
immediate effect and until further orders vice Ms. Anjuly Chib Duggal.
[F. No. 7/2/2012-BO-I]
JNANATOSH ROY, Under Secy.
नई दली, 12 िसतबर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2201
2201
2201
2201.—भारतीय ?रजव@ बक अिधिनयम, 1934 (1934 का 2) क धारा 8 क उप-धारा (1) के खंड (घ) ारा द
शि"य# का योग करते &ए, के()ीय सरकार, एत*ारा, सु,ी अंजिल िचब दु0गल के थान पर ,ी राजीव कुमार, सिचव, भारत सरकार,
िव मं4ालय, िव ीय सेवाएं िवभाग को त5काल भाव से और अगले आदेश# तक, भारतीय ?रजव@ बक के के()ीय िनदेशक मडल म8
िनदेशक के 9प म8 नािमत करती है।
[फा.सं. 7/2/2012-बीओ-I]
=ानोतोष राय, अवर सिचव
New Delhi, the 12th September, 2017
S.O. 2201.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 8 of the Reserve
Bank of India Act, 1934 (2 of 1934), the Central Government hereby nominates Shri Rajiv Kumar, Secretary,
Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Financial Services, as Director on the Central Board of
Directors of Reserve Bank of India with immediate effect and until further orders vice Ms. Anjuly Chib Duggal.
[F. No.7/2/2012-BO-I]
JNANATOSH ROY, Under Secy.
fons'k ea=kky;
(lh-ih-oh- izHkkx)
ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2202-—jktuf;d vkSj dksalqyh; vf/dkjh ('kiFk ,oa iQhl) ds vf/fu;e] 1948 (1948 dk 41) dh /kjk 2 ds
[akM (d) ds vuqlj.k esa oSèkkfud vkns'k A
,rn~}kjk] dsaæ ljdkj Hkkjr ds nwrkokl] cgjhu esa Jh furs'k dqekj ekgqj] lgk;d vuqHkkx vf/dkjh dks fnukad 1 flrEcj]
2017 ls lgk;d dksalqyj vf/dkjh ds rkSj ij dksalqyj lsokvksa ds fuoZgu ds fy, izkfèkd`r djrh gS A
¹la- Vh&4330@01@2017º
izdk'k pUn] funs'kd (dksalqyj)
MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
(CPV DIVISION)
New Delhi, the 1st September, 2017
S.O. 2202.—Statutory Order in pursuance of clause (a) of the Section 2 of the Diplomatic and Consular
Officers (Oaths and Fees) Act, 1948 (41 of 1948), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Nitesh Kumar Mahur,
Assistant Section Officer as Assistant Consular Officer in Embassy of India, Bahrain to perform the Consular services
with effect from 1st September, 2017.
[No. T-4330/01/2017]
PRAKASH CHAND, Director (Consular)
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7231
LokLF; ,oa ifjokj dY;k.k ea=kky;
(LokLF; ,oa ifjokj dY;k.k foHkkx)
ubZ fnYyh] 5 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2203-—LokLF; ,oa ifjokj dY;k.k ea=kky; ds fuEufyf[kr v/huLFk dk;kZy;] ftlesa 80 izfr'kr ls vf/d
vf/dkfj;ksa@deZpkfj;ksa us ¯gnh dk dk;Zlk/d Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS] dks dsUnzh; ljdkj] jktHkk"kk (la?k ds 'kkldh; iz;kstu ds fy,
iz;ksx) fu;ekoyh] 1976 ds fu;e 10 ds mi&fu;e (4) ds rgr vf/lwfpr djrh gS %&
1- Hkkjrh; nUr ifj"kn] ubZ fnYyh
[iQk- la- bZ&11012@08@2014&fganh&II]
Xkk;=kh feJk] la;qDr lfpo
MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE
(Department of Health and Family Welfare)
New Delhi, the 5th September, 2017
S.O. 2203.—In pursuance of Sub-Rule (4) of the Rule 10 of the Official Languages (Use of Official Purpose
of the Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies the following subordinate office of Ministry of
Health and Family Welfare, whose 80 per cent staff officers/employees have acquired working knowledge of Hindi :
1.
Dental Council of India, New Delhi.
[F. No. E-11012/08/2014-Hindi-II]
GAYATRI MISHRA, Jt. Secy.
उपभोा
उपभोा
उपभोा
उपभोा मामले
मामले
मामले
मामले, , , , खा
खा
खा
खा और
और
और
और सावजिनक
सावजिनक
सावजिनक
सावजिनक िवतरण
िवतरण
िवतरण
िवतरण मंालय
मंालय
मंालय
मंालय
(उपभोा
उपभोा
उपभोा
उपभोा मामले
मामले
मामले
मामले िवभाग
िवभाग
िवभाग
िवभाग)
(भारतीय
भारतीय
भारतीय
भारतीय मानक
मानक
मानक
मानक यूरो
यूरो
यूरो
यूरो)
नई दली, 30 अग त, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2204
2204
2204
2204.—भारतीय मानक Bयूरो (माणन) िविनयम 1988 के िविनयम 6 के उपिविनयम (3) के अनुसरण म8 भारतीय
मानक Bयूरो एतद्ारा नीचे अनुसूची म8 दए गए उ5 पाद क मुहरांकन शु क अिधसूिचत करता है :
अनुसूची
अनुसूची
अनुसूची
अनुसूची
Hkkjrh;
ekud
la[;k
Hkkx vuqHkkx
o"kZ
mRikn
bdkbZ
U;wure eqgjkadu 'kqYd
(#-)
bdkbZ
nj LySc
1 (#-)
LySc esa
bdkbZ;ka
'ks"k
izpkyu frfFk
o`gn Lrj
,e,l,ebZ
ds fy,
2556
2
2004
dkWpkHk LoPNrk lkf/=k
(dkWpkHk phuh feV~Vh)
Hkkx 2 'kkSp dqaMksa ds
fy, fof'k"V vis{kk,a
1 Vu
46000
37000
14-00
lHkh
&
l{ke izkf/dkjh
ds vuqeksnu dh
rkjh[k
2556
4
2004
dkWpkHk LoPNrk lkf/=k
(dkWpkHk phuh feV~Vh)
Hkkx 4 okW'k csflu ds
fy, fof'k"V vis{kk,a
1 Vu
46000
37000
14-00
lHkh
&
l{ke izkf/dkjh
ds vuqeksnu dh
rkjh[k
2556
5
2004
dkWpkHk LoPNrk lkf/=k
(dkWpkHk phuh feV~Vh)
Hkkx 5 iz;ksx'kkyk ¯ld
dh vis{kk,a
1 Vu
46000
37000
14-00
lHkh
&
l{ke izkf/dkjh
ds vuqeksnu dh
rkjh[k
7232
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
2556
6
2004
dkWpkHk LoPNrk lkf/=k
(dkWpkHk phuh feV~Vh)
Hkkx 6 ;wjhuy vkSj
foHktu ifV~Vdk dh
fof'k"V vis{kk,a
1 Vu
46000
37000
14-00
lHkh
&
l{ke izkf/dkjh
ds vuqeksnu dh
rkjh[k
2556
7
2004
dkWpkHk LoPNrk lkf/=k
(dkWpkHk phuh feV~Vh)
Hkkx 7 dkWpkHk LoPNrk
lkf/=kksa ds lgk;dkax dh
fof'k"V vis{kk,a
1 Vu
46000
37000
14-00
lHkh
&
l{ke izkf/dkjh
ds vuqeksnu dh
rkjh[k
2556
8
2004
dkWpkHk LoPNrk lkf/=k
(dkWpkHk phuh feV~Vh)
Hkkx 8 fiMLVy Dykst
;qXeu ok'kMkmu vkSj
lkbiQksfud ty ew=kky;ksa
vk/kuksa
dh
fof'k"V
vis{kk,a
1 Vu
46000
37000
14-00
lHkh
&
l{ke izkf/dkjh
ds vuqeksnu dh
rkjh[k
2556
9
2004
dkWpkHk LoPNrk lkf/=k
(dkWpkHk phuh feV~Vh)
Hkkx 9 fiMLVy izdkj
ds fcMsVksa ds fy,
fof'k"V vis{kk,a
1 Vu
46000
37000
14-00
lHkh
&
l{ke izkf/dkjh
ds vuqeksnu dh
rkjh[k
2556
14
2004
dkWpkHk LoPNrk lkf/=k
(dkWpkHk phuh feV~Vh)
Hkkx
14
lekdkyu
LDoS¯Vx vkFkkuksa dh
fof'k"V vis{kk,a
1 Vu
46000
37000
14-00
lHkh
&
l{ke izkf/dkjh
ds vuqeksnu dh
rkjh[k
2556
15
2004
dkWpkHk LoPNrk lkf/=k
(dkWpkHk phuh feV~Vh)
Hkkx 15 ;wuholZy ty
ew=kky;
vk/kuksa
dh
fof'k"V vis{kk,a
1 Vu
46000
37000
14-00
lHkh
&
l{ke izkf/dkjh
ds vuqeksnu dh
rkjh[k
2556
16
2004
dkWpkHk LoPNrk lkf/=k
(dkWpkHk phuh feV~Vh)
Hkkx 16 nhokj ij yxus
okys 'kkSpdaqM ds fy,
fof'k"V vis{kk,a
1 Vu
46000
37000
14-00
lHkh
&
l{ke izkf/dkjh
ds vuqeksnu dh
rkjh[k
6685
2009
ykbiQ tSdsV
1 ihl
186000
149000
1-0
lHkh
&
l{ke izkf/dkjh
ds vuqeksnu dh
rkjh[k
¹lanHkZ % lh,eMh&3@8%8º
lh- ch- ¯lg] vij egkfuns'kd
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7233
MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION
(Department of Consumer Affairs)
(BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS)
New Delhi, the 30th August, 2017
S.O. 2204.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (3) of regulation 6 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification)
Regulation 1988, the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies the Marking fee for the product given in the Schedule :
SCHEDULE
IS
No.
Part
Sec
Year
Product
Units
Minimum Marking
Fee (Rs.)
Unit
Rate
Slab-1
Fee
(Rs.)
Units
in
Slab-1
Remain-
ing
Effective
Date
Large
Scale
MSME
2556
2
2004
Vitreous
Sanitary
Appliances
(Vitreous China) —
Part 2 : Specific
Requirements
of
Washdown
Water
Closets
1 ton
46000
37000
14.00
All
-
Date
of
approval of
Competent
Authority
2556
4
2004
Vitreous
Sanitary
Appliances
(Vitreous China) —
Part 4 : Specific
Requirements
of
Wash Basins
1 ton
46000
37000
14.00
All
-
Date
of
approval of
Competent
Authority
2556
5
2004
Vitreous
Sanitary
Appliances
(Vitreous China) —
Part 5 : Specific
Requirements
of
Laboratory Sinks
1 ton
46000
37000
14.00
All
-
Date
of
approval of
Competent
Authority
2556
6
2004
Vitreous
Sanitary
Appliances
(Vitreous China) —
Part 6 : Specific
Requirements
of
Urinals
and
Partition Plates
1 ton
46000
37000
14.00
All
-
Date
of
approval of
Competent
Authority
2556
7
2004
Vitreous
Sanitary
Appliances
(Vitreous China) —
Part 7 : Specific
Requirements
of
Accessories
for
Sanitary Appliances
1 ton
46000
37000
14.00
All
-
Date
of
approval of
Competent
Authority
2556
8
2004
Vitreous
Sanitary
Appliances
(Vitreous China) —
Part 8 : Specific
Requirements
of
Pedestal
Close
Coupled Washdown
and Syphonic Water
Closets
1 ton
46000
37000
14.00
All
-
Date
of
approval of
Competent
Authority
2556
9
2004
Vitreous
Sanitary
Appliances
(Vitreous China) —
Part 9 : Specific
Requirements
of
Pedestal
Type
Bidets
1 ton
46000
37000
14.00
All
-
Date
of
approval of
Competent
Authority
7234
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
2556
14
2004
Vitreous
Sanitary
Appliances
(Vitreous China) —
Part 14 : Specific
Requirements
of
Integrated Squatting
Pans
1 ton
46000
37000
14.00
All
-
Date
of
approval of
Competent
Authority
2556
15
2004
Vitreous
Sanitary
Appliances
(Vitreous China) —
Part 15 : Specific
Requirements
of
Universal
Water
Closets
1 ton
46000
37000
14.00
All
-
Date
of
approval of
Competent
Authority
2556
16
2004
Vitreous
Sanitary
Appliances
(Vitreous China) —
Part 16 : Specific
Requirements
of
Wash Down Wall
Mounted
Water
Closets
1 ton
46000
37000
14.00
All
-
Date
of
approval of
Competent
Authority
6685
2009
Life Jackets
1
piece
186000
149000
1.0
All
-
Date
of
approval of
Competent
Authority
[Ref. CMD-3/8:8]
C. B. SINGH, Addl. Director General
नई दली, 8 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2205
2205
2205
2205.—भारतीय मानक Bयूरो (माणन) िविनयम 1988 के िविनयम 4 के उपिनयम (5) के अनुसरण म8 भारतीय
मानक Bयूरो एतद्ारा अिधसूिचत करता है क िजन लाइस8स# के िववरण नीचे अनुसूची म8 दए गए ह, वे वीकृत कर दए गए ह:-
अनुसूची
अनुसूची
अनुसूची
अनुसूची
G.
सं.
लाइस8स सं
वीकृत करने
क ितिथ वष@/
माह
लाइस8सधारी का नाम व पता
भारतीय मानक का शीष@
भा मा सं
(भाग/ अनुभाग)
: वष@
1.
6590001212
20170801
मेसस@ कोनार Iवेलरी
सं. 9/59 B, मुJय सडक, वालपारै,
कोयब ूर-642127
वण@ एवं वण@
िम,धातुएं, आभूषण/
िश पकारी – शुMता एवं
मुहरांकन
IS 1417 :
2016
2.
6590001313
20170801
मेसस@ ,ी अमन तंगामािलगै
123/1, अNल जोती कॉPलेQस,
भवानी मुJय सडक, पेN(दुरै,
ईरोड-638052
वण@ एवं वण@
िम,धातुएं, आभूषण/
िश पकारी – शुMता एवं
मुहरांकन
IS 1417 :
2016
3.
6500027208
20170807
मेसस@ जे जे पप ायवेट िलिमटड
एस एफ सं. 76/1B & 2,
ओरैकालपालयम,
कुRतुरपुदुर पोट, कोयब ूर -
641107.
गहरे कुS के िलए
िनमजनीय पपसेट
IS 14220:
1994
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7235
4.
6500027309
20170807
मेसस@ ीिमयर पी वी सी इंडTी
दरवाजा सं. 1/21-2, उगयRूर सडक,
प#गलूर,
पलडम तालुक, ितNPपुर - 641667.
पेयजल आपूUत@ के िलए
उV घन5व वाले
पॉलीएिथलीन पाइPस
IS 4984:
1995
5.
6590001414
20170816
मेसस@ वणा@ धरा Iवेलस@ एल एल पी
1054, िबग बाज़ार, आर आर कॉPलेQस
के सामने,
कोयब ूर - 641001
वण@ एवं वण@
िम,धातुएं, आभूषण/
िश पकारी – शुMता एवं
मुहरांकन
IS 1417 :
2016
6.
6590001515
20170817
मेसस@ िशवम Tेडस@ (,ी तंगम Iवेलरी)
दरवाजा सं. 93-95, नया माक[ट Tीट,
ितNPपुर -641604
वण@ एवं वण@
िम,धातुएं, आभूषण/
िश पकारी – शुMता एवं
मुहरांकन
IS 1417 :
2016
7.
6590001616
20170817
मेसस@ िशवम Tेडस@ (,ी तंगम Iवेलरी)
दरवाजा सं. 93-95, नया माक[ट Tीट,
ितNPपुर -641604
चाँदी एवं चाँदी
िम,धातुएं, आभूषण/
िश पकारी – शुMता एवं
मुहरांकन
IS 2112 :
2014
8.
6500027705
20170821
मेसस@ डेटाफड इंिडया ायवेट िलिमटड
119/2B, मुदिलपालयम सडक,
अरसुर पोट, सुलूर (के राते),
कोयब ूर - 641407
450/750 वोट क और
तक क काय@का?रता
वोटता के िलए दृढ़ और
लचीले चालक वाले
पॉलीिवनायल Qलोरायड
से िव^ुत रोिधत
आनाव?रत और आव?रत
केबल/ डोरी
IS 694 :
2010
9.
6500027410
20170821
मेसस@ पी एस के पोपुलर Tे_डंग ायवेट
िलिमटड
सं.165 B, शि" नगर, ित(डाल पोट,
ईरोड - 638012
घरेलू शर कुकर
IS
2347:2006
10.
6500027511
20170821
मेसस@ िशवम इंजीिनय`रंग इंडTीस
ायवेट िलिमटड
255/2 A, नालु कवलै तोaम,
मिणयकरमपालयम, गणपित, कोयब ूर
– 641 006
िनमजनीय पपसेट
IS 8034:
2002
11.
6500027612
20170821
मेसस@ िशवम इंजीिनय`रंग इंडTीस
ायवेट िलिमटड
255/2 A, नालु कवलै तोaम,
मिणयकरमपालयम, गणपित, कोयब ूर
– 641 006
गहरे कुS के िलए
िनमजनीय पपसेट
IS 14220:
1994
12.
6500027806
20170829
मेसस@ पयोनीर पैके_जंग सोलूश(स
सं. 14/3 A, ओलापालयम पोट,
कांगयम तालुक,
ितNPपुर -638701.
िवफोटक# के पैकेज के
िलए सामा(य
आवcयकताएं: भाग 1-
वािणिIयक उV िवफोटक
IS 10212 :
Part 1 : 1986
7236
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
13.
6590001717
20170829
मेसस@ ,ी गौरी तंगा मािलगै
5/129 A-1, एस. एस. कॉपलेQस, बी.
एस. सु(दर Tीट, नए बस अeे के पास,
अिवनािश - 641654
वण@ एवं वण@
िम,धातुएं, आभूषण/
िश पकारी – शुMता एवं
मुहरांकन
IS 1417 :
2016
[सं. सीएमडी/13 : 11]
टी. कलैवाणन, वै=ािनक ‘एफ’ एवं मुख
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2017
S.O. 2205.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (5) of the regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards
(Certification) Regulation 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies the grant of licence particulars of
which are given in the following schedule:
SCHEDULE
IS
No.
Licence No.
Grant
Date
Name and Address (Factory) of the Party
Title of the Standard
IS No. Part/
Sec. Year
1.
6590001212
20170801
M/s. Konar Jewellery
No. 9/59 B, Main Road,,
Valparai,
Coimbatore-642127
Gold and Gold Alloys,
Jewellery/ Aertefacts-
Fineness and Marking
IS 1417 : 2016
2.
6590001313
20170801
M/s. Sree Amman Thangamaaligai
123/1, Arul Jothi Complex,
Bhavani Main Road,
Perundurai,
Erode-638052
Gold and Gold Alloys,
Jewellery/ Aertefacts-
Fineness and Marking
IS 1417 : 2016
3.
6500027208
20170807
M/s. JJ Pump Private Limited
SF No. 76/1B & 2, Oraikalpalayam,
Kunnathurpudur Post,
Coimbatore- 641107.
Openwell Submersible
Pumpsets
IS 14220: 1994
4.
6500027309
20170807
M/s. Premier PVC Industry
Door No.1/21-2, Ugayanur Road,
Pongalur, Palladam Taluk,
Tirupur-641667.
High density polyethylene
pipes for water supply)
IS 4984: 1995
5.
6590001414
20170816
M/s. Swarna Dhara Jewellers LLP
1054, Big Bazaar,
Opp. R.R. Complex,
Coimbatore -641001
Gold and Gold Alloys,
Jewellery/ Aertefacts-
Fineness and Marking
IS 1417 : 2016
6.
6590001515
20170817
M/s. Shivam Traders (Sree Thangam
Jewellery)
Door No. 93-95, New Market Street,,
Tirupur -641604
Gold and Gold Alloys,
Jewellery/ Aertefacts-
Fineness and Marking
IS 1417 : 2016
7.
6590001616
20170817
M/s. Shivam Traders (Sree Thangam
Jewellery)
Door No. 93-95, New Market Street,,
Tirupur -641604
Silver and Silver Alloys,
Jewellery/ Aertefacts-
Fineness and Marking
IS 2112 : 2014
8.
6500027705
20170821
M/s. Datafield India Pvt Ltd
119/2B, Mudalipalayam Road,
Arasur Post, Sulur (Via),
Coimbatore - 641407
Polyvinyl Chloride Insulated
Unsheathed And Sheathed
Cables/ cords With Rigid And
Flexible Conductor For Rated
Voltages Up To And
Including 450/750 V
IS 694 : 2010
9.
6500027410
20170821
M/s. P S K Popular Trading Private
Limited
No.165 B, Sakthi Nagar,
Thindal Post, Erode - 638012
Domestic Pressure Cookers
IS 2347:2006
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7237
10.
6500027511
20170821
M/s. Shivam Engg. Industries Pvt. Ltd.
255/2 A, Naalu Kavalai Thottam,
Manikaram Palayam, Ganapathy,
Coimbatore – 641 006
Submersible Pumpsets
IS 8034: 2002
11.
6500027612
20170821
M/s. Shivam Engg. Industries Pvt. Ltd.
255/2 A, Naalu Kavalai Thottam,
Manikaram Palayam, Ganapathy,
Coimbatore – 641 006
Openwell Submersible
Pumpsets
IS 14220: 1994
12.
6500027806
20170829
M/s. Pioneer Packing Solutions
No. 14/3 A, Olappalayam Post,
Kangayam (Tk),
Tirupur-638701.
General requirements for
packages of Explosives: Part
1 - Commercial high
explosives
IS 10212 : Part 1
: 1986
13.
6590001717
20170829
M/s. Sri Gowri Thanga Maaligai
5/129 A-1, S.S. Complex,
B.S. Sundaram Street, Near New Bus
Stand,
Avinashi-641654
Gold and Gold Alloys,
Jewellery/ Aertefacts-
Fineness and Marking
IS 1417 : 2016
[No. CMD/13:11]
T. KALAIVANAN, Scientist ‘F’ & Head
नई दली, 8 िसत बर, 2017
का
का
का
का.आ. 2206
2206
2206
2206.—भारतीय मानक B यूरो (माणन) िविनयम, 1988 के िविनयम (5) के उपिविनयम (6) के अनुसरण म8 भारतीय
मानक B यूरो एत*ारा अिधसूिचत करता है क िन न िववरण वाले लाइस8स# को उनके आगे दशा@यी गई तारीख से रद्द / थिगत कर दया
गया है :-
अनुसूची
अनुसूची
अनुसूची
अनुसूची
G.
सं.
लाइस8स सं
सी एम/
एल-
लाइस8सधारी का नाम व पता
थिगत कए गए/ रg कए गए लाइस8स के
अंतग@त वतु/ Gम सबM भारतीय मानक का
शीष@क
रg होने क
ितिथ
अगत 2017 - शू(य
[सं. सीएमडी/13:13]
टी. कलैवाणन, वै=ािनक ‘एफ’ एवं मुख
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2017
S.O. 2206.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (6) of the regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards
(Certification) Regulations 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies that the licences particulars of
which are given below have been cancelled/suspended with effect from the date indicated against each:
SCHEDULE
Sl.
No.
Licence No.
CM/L-
Name & Address of the Licensee
Article/ Process with relevant
Indian Standard covered by the
licence cancelled/ suspension
Date of
Cancellation
AUGUST 2017 - NIL
[No. CMD/13:13]
T. KALAIVANAN, Scientist ‘F’ & Head
7238
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
वािणय एवं उोग मंालय
वािणय एवं उोग मंालय
वािणय एवं उोग मंालय
वािणय एवं उोग मंालय
(वािणय िवभाग)
(वािणय िवभाग)
(वािणय िवभाग)
(वािणय िवभाग)
नई दली, 6 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2207.—केीय सरकार, िनयात (गुणवा िनयंण एंव िनरीण) िनयम, 1964 के िनयम 12,के
उपिनयम (2) के साथ प&ठत, िनयात (गुणवा िनयंण एंव िनरीण) अिधिनयम, 1963 (1963 का 22) क+ धारा 7 क+
उपधारा (1) .ारा /द शि1य2 का /योग करते 4ए, मैसस एसजीएस इंिडया /ाइवेट िलिमटेड, एमयू -33, मधुबन माक:ट
कॉ<ले=स, मधुबन, पारादीप-754142, ओिडशा, िजसे एत>प?ात उ1 एज@सी कहा जायेगा , को इस अिधसूचना के
राजप म@ /काशन क+ तारीख से तीन वष क+ अविध के िलए भारत सरकार के वािणEय मंालय क+ शासक+य राजप
भाग-II,खंF ड-3, उप खंF ड(ii), म@ दनांक 20 दसबर, 1965 क+ अिधसूचना सं॰ का.आ. 3975 के तहत /कािशतर
अिधसूचना म@ उपाबJ अनुसूिचय2 म@ िविनKदL खिनज और अयNक समूह-।, Oम सं॰ दो पर िनKदL लौह अयN क को िनयात
से पूव िनRिलिखत शतS के अधीन पारादीप पन , धामरा पन तथा गोपालपुर पन म@ उ= त खिनज और अयN क के
िनरीण करने के िलए एक अिभकरण के Tप म@ मायता देती है, अथात् :
(i)
यह अिभकरण,खिनज और अयNक समूह-। का िनयात (िनरीण) िनयम, 1965 के िनयम 4 के अधीन
िनरीण क+ पJित क+ जाँच करने के िलये िनयात िनरीण प&रषद् .ारा िनिम नामिनKदL अिधका&रय2
को पयाX सुिवधाएं देगी; और
(ii)
यह अिभकरण,इस अिधसूचना के अधीन अपने कायY के पालन म@ िनदेशक (िनरीण और गुणवा िनयंण)
िनयात िनरीण प&रषद .ारा समय-समय पर िलिखत Tप म@ दए गए ऐसे िनद:श2 से आबJ ह2गी ।
[फा. सं. के-16014/14/2017 - िनयात िनरीण]
संतोष कुमार सारंगी, संयु1 सिचव
MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY
(Department of Commerce)
New Delhi, the 6th September, 2017
S.O. 2207.—In exercise of the powers conferred by 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 SGS India Pvt. Ltd., MU-33, Madhuban
Market Complex, Madhuban, Paradip-754142, Odisha, 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 Minerals and Ores Group-I, in the Schedule to the notification number S.O. 3975, dated the 20th
December, 1965, published in the Gazette of India, part II, section 3, sub-section (ii), dated the 20th December, 1965,
prior to export of the said Minerals and Ores at Paradip Port, Dhamra Port and Gopalpur 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 specified under rule 4 of the Export of Minerals and Ores -
Group I (Inspection) Rules, 1965;
(ii)
the said agency shall, 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.16014/14/2017- Export Inspection]
SANTOSH KUMAR SARANGI, Jt. Secy.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7239
परमाणु
परमाणु
परमाणु
परमाणु ऊजा
ऊजा
ऊजा
ऊजा िवभाग
िवभाग
िवभाग
िवभाग
मुंबई, 10 जुलाई, 2017
का
का
का
का.आ. . . . 2208
2208
2208
2208.—सरकारी प?रसर (अािधकृत अिधभोिगय# क बेदखली) अिधिनयम, 1971 (1971 का 40), क धारा 3 ारा
द शि"य# का योग करते &ए, के()ीय सरकार, एतद्ारा भारत के दनांक 25 जनवरी 2005 के राजप4 के भाग- II, खंड 3,
उपखंड (ii) म8, दनांक 12 फरवरी, 2005 के सा.आ. सं. 470 के अंतग@त कािशत परमाणु ऊजा@ िवभाग, भारत सरकार क अिधसूचना
म8 आगे िनmिलिखत संशोधन करती है:-
उपरो" अिधसूचना म8 दी गयी सारणी के थान पर िनmिलिखत सारणी ितथािपत हो जाएगी, नामत:-
सारणी
सारणी
सारणी
सारणी
अिधकारी का पदनाम
सरकारी प?रसर
(1)
(2)
उप बंधक (काUम@क), यूरेिनमय कॉपnरेशन ऑफ
इंिडया िलिमटेड, डाकघर: सुंदरनगर, _संहभूम
(पूव@), झारखंड- 832 107 ।
तुरामडीह माइ(स,मो&लडीह माइ(स और बंधु&रंग माइंस, डाकघर: सुंदरनगर,
िजला _संहभूम (पूव@) झारखंड म8 यूरेिनयम कॉपोरेशन ऑफ इंिडया िलिमटेड के,
अथवा उसके िलये लीज पर िलये गये प?रसर, जो तुरामडीह प?रयोजना के
शासिनक िनयं4ण म8 ह।
[फा. सं. 10/8(17)/2004-पीएसयू/9209]
टी. जी. रवी()न, अवर सिचव
नोट
नोट
नोट
नोट : मूल अिधसूचना भारत के दनांक 12 फरवरी, 2005 के राजप4 के भाग- II, खंड 3, उपखंड (ii) म8, दनांक 25 जनवरी 2005
के सा.आदेश सं. 470 के अंतग@त कािशत क गई थी ।
DEPARTMENT OF ATOMIC ENERGY
Mumbai, the 10th July, 2017
S.O. 2208.—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized
Occupants) Act, 1971(40 of 1971), the Central Government hereby makes the following amendments in the notification
of the Government of India in the Department of Atomic Energy, published in the Gazette of India, Part-II, Section 3,
Sub-section (ii) dated 25th January 2005, vide number S.O. 470, dated the 12th February, 2005, namely:-
In the said notification, for the Table, the following Table shall be substituted, namely:-
TABLE
[F. No.10/8(17)/2004-PSU/9209]
T.G. RAVEENDRAN, Under Secy.
Note : The Principal Notification was published in the the Gazette of India, Part-II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii) dated
the 12th February, 2005 vide number S.O. 470, dated the 25th January 2005.
Designation of the officer
Public premises
(1)
(2)
Deputy Manager (Personnel), Uranium
Corporation of India Limited, Post:
Sundernagar,
Singhbhum
(East),
Jharkhand - 832 107.
Premises belonging to or taken on lease for the Uranium Corporation of
India Limited at Turamdih Mines, Mohuldih Mines and Banduhurang
Mines, PO: Sundernagar, District Singhbhum (East), Jharkhand, which are
under the administrative control of Turamdih Project.
7240
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
मुंबई, 10 जुलाई, 2017
का
का
का
का.आ. . . . 2209
2209
2209
2209.—सरकारी प?रसर (अािधकृत अिधभोिगय# क बेदखली) अिधिनयम, 1971 (1971 का 40), क धारा 3 ारा
द शि"य# का योग करते &ए, के()ीय सरकार, एतद्ारा भारत के राजप4 के भाग- II, खंड 3, उपखंड (ii) म8, दनांक 03 दसंबर
1993 के सा.आदेश सं. 588 के अंतग@त कािशत परमाणु ऊजा@ िवभाग, भारत सरकार क अिधसूचना म8 आगे िनmिलिखत संशोधन
करती है:-
उपरो" अिधसूचना म8 दी गयी सारणी के थान पर िनmिलिखत सारणी ितथािपत हो जाएगी, नामत:-
सारणी
सारणी
सारणी
सारणी
अिधकारी का पदनाम
सरकारी प?रसर
(1)
(2)
उप बंधक (काUम@क), यूरेिनमय कॉपnरेशन ऑफ
इंिडया िलिमटेड, डाकघर: नरवापहाड़ माइ(स,
_संहभूम (पूव@), झारखंड- 832 111 ।
नरवापहाड़ माइंस, िजला _संहभूम (पूव@) झारखंड म8 यूरेिनयम कॉपोरेशन ऑफ
इंिडया िलिमटेड के, अथवा उसके िलये लीज पर िलये गये प?रसर, तथा वे
प?रसर जो नरवापहाड़ प?रयोजना के शासिनक िनयं4ण म8 ह।
[फा. सं. 10/8(5)/2009-पीएसयू/9208]
टी. जी. रवी()न, अवर सिचव
नोट
नोट
नोट
नोट : मूल अिधसूचना भारत के दनांक 26 फरवरी 1994 के राजप4 के भाग- II, खंड 3, उपखंड (ii) म8, दनांक 03 दसंबर 1993
क अिधसूचना सा.आदेश सं. 588 के अंतग@त कािशत क गयी थी, एवं उसके बाद दनांक 11 मई , 1999 क अिधसूचना सं.
सा.आ. 1383, दनांक 31 अQटूबर, 2003 क अिधसूचना सं. सा.आ. 1769, एवं दनांक 27 जून, 2009 क अिधसूचना सं.
सा.आ. 1769 ारा संशोिधत क गयी थी।
Mumbai, the 10th July, 2017
S.O. 2209.—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized
Occupants) Act, 1971(40 of 1971), the Central Government hereby makes the following further amendments in the
notification of the Government of India in the Department of Atomic Energy, published in the Gazette of India, Part-II,
Section 3, Sub-section (ii) vide number S.O. 588, dated the 3rd December, 1993, namely:-
In the said notification, for the Table, the following Table shall be substituted, namely:-
TABLE
[F. No.10/8(5)/2009-PSU/9208]
T.G. RAVEENDRAN, Under Secy.
Note : The Principal Notification was published in the Gazette of India, Part-II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii) dated the
26th February, 1994 vide notification number S.O.588, dated 3rd December, 1993 and subsequently amended
vide notification number S.O.1383, dated 11th May, 1999, notification number S.O.3195, dated 31st October,
2003 and notification number S.O.1769, dated 27th June, 2009.
Designation of the officer
Public premises
(1)
(2)
Deputy Manager (Personnel), Uranium
Corporation of India Limited, Post:
Narwapahar Mines, Singhbhum (East),
Jharkhand - 832 111.
Premises belonging to or taken on lease for the Uranium Corporation of
India Limited at Narwapahar Mines, District Singhbhum (East), Jharkhand
and premises which are under the administrative control of Narwapahar
Project.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7241
मुंबई, 10 जुलाई, 2017
का
का
का
का.आ. . . . 2210
2210
2210
2210.—सरकारी प?रसर (अािधकृत अिधभोिगय# क बेदखली) अिधिनयम, 1971 (1971 का 40), क धारा 3 ारा
द शि"य# का योग करते &ए, के()ीय सरकार, एतद्ारा भारत के दनांक 13 अैल 1996 के राजप4 के भाग- II, खंड 3, उपखंड
(ii) म8, दनांक 26 माच@ 1996 के सा.आदेश सं. 1146 के अंतग@त कािशत परमाणु ऊजा@ िवभाग, भारत सरकार क अिधसूचना म8 आगे
िनmिलिखत संशोधन करती है:-
उपरो" अिधसूचना म8 दी गयी सारणी के थान पर िनmिलिखत सारणी ितथािपत हो जाएगी, नामत:-
सारणी
सारणी
सारणी
सारणी
अिधकारी का पदनाम
सरकारी प?रसर
(1)
(2)
अपर बंधक (सुरxा), यूरेिनमय कॉपnरेशन ऑफ
इंिडया िलिमटेड, डाकघर: जादुगुड़ा माइ(स,
_संहभूम (पूव@), झारखंड- 832 012 ।
एमयूआरपी कॉलोनी, मुसाबनी सिहत जादुगुड़ा माइ(स, बागजाता माइ(स और
भा?टन माइ(स िजला _संहभूम (पूव@) झारखंड म8 यूरेिनयम कॉपोरेशन ऑफ इंिडया
िलिमटेड के, अथवा उसके िलये लीज पर िलये गये प?रसर।
[फा. सं. 10/8(14)/2008-पीएसयू/9207]
टी. जी. रवी()न, अवर सिचव
नोट
नोट
नोट
नोट : मूल अिधसूचना भारत के दनांक 13 अैल 1996 के राजप4 के भाग- II, खंड 3, उपखंड (ii) म8, दनांक 26 माच@ 1996 के
सा.आदेश सं. 1146 के अंतग@त कािशत क गई थी, एवं उसके बाद दनांक 24 जून, 1999 क अिधसूचना सं. सा.आ. सं.
1879, दनांक 23 अैल 2004 क अिधसूचना सं. सा.आ. सं. 1082 एवं दनांक 2 मई, 2009 क अिधसूचना सं. सा.आ. सं.
1122 ारा संशोिधत क गयी थी।
Mumbai, the 10th July, 2017
S.O. 2210.—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized
Occupants) Act, 1971(40 of 1971), the Central Government hereby makes the following further amendments in the
notification of the Government of India in the Department of Atomic Energy, published in the Gazette of India, Part-II,
Section 3, Sub-section (ii) dated 13th April 1996, vide number S.O. 1146, dated the 26th March, 1996, namely:-
In the said notification, for the Table, the following Table shall be substituted, namely:-
TABLE
[F. No.10/8(14)/2008-PSU/9207]
T.G. RAVEENDRAN, Under Secy.
Note : The Principal Notification was published in the Gazette of India, Part-II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii) dated the
13th April, 1996 vide notification number S.O. 1146, dated 26th March, 1996 and subsequently amended
vide notification number S.O. 1879, dated 24th June, 1999, notification number S.O. 1082, dated 23rd April,
2004 and notification number S.O.1122, dated 2nd May, 2009.
Designation of the officer
Public premises
(1)
(2)
Additional Manager (Security), Uranium
Corporation of India Limited, Post:
Jaduguda Mines, Singhbhum (East),
Jharkhand - 832 012.
Premises belonging to or taken on lease for the Uranium Corporation of
India Limited at Jaduguda Mines, Bagjata Mines and Bhatin Mines
including MURP Colony, Mosaboni, District Singhbhum (East),
Jharkhand.
7242
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
मुंबई, 11 जुलाई, 2017
का
का
का
का.आ. . . . 2211
2211
2211
2211.— सरकारी प?रसर (अािधकृत अिधभोिगय# क बेदखली) अिधिनयम, 1971 (1971 का 40), क धारा 3
ारा द शि"य# का योग करते &ए, के()ीय सरकार, एतद्ारा िनmिलिखत सारणी के कालम (1) म8 उलेख कए गए अिधकारी,
जो सरकार के राजपि4त अिधकारी के तर के समतुय अिधकारी के 9प म8 ह, को उ" अिधिनयम के तहत संपदा अिधकारी के 9प म8
िनयु" करती है, जो िनmिलिखत सारणी के कालम (2) म8 िविनyद@z सरकारी प?रसर से संबंिधत अपने काय@xे4 क थानीय सीमा के
भीतर उ" अिधिनयम के ारा अथवा इसके तहत संपदा अिधकारी को द शि"य# के कत@Bय# का िनवा@ह कर8गे –
सारणी
सारणी
सारणी
सारणी
अिधकारी का पदनाम
सरकारी प?रसर
(1)
(2)
मुJय बंधक (मा.सं..), इंिडयन रेअर
अ{स@ िलिमटेड
(आइआरईएल), Pलॉट नं. 1207, वीर सावरकर माग@, िसिM
िवनायक मंदर के पास, भादेवी, मुंबई- 400 028
मुंबई म8 इंिडयन रेअर अ{स@ िलिमटेड (आइआरईएल) के, अथवा
उसके िलये लीज पर िलये गये प?रसर।
[फा. सं. 3/10(28)/2016-पीएसयू/9246]
टी. जी. रवी()न, अवर सिचव
Mumbai, the 11th July, 2017
S.O. 2211.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised
Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971), the Central Government hereby appoints the officer mentioned in column (1) of the
Table given below, being an officer equivalent to the rank of a Gazetted Officer of the Government, to be estate officer
for the purposes of the said Act, who shall exercise the powers conferred and perform the duties imposed on estate
officer by or under the said Act within the local limits of his jurisdiction in respect of the public premises specified in
column (2) of the said Table:
TABLE
[F. No. 3/10(28)/2016-PSU/9246]
T.G. RAVEENDRAN, Under Secy.
lw{e] y?kq vkSj e/;e m|e ea=ky;
ubZ fnYyh] 13 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2212-&dsUnzh; ljdkj] jktHkk"kk ¼la?k ds 'kkldh; iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx½ fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e 10 ds mi
fu;e ¼4½ ds vuqlj.k esa] lw{e] y?kq vkSj e/;e m|e ea=ky; ds fu;a=.kk/khu d;j cksMZ ds fuEufyf[kr 7 mi dk;kZy;ksa
ftuds 80 izfr'kr ls vf/kd deZpkfj;ksa us fganh dk dk;Zlk/kd Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS] dks ,rn~}kjk vf/klwfpr djrh gS%
1-
कयर बोड@ शो9म व िबG िडपो, “ाण िवजय”, टाइस ऑफ इि(डया के पास, बाटा शो9म के सामने, आ,म रोड,
अहमदाबाद – 380009, भारत सरकार
2-
कयर बोड@ शो9म व िबG िडपो, 182 वेट मासी Tीट, टी.एम. कोट@ के पास, मदुरै – 625001
Designation of the officer
Public premises
(1)
(2)
Chief Manager (HRM), Indian Rare Earths Limited
(IREL), Plot No.1207, Veer Savarkar Marg, Near Siddhi
Vinayak Temple, Prabhadevi, Mumbai -400 028.
Premises belonging to or taken on lease for the Indian
Rare Earths Limited (IREL) in Mumbai.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7243
3-
कयर बोड@ उप xे4ीय काया@लय, कमरा सं. 207, पहली मंिजल िजला शासिनक कॉपलेQस, शासिनक संकुल,
_संधुदुग@ नगरी, ओरोस – 416812
4-
कयर बोड@ शो9म व िबG के(), वेट पिल ानम िब_डंग, 28/8761 कNणाकरन नंिबयार रोड, तृcशूर –
686020
5-
कयर बोड@ उप xे4ीय काया@लय, एएसआईडीसी कॉपलेQस, बामुनी मैदान गुवाहटी-781021
6-
कयर बोड@ उप ादेिशक काया@लय, उ^ोग िनदेशालय काया@लय, लxीप संघ राIय xे4, कवर ी-682555
7-
कयर बोड@ उप ादेिशक काया@लय, माधवा एपाट@म8ट, तेषु|ल पीिडका, मेले चौआ पी.ओ. कणूर – 670002
[la- bZ&12016@01@2005-fganh]
vydk vjksM+k] la;qDr lfpo
MINISTRY OF MICRO, SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISES
New Delhi, the 13th September, 2017
S.O. 2212.—In pursuance of sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Languages (Use for official purposes of
the Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies the following offices of Coir Board under the control
of the Ministry of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises,whose more than 80% staff has acquired working knowledge in
Hindi:
1.
Coir Board Showroom & Sales Depot, “Pran Vijay” Near Times of India, Opp. Bata Showroom,
Ashram Road, Ahmedabad – 380009
2.
Coir Board Showroom & Sales Depot, 182-West Masi Street, Near T.M. Court, Madurai-625001
3.
Coir Board Sub Regional Office, Room No. 207, 1st Floor, District Administration Complex,
Sindhudurgnagari, Navnagar, Oras, Sindhudurg-416812
4.
Coir Board Showroom & Sales Depot, West Pallithanam Building, 28/8761, Karunakaran Nambiar
Road, Thrissur-686020
5.
Coir Board Sub Regional Office, ASIDC Complex, Bamuni Maidan, Guwahati- 781021
6.
Coir Board Sub Regional Office, Office of the Directorate of Industries, U.T. Lakshadweep,
Kavarathi-682555
7.
Coir Board Sub Regional Office, Madhava Apartment, Thezhukkil Peedika, Mele Chovva P.O.,
Kannur – 670 006
[No. E-12016/01/2005-Hindi]
ALKA ARORA, Jt. Secy.
कोयला मंालय
कोयला मंालय
कोयला मंालय
कोयला मंालय
नई दली, 19 िसतबर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2213
2213
2213
2213.—के()ीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक xे4 (अज@न और िवकास) अिधिनयम 1957 (1957 का 20) (िजस इसम8
इसके प}ात् उ" अिधिनयम कहा गया है) क धारा 9 क उप-धारा (1) के अधीन जारी क गई भारत सरकार के कोयला मं4ालय क
अिधसूचना संJयांक का. आ. 1884(अ), तारीख 13 जून, 2017, भारत के राजप4, असाधारण, भाग II, खड 3, उप-खड (ii),
तारीख 13 जून, 2017 म8 कािशत होने पर, उ" अिधसूचना से संल~ अनुसूची म8 वणत भूिम और भूिम म8, या उस पर के अिधकार
(िजसे इसम8 इसके प}ात् उ" भूिम कहा गया है) उ" अिधिनयम क धारा 10 क उप-धारा (1) के अधीन, सभी िवलंगम# से मु"
होकर आ5यांितक 9प म8 के()ीय सरकार म8 िनिहत हो गए थे;
7244
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
और के()ीय सरकार का यह समाधान हो गया क ईटन@ कोलफस िलिमटेड, सांकतोिड़या, डाकघर िडसेरगढ़, िजला –
बM@वान – 713333, पि}म बंगाल (िजसे इसम8 इसके प}ात् उ" कंपनी कहा गया है), ऐसे िनबंधन# और शत का, जो के()ीय सरकार
इस िनिम अिधरोिपत करना उिचत समझे, अनुपालन करने के िलए तैयार है;
अत: अब, के()ीय सरकार, उ" अिधिनयम क धारा 11 क उप-धारा (1) ारा द शि"य# का योग करते &ए, यह िनदेश
देती है क इस कार िनिहत उ" भूिम और उस पर के सभी अिधकार, तारीख 13 जून, 2017 से के()ीय सरकार म8 इस कार िनिहत
बने रहने क बजाय, िनmिलिखत िनबंधन# और शत के अधीन रहते &ए, उ" कंपनी म8 िनिहत हो जाएंगे, अथा@त् ;
(1) सरकारी कंपनी, उ" अिधिनयम के उपबंध# के अधीन यथा अवधा?रत ितकर, Bयाज, नुकसान और वैसी ही मद# क
बाबत कए गए सभी संदाय# क के()ीय सरकार को ितपूUत@ करेगी;
(2) कंपनी ारा शत@ (1) के अधीन, के()ीय सरकार को संदेय रकम# का अवधारण करने के योजन के िलए एक अिधकरण का
गठन कया जाएगा तथा ऐसे कसी अिधकरण और उ" अिधकरण क सहायता करने के िलए िनयु" ि"य# के संबंध म8
उपगत सभी य, उ" कंपनी ारा वहन कए जाय8गे और इस पर कार िनिहत उ" भूिम म8 या उस पर के अिधकार के
िलए या उसके संबंध म8 जैसे अपील आद, सभी िविधक काय@वािहय# क बाबत उपगत, सभी य भी, इसी कार उ"
कंपनी ारा वहन कये जाय8गे;
(3) सरकारी कंपनी, के()ीय सरकार या उसके पदािधका?रय# क, ऐसे कसी अ(य य के संबंध म8, xितपूUत@ कर8गी जो इस
कार िनिहत उ" भूिम म8 या उस पर के अिधकार# के बारे म8, के()ीय सरकार या उसके पदािधका?रय# ारा या उनके
िव9M क(ह काय@वािहय# के संबंध म8 आवcयक हो;
(4) सरकारी कंपनी को, के()ीय सरकार के पूव@ अनुमोदन के िबना, उ" भूिम और भूिम म8 या उसके ऊपर इस कार िनिहत
अिधकार को कसी अ(य ि" को अंत?रत करने क शि" नह होगी ; और
(5) सरकारी कंपनी,ऐसे िनदेश# और शत को, जो के()ीय सरकार ारा, जब कभी आवcयक हो, उ" भूिम के िविशz xे4# के
िलए दए जाएं या अिधरोिपत कये जाएं, पालन करेगी।
[फा. सं. 43015/24/2017-एलए एड आईआर]
आर. एस. सरोज, अवर सिचव
MINISTRY OF COAL
New Delhi, the 19th September, 2017
S.O. 2213.—Whereas, on the publication of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal,
number S.O. 1884(E), dated the 13th June, 2017 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II Section 3,Sub-
section (ii), dated the 13th June, 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 all rights in or over the
land described in the Schedule appended to the said notification (hereinafter referred to as the said lands) 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 Eastern Coalfields Limited, Sanctoria, Post Office
Dishergarh, District – Burdwan-713333,West Bengal (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 rights in or over the said lands so vested shall, with effect from dated the 13th June,
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 respects of
compensation, interest, damages and the like, as determined under the provision of the said Act;
(2)
A Tribunal shall be constituted 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 said Tribunal shall be borne by the
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7245
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 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 to any other persons 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. 43015/24/2017-LA & IR]
R. S. SAROJ, Under Secy.
ubZ fnYyh] 19 flrEcj] 2017
dk
dk
dk
dk-vk
vkvk
vk- 2214
2214
2214
2214-&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=] vlk/kkj.k] Hkkx AA] [kaM 3]
mi&[kaM ¼AaAa½] rkjh[k 18 vxLr] 2017 esa izdkf’kr Hkkjr ljdkj ds dks;yk ea=ky; dh vf/klwpuk la[;kad dk- vk-
2672¼v½] rkjh[k 16 vxLr] 2017 ds izdk’ku ij] mDr vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa of.kZr Hkwfe ¼ftls blesa blds
i’pkr~ mDr “wfe dgk x;k gS½ vkSj Hkwfe esa ;k ml ij ds Hkw&lrg vf/kdkj] mDr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 10 dh mi&/kkjk ¼a1½
ds v/khu] lHkh foYyaxeksa ls eqDr gksdj] vkR;akfrd :i ls dsUnzh; ljdkj esa fufgr gks x, Fks(
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 mDr ljdkjh dEiuh dgk x;k gS½] ,sls fuca/kuksa vkSj
’krksZa dk tks dsUnzh; ljdkj bl vk/kkj ij 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 1632-380 gsDVj ¼yxHkx½ vFkok 4033-61 ,dM+ ¼yxHkx½ Hkwfe vkSj ml ij ds
Hkw&lrg vf/kdkj] rkjh[k 18 vxLr] 2017 ls dsUnzh; ljdkj esa bl izdkj fufgr cus jgus dh ctk;] fuEufyf[kr fuca/kuksa
vkSj ’krksZa ds v/khu jgrs gq,] mDr 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 vkSj ,sls fdlh vf/kdj.k
vkSj mDr vf/kdj.k dh lgk;rk djus ds fy;s fu;qDr O;fDr;ksa ds laca/kkas 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
mDr ljdkjh dEiuh }kjk ogu fd;s tk;saxs;
¼3½
ljdkjh dEiuh] dsUnzh; ljdkj ;k mlds ink/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:) fdUgh 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 ikyu djsxh] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj }kjk vkSj tc dHkh vko’;d gks]
mDr Hkwfe ds fof’k"V {ks=ksa ds fy;s fn, tk,a ;k vf/kjksfir dh tk, A
[Qk- la- 43015@35@2017&,y, ,.M vkbZvkj]
vkj- ,l- ljkst] voj lfpo
7246
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 19th September, 2017
S.O. 2214.—Whereas on the publication of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal,
number S.O. 2672(E), dated the 16th August, 2017 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3,
Sub-section (ii), dated the 18th August, 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 surface
rights in or over the land described in the Schedule appended to the said notification (hereinafter referred to as the said
lands) 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 directs that the surface rights of 1632.380 hectares (approximately) or 4033.61
acres(approximately) in or over the said lands so vested shall with effect from the 18th August, 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 said
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
(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. 43015/35/2017-LA & IR]
R. S. SAROJ, Under Secy.
isVªksfy;e vkSj izkÑfrd xSl ea=ky;
ubZ fnYyh] 14 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2215-&dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksdfgr esa ;g vko’;d gS fd egkjk"Vª jkT; esa
iSVªksfy;e inkFkksZ ds ifjogu ds fy, Þdks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj iSVªksfy;e ikbiykbu ifj;kstuk ds fdz;kUo;u gsrq
bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg,%
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko’;d izrhr gksrk gS fd ,slh Hkwfe esa tks bl
ls mikCk) vuqlwfp esa of.kZr gS] vkSj ftlesa mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS] mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k
tk,(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] iSVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e] 1962
¼1962 dk 50½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ml Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu
djus ds vius vk’k; dh ?kks"k.kk djrh gS%
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwPkh esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks bl vf/klwpuk esa ;qDr “kjr ds
jkti= dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gSa] bDdhl fnu ds “hrj] Hkwfe ds uhps ikbiykbZu fcNk, tkus
ds fy, mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds lacU/k esa Jh ,- ch- eksgsdj uk;c dysDVj ¼vodk’k izkIr½ l{ke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7247
vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM] nwljh eafty 4@1] ojn ladqy नांदगांव lM+d] euekM egkjk"Vª & 423104 dks fyf[kr :i eas
vk{ksi Hkst ldsxkA
vuqlwph
rkyqdk%&ekysxkao
ftyk%& ukfld
jkT;%& egkjk"Vª
ekSts@xzke
losZ@CykWd@ la-
¼IykWV la-½
lc&Mho&la-
{ks=Qy
हेQटs;र
आर
oxZ ehVj
1
2
3
4
5
6
/kqa/ks
/k,/kj unh
00
02
22
373
00
22
94
374
00
35
11
375
00
36
53
309
00
09
03
ugj
00
00
73
308
00
07
55
307
00
08
64
306
00
09
64
305
00
30
74
jkLrk
00
02
10
304
00
39
36
303
00
17
88
302
00
13
73
301
00
03
63
299
00
35
31
jkLrk
00
02
27
317
01
78
02
ryokMs
958
00
46
02
ukyk
00
07
14
952
00
03
40
969
00
43
65
974
00
16
76
973
00
16
30
975
00
12
94
978
00
58
25
943
00
17
01
ukyk
00
01
54
942
00
29
35
923
00
17
00
924
00
14
89
7248
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
dPpk jkLrk
00
03
01
898
00
22
10
897
00
04
23
896
00
04
74
145
00
09
32
895
00
21
03
890
00
24
50
889
00
16
04
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
23
879
00
00
81
885
00
14
83
883
00
20
25
882
00
10
25
881
00
00
48
880
00
28
64
884
00
00
20
823
00
04
43
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
61
818
00
14
42
819
00
34
70
820
00
07
85
814
00
31
30
ika<#.k
131
00
92
39
ukyk
00
03
68
dPpk jkLrk
00
04
47
129
00
41
29
124
00
00
28
125
00
07
02
126
00
02
78
128
00
00
45
jkLrk
00
06
96
ugj
00
02
05
152
00
08
66
146
00
16
79
ukyk
00
00
20
151
00
17
97
150
00
27
15
175
00
04
42
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7249
173
00
25
86
174
00
06
18
172
00
15
92
171
00
00
86
194
00
17
82
210
00
10
45
211
00
19
40
209
00
19
49
208
00
03
35
219
00
30
64
218
00
60
26
jkLrk
00
02
52
223
00
00
20
229
00
57
36
231
00
04
43
232
00
38
19
240
00
18
43
239
00
27
42
242
00
30
51
/koys'oj
jkLrk
00
00
25
409
00
55
41
406
00
11
81
405
00
11
92
404
00
14
41
395
00
76
86
398
00
20
74
384
00
08
57
ukyk
00
03
42
358
00
30
75
357
00
44
31
350
00
08
47
353
00
00
20
351
00
19
07
352
00
17
96
333
00
22
38
332
00
11
02
330
00
03
05
331
00
06
49
7250
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
329
00
09
80
327
00
07
28
324
00
08
78
322
00
12
46
321
00
12
92
,l ,p&19
00
01
89
vk?kkj cqæq[k
,l ,p&19
00
01
59
228
00
27
44
233
00
18
29
235
00
00
20
234
00
08
55
223
00
02
88
222
00
22
99
221
00
11
72
218
00
24
94
217
00
30
90
dPpk jkLrk
00
02
71
138
00
18
20
137
00
13
63
136
00
17
12
104
00
15
66
103
00
04
63
88
00
28
88
87
00
44
49
89
00
18
18
90
00
02
57
82
00
17
47
81
00
12
22
76
00
41
64
jkLrk
00
02
71
77
00
10
83
55
00
35
87
53
00
27
29
fxjuk unh
00
22
91
fpapkoM
unh
00
07
34
23
00
28
77
,e Mh vkj&54
00
02
63
48
00
26
15
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7251
50
00
22
96
51
00
21
55
47
00
17
88
46
00
09
71
118
00
30
43
dPpk jkLrk
00
02
08
dPpk jkLrk
00
04
11
189
00
48
54
192
00
14
08
200
00
10
33
198
00
09
08
197
00
01
96
202
00
14
03
203
00
15
61
206
00
13
58
205
00
12
16
209
00
59
82
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
51
216
00
42
21
215
00
05
55
230
00
19
59
231
00
94
48
[kkjh unh
00
04
02
vk?kkj [kqZn
[kkjh unh
00
04
23
670
00
22
85
669
00
32
74
jkLrk
00
04
35
655
00
52
28
651
00
04
50
650
00
08
39
649
00
13
77
648
00
18
66
647
00
16
84
645
00
00
75
646
00
22
10
ugj
00
02
57
135
00
35
92
ukanxkao
138
00
11
55
7252
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
137
00
07
35
unh
00
06
96
191
00
07
31
192
00
18
89
189
00
16
44
188
00
11
71
184
00
07
27
183
00
07
08
180
00
06
83
176
00
02
10
179
00
20
43
jkLrk
00
03
16
400
00
19
78
399
00
00
20
402
00
24
27
396
00
26
57
398
00
06
39
389
00
08
43
387
00
28
29
386
00
07
03
382
00
47
66
384
00
02
11
383
00
31
77
524
00
07
35
xykFkh unh
00
05
56
okds
unh
00
06
39
158
00
39
01
157
00
03
82
156
00
47
03
jkLrk
00
10
00
Ukgj
00
01
86
155
00
01
49
jkLrk
00
02
33
144
00
19
44
145
00
10
83
MhokbMj
00
00
77
139
00
03
94
137
00
25
13
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7253
l©ank.ks
175
00
33
33
176
00
06
19
/koyh unh
00
05
47
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
55
/koyh unh
00
01
72
ukyk
00
12
01
/koyh unh
00
00
20
Vkdyh
ukyk
00
10
93
431
00
04
26
426
00
21
31
427
00
12
09
423
00
04
16
424
00
10
85
417
00
08
85
418
00
00
20
416
00
11
36
400
00
14
27
401
00
63
21
ugj
00
01
05
402
00
09
90
jkLrk
00
01
74
631
00
13
71
630
00
13
46
629
00
11
86
861
00
08
10
628
00
12
59
627
00
25
29
626
00
28
61
69
00
00
57
639
00
10
84
642
00
13
88
643
00
11
70
644
00
09
66
645
00
00
20
646
00
26
45
647
00
06
46
649
00
16
26
648
00
00
20
7254
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
jkLrk
00
01
76
650
00
04
97
651
00
05
20
652
00
03
33
jkLrk
00
03
70
ugj
00
01
31
654
00
08
23
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
49
716
00
13
24
834
00
00
34
836
00
28
75
835
00
00
22
840
00
23
94
839
00
00
96
853
00
09
87
856
00
26
37
862
00
10
60
863
00
11
23
lksut
dPpk jkLrk
00
02
43
1018
00
18
78
1017
00
04
60
1016
00
03
22
1015
00
06
50
1014
00
00
48
1013
00
03
79
1012
00
03
42
1011
00
07
09
1010
00
35
12
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
46
ekatjs
53
00
09
53
55
00
33
68
56
00
03
02
50
00
14
05
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
49
60
00
33
44
68
00
02
91
66
00
00
20
67
00
14
44
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7255
74
00
11
33
72
00
08
37
jkLrk
00
02
80
73
00
18
68
75
00
00
38
82
00
04
56
80
00
07
65
81
00
12
72
85
00
00
20
89
00
03
19
88
00
03
08
90
00
03
80
87
00
00
20
92
00
11
72
86
00
15
32
95
00
07
03
96
00
07
97
113
00
17
34
112
00
17
81
118
00
25
10
ugj
00
03
71
117
00
31
40
174
00
17
91
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
23
174
00
16
94
175
00
15
74
jkLrk
00
03
49
176
00
28
37
177
00
45
24
216
00
34
05
213
00
23
30
272
00
15
88
273
00
16
07
274
00
13
62
275
00
08
04
277
00
08
76
276
00
16
62
282
00
47
66
7256
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
jkLrk
00
02
10
286
00
30
39
281
00
56
17
tyxkao ¼fuack;rh½
jkLrk
00
01
28
86
00
28
14
85
00
33
30
84
00
00
55
81
00
11
18
83
00
18
07
82
00
46
36
80
00
52
80
79
00
34
51
78
00
24
63
73
00
00
20
76
00
31
48
jkLrk
00
02
36
72
00
09
90
66
00
44
21
64
00
26
81
63
00
40
89
57
00
09
49
61
00
33
87
lq[kh unh
00
13
14
646
00
11
34
647
00
04
62
645
00
28
78
jkLrk
00
02
08
649
00
25
17
651
00
12
11
ukyk
00
12
83
655
00
07
18
654
00
21
09
653
00
34
16
635
00
41
21
634
00
22
23
,l ,p &10
00
06
48
604
00
49
11
605
00
34
58
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7257
606
00
09
22
612
00
08
18
610
00
08
37
613
00
51
33
614
00
32
81
568
00
15
89
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
53
pksa<h
64
00
40
84
69
00
16
36
ukyk
00
21
90
35
00
18
29
62
00
41
98
36
00
49
02
37
00
09
56
32
00
60
07
31
00
07
94
26
00
00
20
27
00
56
03
dPpk jkLrk
00
03
38
18
00
43
74
19
00
14
16
16
00
40
52
15
00
52
47
156
00
09
34
154
00
39
74
153
00
27
84
150
00
44
89
jkLrk
00
02
72
149
00
40
67
cks;xkao
25
00
08
52
143
00
45
25
142
00
29
64
dPpk jkLrk
00
02
46
122
00
18
09
HkkMhZ
106
00
05
58
105
00
22
68
104
00
22
98
103
00
49
81
7258
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
102
00
40
35
101
00
39
68
100
00
25
37
ukyk
00
04
12
uoljh
179
00
23
62
178
00
11
24
177
00
22
85
jkLrk
00
03
54
162
00
27
37
ukyk
00
07
27
160
00
09
43
159
00
08
12
158
00
11
77
157
00
03
83
156
00
21
35
161
00
00
20
154
00
10
13
155
00
20
53
122
00
45
72
120
00
41
97
119
00
23
46
[kkrxkao
ukyk
00
03
78
34
00
58
17
37
00
97
81
1
00
13
95
2
00
21
90
jkLrk
00
02
82
288
00
51
43
ukyk
00
05
46
289
00
20
69
jkLrk
00
01
79
302
00
08
96
298
00
04
56
299
00
15
72
300
00
20
42
301
00
07
92
ukyk
00
03
61
305
00
25
96
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7259
206
00
17
87
,e Mh vkj&23
00
03
21
205
00
16
50
204
00
14
71
203
00
08
38
202
00
45
38
201
00
24
39
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
20
vkLrsxkao
dPpk jkLrk
00
05
11
26
00
12
45
36
00
31
23
34
00
21
85
35
00
23
80
42
00
00
32
41
00
04
55
43
00
05
73
44
00
04
27
ukyk
00
22
74
54 iSdh
00
30
53
55
00
52
21
54
00
03
57
105
00
20
12
106
00
76
24
109
00
68
90
jkLrk
00
01
02
120
00
23
62
121
00
73
94
unh
00
15
30
122
00
41
97
123
00
35
33
124
00
19
95
125
00
10
75
[फा. सं. आर-25011/41/2017-ओआर-I]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
7260
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2017
S.O. 2215.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for
the transportation of Petroleum from the State of Maharashtra a pipeline should be laid for implementing Koyali -
Ahmednagar – Solapur Pipeline Project under Koyali – Ahmednagar Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is
necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is
described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and
Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby
declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person who is interested in the land described in the said Schedule may submit objection in writing to Shri
A.B.Mohekar, Deputy Collector (Retd.) Competent Authority Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Second floor, 4/1, Varad
Sankul, Nandgaon Road, Manmad – 423104, Maharashtra. Within twenty one days from the date on which the copies
of this notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India, are
made available to the general public.
SCHEDULE
Taluka:- Malegaon
District:- Nashik
State :- Maharashtra
Mauje / Village
Survey/Block No.
Sub-Div-No.
Area
Hectare
Are
Sq.mtr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Dundhe
Dhaedhar River
00
02
22
373
00
22
94
374
00
35
11
375
00
36
53
309
00
09
03
Field Channel
00
00
73
308
00
07
55
307
00
08
64
306
00
09
64
305
00
30
74
Metal Road
00
02
10
304
00
39
36
303
00
17
88
302
00
13
73
301
00
03
63
299
00
35
31
Asphalt Road
00
02
27
317
01
78
02
Talwade
958
00
46
02
Nala
00
07
14
952
00
03
40
969
00
43
65
974
00
16
76
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7261
973
00
16
30
975
00
12
94
978
00
58
25
943
00
17
01
Nala
00
01
54
942
00
29
35
923
00
17
00
924
00
14
89
Cart Track
00
03
01
898
00
22
10
897
00
04
23
896
00
04
74
145
00
09
32
895
00
21
03
890
00
24
50
889
00
16
04
Cart Track
00
01
23
879
00
00
81
885
00
14
83
883
00
20
25
882
00
10
25
881
00
00
48
880
00
28
64
884
00
00
20
823
00
04
43
Cart Track
00
00
61
818
00
14
42
819
00
34
70
820
00
07
85
814
00
31
30
Pandharun
131
00
92
39
Nala
00
03
68
Cart Track
00
04
47
129
00
41
29
124
00
00
28
125
00
07
02
126
00
02
78
128
00
00
45
Service Road
00
06
96
Canal
00
02
05
152
00
08
66
7262
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
146
00
16
79
Nala
00
00
20
151
00
17
97
150
00
27
15
175
00
04
42
173
00
25
86
174
00
06
18
172
00
15
92
171
00
00
86
194
00
17
82
210
00
10
45
211
00
19
40
209
00
19
49
208
00
03
35
219
00
30
64
218
00
60
26
Road
00
02
52
223
00
00
20
229
00
57
36
231
00
04
43
232
00
38
19
240
00
18
43
239
00
27
42
242
00
30
51
Dhavleshwar
Metal Road
00
00
25
409
00
55
41
406
00
11
81
405
00
11
92
404
00
14
41
395
00
76
86
398
00
20
74
384
00
08
57
Nala
00
03
42
358
00
30
75
357
00
44
31
350
00
08
47
353
00
00
20
351
00
19
07
352
00
17
96
333
00
22
38
332
00
11
02
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7263
330
00
03
05
331
00
06
49
329
00
09
80
327
00
07
28
324
00
08
78
322
00
12
46
321
00
12
92
SH-19
00
01
89
Aadhar Budrukh
SH-19
00
01
59
228
00
27
44
233
00
18
29
235
00
00
20
234
00
08
55
223
00
02
88
222
00
22
99
221
00
11
72
218
00
24
94
217
00
30
90
Cart Track
00
02
71
138
00
18
20
137
00
13
63
136
00
17
12
104
00
15
66
103
00
04
63
88
00
28
88
87
00
44
49
89
00
18
18
90
00
02
57
82
00
17
47
81
00
12
22
76
00
41
64
Metal Road
00
02
71
77
00
10
83
55
00
35
87
53
00
27
29
Girna River
00
22
91
Chinchavad
River
00
07
34
23
00
28
77
Mdr-54
00
02
63
48
00
26
15
50
00
22
96
7264
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
51
00
21
55
47
00
17
88
46
00
09
71
118
00
30
43
Cart Track
00
02
08
Cart Track
00
04
11
189
00
48
54
192
00
14
08
200
00
10
33
198
00
09
08
197
00
01
96
202
00
14
03
203
00
15
61
206
00
13
58
205
00
12
16
209
00
59
82
Cart Track
00
00
51
216
00
42
21
215
00
05
55
230
00
19
59
231
00
94
48
Khari Nadi
00
04
02
Aadhar Khurd
Khari Nadi
00
04
23
670
00
22
85
669
00
32
74
Asphalted Road
00
04
35
655
00
52
28
651
00
04
50
650
00
08
39
649
00
13
77
648
00
18
66
647
00
16
84
645
00
00
75
646
00
22
10
Unlined Canal
00
02
57
Nandgaon
135
00
35
92
138
00
11
55
137
00
07
35
Nadi
00
06
96
191
00
07
31
192
00
18
89
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7265
189
00
16
44
188
00
11
71
184
00
07
27
183
00
07
08
180
00
06
83
176
00
02
10
179
00
20
43
Asphalted Road
00
03
16
400
00
19
78
399
00
00
20
402
00
24
27
396
00
26
57
398
00
06
39
389
00
08
43
387
00
28
29
386
00
07
03
382
00
47
66
384
00
02
11
383
00
31
77
524
00
07
35
Galathi Nadi
00
05
56
Wake
Nadi
00
06
39
158
00
39
01
157
00
03
82
156
00
47
03
Road
00
10
00
Unlined Canal
00
01
86
155
00
01
49
Metal Road
00
02
33
144
00
19
44
145
00
10
83
Divider
00
00
77
139
00
03
94
137
00
25
13
Saudane
175
00
33
33
176
00
06
19
Dhavli NadI
00
05
47
Cart Track
00
00
55
Dhavli NadI
00
01
72
Nala
00
12
01
Dhavli NadI
00
00
20
7266
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Takali
Nala
00
10
93
431
00
04
26
426
00
21
31
427
00
12
09
423
00
04
16
424
00
10
85
417
00
08
85
418
00
00
20
416
00
11
36
400
00
14
27
401
00
63
21
Unlined Canal
00
01
05
402
00
09
90
Road
00
01
74
631
00
13
71
630
00
13
46
629
00
11
86
861
00
08
10
628
00
12
59
627
00
25
29
626
00
28
61
69
00
00
57
639
00
10
84
642
00
13
88
643
00
11
70
644
00
09
66
645
00
00
20
646
00
26
45
647
00
06
46
649
00
16
26
648
00
00
20
Metal Road
00
01
76
650
00
04
97
651
00
05
20
652
00
03
33
Road
00
03
70
Unlined Canal
00
01
31
654 Paiky
00
08
23
Cart Track
00
01
49
716
00
13
24
834
00
00
34
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7267
836
00
28
75
835
00
00
22
840
00
23
94
839
00
00
96
853
00
09
87
856
00
26
37
862
00
10
60
863
00
11
23
Sonaj
CTR
00
02
43
1018
00
18
78
1017
00
04
60
1016
00
03
22
1015
00
06
50
1014
00
00
48
1013
00
03
79
1012
00
03
42
1011
00
07
09
1010
00
35
12
CTR
00
01
46
Manjare
53
00
09
53
55
00
33
68
56
00
03
02
50
00
14
05
Cart Track
00
01
49
60
00
33
44
68
00
02
91
66
00
00
20
67
00
14
44
74
00
11
33
72
00
08
37
Asphalted Road
00
02
80
73
00
18
68
75
00
00
38
82
00
04
56
80
00
07
65
81
00
12
72
85
00
00
20
89
00
03
19
88
00
03
08
90
00
03
80
87
00
00
20
7268
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
92
00
11
72
86
00
15
32
95
00
07
03
96
00
07
97
113
00
17
34
112
00
17
81
118
00
17
40
Unlined Canal
00
03
71
118 Paiky
00
07
70
117
00
31
40
174
00
17
91
Cart Track
00
01
23
174
00
16
94
175
00
15
74
Metal Road
00
03
49
176
00
28
37
177
00
45
24
216
00
34
05
213
00
23
30
272
00
15
88
273
00
16
07
274
00
13
62
275
00
08
04
277
00
08
76
276
00
16
62
282
00
47
66
Metal Road
00
02
10
286
00
30
39
281Paiky
00
56
17
Jalgoan (Nimbayti)
Asphalted Road
00
01
28
86
00
28
14
85
00
33
30
84
00
00
55
83
00
18
07
82
00
46
36
81
00
11
18
80
00
52
80
79
00
34
51
78
00
24
63
73
00
00
20
76
00
31
48
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7269
Metal Road
00
02
36
72
00
09
90
66
00
44
21
64
00
26
81
63
00
40
89
57
00
09
49
61
00
33
87
Sukhi Nadi
00
13
14
646
00
11
34
647
00
04
62
645
00
28
78
Ashphalted Road
00
02
08
649
00
25
17
651
00
12
11
Nala
00
12
83
655
00
07
18
654
00
21
09
653
00
34
16
635
00
41
21
634
00
22
23
SH-10
00
06
48
604
00
49
11
605
00
34
58
606
00
09
22
612
00
08
18
610
00
08
37
613
00
51
33
614
00
32
81
568
00
15
89
Cart Track
00
01
53
Chondhi
64
00
40
84
69
00
16
36
Nala
00
21
90
35
00
18
29
62
00
41
98
36
00
49
02
37
00
09
56
32
00
60
07
31
00
07
94
26
00
00
20
27
00
56
03
7270
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Cart Track
00
03
38
18
00
43
74
19
00
14
16
16
00
40
52
15
00
52
47
156
00
09
34
154
00
39
74
153
00
27
84
150
00
44
89
Metal Road
00
02
72
149
00
40
67
Boygaon
25
00
08
52
143
00
45
25
142
00
29
64
Cart Track
00
02
46
122
00
18
09
Bhardi
106
00
05
58
105
00
22
68
104
00
22
98
103
00
49
81
102
00
40
35
101
00
39
68
100
00
25
37
Nala
00
04
12
Nawasari
179
00
23
62
178
00
11
24
177
00
22
85
Asphalt Road
00
03
54
162
00
27
37
Nala
00
07
27
160
00
09
43
159
00
08
12
158
00
11
77
157
00
03
83
156
00
21
35
161
00
00
20
154
00
10
13
155
00
20
53
122
00
45
72
120
00
41
97
119
00
23
46
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7271
Khatgaon
Nala
00
03
78
34
00
58
17
37
00
97
81
1
00
13
95
2
00
21
90
Metal Road
00
02
82
288
00
51
43
Nala
00
05
46
289
00
20
69
Asphalted Road
00
01
79
302
00
08
96
298
00
04
56
299
00
15
72
300
00
20
42
301
00
07
92
Nala
00
03
61
305
00
25
96
206
00
17
87
MDR-23
00
03
21
205
00
16
50
204
00
14
71
203
00
08
38
202
00
45
38
201
00
24
39
Cart Track
00
00
20
Aastegaon
Cart Track
00
05
11
26
00
12
45
36
00
31
23
34
00
21
85
35
00
23
80
42
00
00
32
41
00
04
55
43
00
05
73
44
00
04
27
Nala
00
22
74
54Paiky
00
30
53
55
00
52
21
54
00
03
57
105
00
20
12
106
00
76
24
109
00
68
90
7272
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Metal Road
00
01
02
120
00
23
62
121
00
73
94
River
00
15
30
122
00
41
97
123
00
35
33
124
00
19
95
125
00
10
75
[F. No. R-25011/41/2017-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
ubZ fnYyh] 14 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2216-&dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksdfgr esa ;g vko’;d gS fd egkjk"Vª jkT; esa
iSVªksfy;e inkFkksZ ds ifjogu ds fy, Þdks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj iSVªksfy;e ikbiykbu ifj;kstuk ds fdz;kUo;u gsrq
bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg,%
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko’;d izrhr gksrk gS fd ,slh Hkwfe esa tks bl
ls mikCk) vuqlwfp esa of.kZr gS] vkSj ftlesa mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS] mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k
tk,(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] iSVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e] 1962
¼1962 dk 50½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ml Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu
djus ds vius vk’k; dh ?kks"k.kk djrh gS%
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwPkh esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks bl vf/klwpuk esa ;qDr “kjr ds
jkti= dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gSa] bDdhl fnu ds “hrj] Hkwfe ds uhps ikbiykbZu fcNk, tkus
ds fy, mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds lacU?k esa Jh ,- ch- eksgsdj uk;c dysDVj ¼vodk’k izkIr½ l{ke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u
vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM] nwljh eafty 4@1] ojn ladqy, नांदगांव lM+d] euekM egkjk"Vª & 423104 dks fyf[kr :i eas
vk{ksi Hkst ldsxkA
vuqlwph
rkyqdk%&uaknxkao
ftyk%& ukfld
jkT;%& egkjk"Vª
ekSts@xzke
losZ @ Cykd @ la-
¼IyksV la-½
lc&Mho&la-
{ks=Qy
हेQटर
आर
oxZ ehVj
1
2
3
4
5
6
dâh
55
00
74
56
jkLrk
00
03
21
51
00
37
00
46
00
13
99
45
00
10
50
39
00
09
34
38
00
00
20
40
00
06
32
41
00
03
23
42
00
00
89
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7273
33
00
15
78
ukyk
00
01
94
lVk.ks
ukyk
00
01
80
6
00
21
84
7
00
45
81
8
00
38
68
9
00
36
59
jkLrk
00
01
60
10
00
29
38
11
00
05
49
ukyk
00
04
94
13
00
01
56
14
00
78
55
ukyk
00
03
35
15
00
42
52
oatkjokMh
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
48
237 iSdh
00
50
81
jkLrk
00
02
87
237
00
42
20
ukyk
00
01
93
236
00
19
03
jkLrk
00
01
42
193
00
06
16
192
00
04
61
191
00
04
52
190
00
05
98
185
00
09
14
183
00
04
63
182
00
03
56
179
00
07
59
165
00
17
97
166
00
03
83
jkLrk
00
03
10
153
00
93
78
ukyk
00
04
20
139
00
49
18
138
00
01
80
129
00
14
53
7274
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
128
00
26
53
126
00
00
39
127
00
19
09
119
00
31
19
124
00
34
15
121
00
26
72
[फा. सं. आर&25011@41@2017&ओआर&I]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2017
S.O. 2216.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for
the transportation of Petroleum from the State of Maharashtra a pipeline should be laid for implementing Koyali -
Ahmednagar – Solapur Pipeline Project under Koyali – Ahmednagar Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is
necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is
described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and
Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby
declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person who is interested in the land described in the said Schedule may submit objection in writing to Shri
A.B.Mohekar, Deputy Collector (Retd.) Competent Authority Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Second floor, 4/1, Varad
Sankul, Nandgaon Road, Manmad – 423 104, Maharashtra. Within twenty one days from the date on which the copies
of this notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India, are
made available to the general public.
SCHEDULE
Taluka:- Nandgaon
District:- Nashik
State :- Maharashtra
Mauje / Village
Survey/Block No.
Sub-Div-No.
Area
Hectare
Are
Sq.mtr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Karhi
55
00
74
56
Road
00
03
21
51
00
37
00
46
00
13
99
45
00
10
50
39
00
09
34
38
00
00
20
40
00
06
32
41
00
03
23
42
00
00
89
33
00
15
78
Nala
00
01
94
Satane
Nala
00
01
80
6
00
21
84
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7275
7
00
45
81
8
00
38
68
9
00
36
59
Road
00
01
60
10
00
29
38
11
00
05
49
Nala
00
04
94
13
00
01
56
14
00
78
55
Nala
00
03
35
15
00
42
52
Wanjarwadi
Cart Track
00
00
48
237Paiky
00
50
81
Road
00
02
87
237
00
42
20
Nala
00
01
93
236
00
19
03
Road
00
01
42
193
00
06
16
192
00
04
61
191
00
04
52
190
00
05
98
185
00
09
14
183
00
04
63
182
00
03
56
179
00
07
59
165
00
17
97
166
00
03
83
Road
00
03
10
153
00
93
78
Nala
00
04
20
139
00
49
18
138
00
01
80
129
00
14
53
128
00
26
53
126
00
00
39
127
00
19
09
119
00
31
19
124
00
34
15
121
00
26
72
[F. No. R-25011/41/2017-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
7276
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
नई दली, 14 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2217
2217
2217
2217.—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksdfgr esa ;g vko’;d gS fd egkjk"Vª jkT; esa
iSVªksfy;e inkFkksZ ds ifjogu ds fy, Þdks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj iSVªksfy;e ikbiykbu ifj;kstuk ds fdz;kUo;u gsrq
bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg,%
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko’;d izrhr gksrk gS fd ,slh Hkwfe esa tks bl
ls mikCk) vuqlwfp esa of.kZr gS] vkSj ftlesa mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS] mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k
tk,(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] iSVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e] 1962
¼1962 dk 50½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ml Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu
djus ds vius vk’k; dh ?kks"k.kk djrh gS%
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwPkh esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks bl vf/klwpuk esa ;qDr “kjr ds
jkti= dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gSa] bDdhl fnu ds “hrj] Hkwfe ds uhps ikbiykbZu fcNk, tkus
ds fy, mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds lacU?k esa Jh ,- ch- eksgsdj uk;c dysDVj ¼vodk’k izkIr½ l{ke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u
vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM] nwljh eafty 4@1] ojn ladqy नांदगांव lM+d] euekM egkjk"Vª & 423104 dks fyf[kr :i eas
vk{ksi Hkst ldsxkA
vuqlwPkh
rkyqdk%& नांदगांव
ftyk%& ukfld
jkT;%& egkjk"Vª
ekSts@xzke
losZ @ Cykd @ la-
¼IyksV la-½
lc&Mho&la-
{ks=Qy
हेQटर
आर
oxZ ehVj
1
2
3
4
5
6
ukxkiqj
12
00
88
16
9
00
48
85
8
00
21
99
7
00
19
97
6
00
19
58
5
00
19
45
4
00
18
45
3
00
22
86
32
00
24
08
31@iSdh
00
11
64
jkLrk
00
06
46
jsYOks
00
09
90
83
00
02
88
38@v
00
01
32
38
00
18
37
49
00
11
59
dPpk jkLrk
00
02
12
50 v
00
09
22
51
00
27
28
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7277
52
00
26
83
53
00
25
80
58
00
25
99
59
00
26
45
60
00
33
77
61
00
30
65
jkLrk
00
03
06
63
00
59
56
ukyk
00
05
02
[फा. सं. आर-25011/41/2017-ओआर-I]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2017
S.O. 2217.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for
the transportation of Petroleum from the State of Maharashtra a pipeline should be laid for implementing Koyali -
Ahmednagar – Solapur Pipeline Project under Koyali – Ahmednagar Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is
necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is
described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and
Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby
declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person who is interested in the land described in the said Schedule may submit objection in writing to
Shri A.B.Mohekar, Deputy Collector (Retd.) Competent Authority Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Second floor, 4/1,
Varad Sankul, Nandgaon Road, Manmad – 423104, Maharashtra. Within twenty one days from the date on which the
copies of this notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India,
are made available to the general public.
SCHEDULE
Taluka:- Nandgaon
District:- Nashik
State :- Maharashtra
Mauje / Village
Survey/Block No.
Sub-Div-No.
Area
Hectare
Are
Sq.mtr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Nagapur
12
00
88
16
9
00
48
85
8
00
21
99
7
00
19
97
6
00
19
58
5
00
19
45
4
00
18
45
3
00
22
86
31/Paiky
00
11
64
32
00
24
08
Road
00
06
46
7278
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Railway
00
09
90
83
00
02
88
38/A
00
01
32
38
00
18
37
49
00
11
59
Cart Track
00
02
12
50A
00
09
22
51
00
27
28
52
00
26
83
53
00
25
80
58
00
25
99
59
00
26
45
60
00
33
77
61
00
30
65
Asphalted Road
00
03
06
63
00
59
56
Nala
00
05
02
[F. No. R-25011/41/2017-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
नई दली, 14 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2218
2218
2218
2218.—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksdfgr esa ;g vko’;d gS fd egkjk"Vª jkT; esa
iSVªksfy;e inkFkksZ ds ifjogu ds fy, Þdks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj iSVªksfy;e ikbiykbu ifj;kstuk ds fdz;kUo;u gsrq
bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg,%
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko’;d izrhr gksrk gS fd ,slh Hkwfe esa tks bl
ls mikCk) vuqlwfp esa of.kZr gS] vkSj ftlesa mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS] mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k
tk,(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] iSVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e] 1962
¼1962 dk 50½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ml Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu
djus ds vius vk’k; dh ?kks"k.kk djrh gS%
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwPkh esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks bl vf/klwpuk esa ;qDr “kjr ds
jkti= dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gSa] bDdhl fnu ds “hrj] Hkwfe ds uhps ikbiykbZu fcNk, tkus
ds fy, mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds lacU?k esa Jh ,- ch- eksgsdj uk;c dysDVj ¼vodk’k izkIr½ l{ke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u
vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM] nwljh eafty 4@1] ojn ladqy नांदगांव lM+d] euekM egkjk"Vª & 423104 dks fyf[kr :i eas
vk{ksi Hkst ldsxkA
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
rkyqdk%&ckxyku
ftyk%& ukfld
jkT;%& egkjk"Vª
ekSts@xzke
losZ@Cyksd@la-
¼IyksV la-½
lc&Mho&la-
{ks=Qy
gsDVj
vkj
oxZ ehVj
1
2
3
4
5
6
t;iqj
111
00
88
45
102
00
14
95
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7279
103
00
27
58
104
00
34
94
105
00
31
34
106
00
01
89
108
00
00
32
107
00
55
41
ukyk
00
03
76
97
00
24
64
110
00
43
83
114
00
08
86
113
00
18
19
115
00
42
17
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
73
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
65
116
00
18
68
okMhfilksy
123
00
65
28
124
00
16
97
121
00
05
63
144
00
38
57
159
00
00
49
147
00
35
11
158
00
24
31
157
00
39
57
156
00
12
67
151
00
17
92
154
00
32
18
,dygjs
182
00
33
81
183
00
00
27
ukyk
00
04
03
181
00
20
71
ukyk
00
12
81
185
00
03
66
186
00
40
00
ugj
00
05
04
153
00
19
12
154
00
43
83
ukyk
00
01
31
145
00
16
42
7280
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
142
00
43
95
ukyk
00
02
86
130
00
23
73
131
00
35
15
jkLrk
00
01
70
132
00
29
23
128
00
12
62
99
00
22
91
98
00
54
80
97
00
15
74
96
00
00
67
95
00
14
80
94
00
17
54
92
00
19
92
90
00
28
08
Ckzkg~e.kikMs
213
00
08
18
206
00
48
87
dPpk jkLrk
00
03
06
203
00
13
85
204
00
15
10
200
00
21
96
190
00
47
12
189
00
03
73
186
00
42
92
185
00
01
45
jkLrk
00
05
09
184
00
02
47
283
00
33
10
279
00
04
46
280
00
25
07
285
00
42
95
288
00
33
94
289
00
50
09
ukyk
00
02
47
ok?kys
ukyk
00
03
60
295
00
03
62
290
00
40
89
289
00
00
20
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7281
287
00
33
81
283
00
30
64
280
00
05
67
jkLrk
00
01
33
284
00
17
16
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
27
275
00
06
76
307
00
46
52
316
00
23
52
315
00
35
67
314
00
20
12
313
00
09
89
312
00
09
80
321
00
26
54
jktiqjikMs
ukyk
00
00
47
jkLrk
00
02
19
50
00
47
38
ugj
00
01
90
49
00
00
87
ugj
00
01
32
51
00
13
28
47
00
14
75
46
00
11
43
45
00
00
63
44 v
00
36
15
25
00
03
73
101
00
13
06
102
00
18
76
103
00
23
77
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
64
124
00
15
66
125
00
14
62
jkLrk
00
03
05
118
00
00
70
117
00
06
59
126
00
15
14
127
00
19
10
128
00
00
20
7282
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
129
00
00
20
132
00
01
01
133
00
05
46
134
00
05
56
137
00
22
22
138
00
12
00
139
00
20
79
jkLrk
00
02
42
255
00
22
86
236
00
09
92
247
00
00
24
248
00
08
98
249
00
01
12
eksle unh
00
08
77
|kus
Ekksle unh
00
04
89
115
00
30
21
117
00
16
49
118
00
10
75
120
00
34
73
121
00
00
20
111
00
31
72
,l ,p&20
00
00
68
159
00
31
02
153
00
02
66
163
00
04
55
161
00
05
78
162
00
10
72
172
00
12
44
173
00
01
48
174
00
10
59
171
00
13
97
177
00
10
10
478
00
31
54
475
00
10
03
474
00
09
41
467
00
12
70
473
00
04
09
472
00
00
36
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7283
469
00
13
88
470
00
18
67
454
00
06
34
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
58
361
00
16
69
363
00
25
27
294
00
03
29
367
00
15
65
293
00
08
86
292
00
09
74
jkLrk
00
00
75
286
00
24
87
291
00
00
32
290
00
06
69
289
00
06
49
288
00
03
29
287
00
35
61
278
00
13
35
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
22
277
00
15
95
ukyk
00
03
77
ukeiqj
ukyk
00
02
55
dPpk jkLrk
00
02
07
416
00
45
73
383
00
01
61
386
00
02
39
387
00
14
83
388
00
13
41
389
00
15
97
374
00
00
20
391
00
01
35
392
00
12
66
393
00
09
04
394
00
10
68
372
00
14
16
371
00
00
20
370
00
10
28
369
00
10
85
7284
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
349
00
05
22
365
00
09
39
1056
00
15
09
364
00
03
51
357
00
12
77
356
00
11
56
355
00
11
49
354
00
10
89
322
00
01
20
289
00
21
24
290
00
32
06
245
00
10
26
jkLrk
00
12
12
293
00
31
67
294
00
03
07
225
00
00
20
224
00
10
73
223
00
29
19
222
00
17
87
216
00
02
20
220
00
12
77
219
00
16
78
218
00
16
35
217
00
03
00
ukyk
00
18
77
221
00
52
12
161
00
00
89
164
00
41
29
167
00
02
84
168
00
17
91
169
00
14
27
170
00
10
43
171
00
04
24
155
00
22
89
154
00
02
50
153
00
16
51
uydl
55
00
16
71
47
00
06
43
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7285
56
00
07
13
40
00
09
58
41
00
08
04
39
00
20
56
38
00
29
93
58
00
04
46
ukyk
00
02
60
13
00
20
23
87
00
00
20
88
00
05
30
89
00
15
70
90
00
19
76
91
00
35
51
jkLrk
00
03
33
101
00
35
29
102
00
16
96
103
00
16
88
109
00
21
96
110
00
31
62
117
00
13
27
116
00
29
07
ukyk
00
01
62
lkjns
ukyk
00
00
99
234
00
34
75
jkLrk
00
02
63
235
00
15
67
231
00
37
51
230
00
19
08
229
00
06
62
217
00
50
78
210
00
00
20
218
00
02
14
209
00
32
72
208
00
29
29
ukyk
00
03
65
207
00
53
94
jkLrk
00
02
34
134
00
22
00
7286
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
116
00
18
03
117
00
23
55
118
00
43
55
113
00
18
70
120
00
13
21
112
00
41
77
109
00
22
60
jkLrk
00
02
98
107
00
18
97
106
00
13
45
Ukxjksy unh
00
11
03
jkerhj
ukyk
00
00
77
137
00
38
72
118
00
07
76
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
77
119
00
43
44
121
00
02
08
116
00
31
26
115
00
43
15
jkLrk
00
02
63
lqjkus
132
00
38
71
ukyk
00
00
68
134
00
36
33
133
00
05
82
115
00
15
70
116
00
18
74
119
00
11
07
122
00
09
07
121
00
02
83
230
00
09
99
93
00
00
43
97
00
31
25
96
00
11
05
95
00
26
05
94
00
29
30
98
00
30
50
99
00
10
40
ukyk
00
03
03
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7287
65
00
20
40
63
00
44
91
55
00
39
58
54
00
35
73
31
00
23
72
jkLrk
00
02
88
32
00
12
51
24
00
14
25
23
00
08
37
22
00
08
76
196
00
13
51
200
00
23
28
201
00
03
33
unh
00
01
28
[फा. सं. आर-25011/41/2017-ओआर-I]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2017
S.O. 2218.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for
the transportation of Petroleum from the State of Maharashtra a pipeline should be laid for implementing Koyali -
Ahmednagar – Solapur Pipeline Project under Koyali – Ahmednagar Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is
necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is
described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and
Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby
declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person who is interested in the land described in the said Schedule may submit objection in writing to
Shri A.B.Mohekar, Deputy Collector (Retd.) Competent Authority Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Second floor 4/1,
Varad Sankul, Nandgaon Road, Manmad – 423104, Maharashtra. Within twenty one days from the date on which the
copies of this notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India,
are made available to the general public.
SCHEDULE
Taluka:- Baglan
District:- Nashik
State :- Maharashtra
Mauje / Village
Survey/Block No.
Sub-Div-No.
Area
Hectare
Are
Sq.mtr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Jaypur
111
00
88
45
102
00
14
95
103
00
27
58
104
00
34
94
7288
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
105
00
31
34
106
00
01
89
108
00
00
32
107
00
55
41
Nala
00
03
76
97
00
24
64
110
00
43
83
114
00
08
86
113
00
18
19
115
00
42
17
Cart Track
00
00
73
Cart Track
00
00
65
116
00
18
68
Wadipisol
123
00
65
28
124
00
16
97
121
00
05
63
144
00
38
57
159
00
00
49
147
00
35
11
158
00
24
31
157
00
39
57
156
00
12
67
151
00
17
92
154
00
32
18
Ekalhare
182
00
33
81
183
00
00
27
Nala
00
04
03
181
00
20
71
Nala
00
12
81
185
00
03
66
186
00
40
00
Unlined Canal
00
05
04
153
00
19
12
154
00
43
83
Nala
00
01
31
145
00
16
42
142
00
43
95
Nala
00
02
86
130
00
23
73
131
00
35
15
Murram Road
00
01
70
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7289
132
00
29
23
128
00
12
62
99
00
22
91
98
00
54
80
97
00
15
74
96
00
00
67
95
00
14
80
94
00
17
54
92
00
19
92
90
00
28
08
Bramhanpade
213
00
08
18
206
00
48
87
Cart Track
00
03
06
203
00
13
85
204
00
15
10
200
00
21
96
190
00
47
12
189
00
03
73
186
00
42
92
185
00
01
45
Asphalt Road
00
05
09
184
00
02
47
283
00
33
10
279
00
04
46
280
00
25
07
285
00
42
95
288
00
33
94
289
00
50
09
Nala
00
02
47
Waghale
Nala
00
03
60
295
00
03
62
290
00
40
89
289
00
00
20
287
00
33
81
283
00
30
64
280
00
05
67
Metal Road
00
01
33
284
00
17
16
Cart Track
00
01
27
275
00
06
76
307
00
46
52
7290
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
316
00
23
52
315
00
35
67
314
00
20
12
313
00
09
89
312
00
09
80
321
00
26
54
Rajpurpade
Nala
00
00
47
Metal Road
00
02
19
50
00
47
38
Canal
00
01
90
49
00
00
87
Field Canal
00
01
32
51
00
13
28
47
00
14
75
46
00
11
43
45
00
00
63
44A
00
36
15
25
00
03
73
101
00
13
06
102
00
18
76
103
00
23
77
Cart Track
00
00
64
124
00
15
66
125
00
14
62
Metal Road
00
03
05
118
00
00
70
117
00
06
59
126
00
15
14
127
00
19
10
128
00
00
20
129
00
00
20
132
00
01
01
133
00
05
46
134
00
05
56
137
00
22
22
138
00
12
00
139
00
20
79
Asphalt Road
00
02
42
255
00
22
86
236
00
09
92
247
00
00
24
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7291
248
00
08
98
249
00
01
12
Mosam River
00
08
77
Dyane
Mosam River
00
04
89
115
00
30
21
117
00
16
49
118
00
10
75
120
00
34
73
121
00
00
20
111
00
31
72
SH-20
00
00
68
159
00
31
02
153
00
02
66
163
00
04
55
161
00
05
78
162
00
10
72
172
00
12
44
173
00
01
48
174
00
10
59
171
00
13
97
177
00
10
10
478
00
31
54
475
00
10
03
474
00
09
41
467
00
12
70
473
00
04
09
472
00
00
36
469
00
13
88
470
00
18
67
454
00
06
34
Cart Track
00
01
58
361
00
16
69
363
00
25
27
294
00
03
29
367
00
15
65
293
00
08
86
292
00
09
74
Metal Road
00
00
75
286
00
24
87
291
00
00
32
290
00
06
69
7292
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
289
00
06
49
288
00
03
29
287
00
35
61
278
00
13
35
Cart Track
00
01
22
277
00
15
95
Nala
00
03
77
Nampur
Nala
00
02
55
Cart Track
00
02
07
416
00
45
73
383
00
01
61
386
00
02
39
387
00
14
83
388
00
13
41
389
00
15
97
374
00
00
20
391
00
01
35
392
00
12
66
393
00
09
04
394
00
10
68
372
00
14
16
371
00
00
20
370
00
10
28
369
00
10
85
349
00
05
22
365
00
09
39
1056
00
15
09
364
00
03
51
357
00
12
77
356
00
11
56
355
00
11
49
354
00
10
89
322
00
01
20
289
00
21
24
290
00
32
06
245
00
10
26
Asphalt Road
00
12
12
293
00
31
67
294
00
03
07
225
00
00
20
224
00
10
73
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7293
223
00
29
19
222
00
17
87
216
00
02
20
220
00
12
77
219
00
16
78
218
00
16
35
217
00
03
00
Nala
00
18
77
221
00
52
12
161
00
00
89
164
00
41
29
167
00
02
84
168
00
17
91
169
00
14
27
170
00
10
43
171
00
04
24
155
00
22
89
154
00
02
50
153
00
16
51
Nalkas
55
00
16
71
47
00
06
43
56
00
07
13
40
00
09
58
41
00
08
04
39
00
20
56
38
00
29
93
58
00
04
46
Nala
00
02
60
13
00
20
23
87
00
00
20
88
00
05
30
89
00
15
70
90
00
19
76
91
00
35
51
Asphalt Road
00
03
33
101
00
35
29
102
00
16
96
103
00
16
88
109
00
21
96
110
00
31
62
117
00
13
27
7294
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
116
00
29
07
Nala
00
01
62
Sarde
Nala
00
00
99
234
00
34
75
Metal Road
00
02
63
235
00
15
67
231
00
37
51
230
00
19
08
229
00
06
62
217
00
50
78
210
00
00
20
218
00
02
14
209
00
32
72
208
00
29
29
Nala
00
03
65
207
00
53
94
Asphalt Road
00
02
34
134
00
22
00
116
00
18
03
117
00
23
55
118
00
43
55
113
00
18
70
120
00
13
21
112
00
41
77
109
00
22
60
Murram Road
00
02
98
107
00
18
97
106
00
13
45
Nagrol Nadi
00
11
03
Ramtir
Nala
00
00
77
137
00
38
72
118
00
07
76
Cart Track
00
00
77
119
00
43
44
121
00
02
08
116
00
31
26
115
00
43
15
Metal Road
00
02
63
Surane
132
00
38
71
Nala
00
00
68
134
00
36
33
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7295
133
00
05
82
115
00
15
70
116
00
18
74
119
00
11
07
122
00
09
07
121
00
02
83
230
00
09
99
93
00
00
43
97
00
31
25
96
00
11
05
95
00
26
05
94
00
29
30
98
00
30
50
99
00
10
40
Nala
00
03
03
65
00
20
40
63
00
44
91
55
00
39
58
54
00
35
73
31
00
23
72
Asphalt Road
00
02
88
32
00
12
51
24
00
14
25
23
00
08
37
22
00
08
76
196
00
13
51
200
00
23
28
201
00
03
33
River
00
01
28
[F. No. R-25011/41/2017-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
नई दली, 14 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2219
2219
2219
2219.—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksdfgr esa ;g vko’;d gS fd egkjk"Vª jkT; esa
iSVªksfy;e inkFkksZ ds ifjogu ds fy, Þdks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj iSVªksfy;e ikbiykbu ifj;kstuk ds fdz;kUo;u gsrq
bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg,%
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko’;d izrhr gksrk gS fd ,slh Hkwfe esa tks bl
ls mikCk) vuqlwfp esa of.kZr gS] vkSj ftlesa mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS] mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k
tk,(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] iSVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e] 1962
¼1962 dk 50½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ml Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu
djus ds vius vk’k; dh ?kks"k.kk djrh gS%
7296
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwPkh esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks bl vf/klwpuk esa ;qDr “kjr ds
jkti= dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gSa] bDdhl fnu ds “hrj] Hkwfe ds uhps ikbiykbZu fcNk, tkus
ds fy, mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds lacU?k esa Jh ,- ch- eksgsdj uk;c dysDVj ¼vodk’k izkIr½ l{ke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u
vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM] nwljh eafty 4@1] ojn ladqy नांदगांव lM+d] euekM egkjk"Vª & 423104 dks fyf[kr :i eas
vk{ksi Hkst ldsxkA
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
rkyqdk%&;soyk
ftyk%& ukfld
jkT;%& egkjk"Vª
ekSts @xzke
losZ @ Cykd @ la-
¼IyksV la-½
lc&Mho&la-
{ks=Qy
gsDVj
vkj
oxZ ehVj
1
2
3
4
5
6
olaruxj
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
55
21
00
40
78
18
00
01
72
22
00
00
20
25
00
36
75
24
00
06
56
26
00
35
32
27
00
54
25
14
00
58
36
dPpk jkLrk
00
03
75
13
00
92
50
31
00
55
26
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
63
32
00
10
60
33
00
76
96
1
00
79
52
ukyk
00
01
75
4
00
74
03
jkLrk
00
03
67
vudkbZ
442
00
34
98
405
00
24
50
400
00
68
32
ukyk
00
01
44
399
00
35
18
dPpk jkLrk
00
02
31
365
00
00
20
366
00
24
37
367
00
14
81
368
00
05
26
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7297
370
00
34
89
ukyk
00
03
10
jkLrk
00
02
55
372
00
24
38
373
00
12
78
374
00
56
14
271
00
54
24
268
00
05
31
272
00
23
11
273
00
05
89
277
00
72
29
jkLrk
00
02
37
237@v
00
02
51
237
00
02
43
237@c
00
05
90
233
00
11
17
234
00
41
36
216
00
00
20
215
00
40
03
212
00
18
42
208
00
25
63
211
00
01
09
209
00
15
94
210
00
36
17
jkLrk
00
03
59
203
00
38
37
204
00
32
57
jkLrk
00
02
99
196
00
01
34
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
81
201
00
10
84
192
00
21
54
ukyk
00
03
61
189
00
33
57
188
00
56
34
ukyk
00
02
37
dqlqj
10
00
39
50
11
00
19
01
7298
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
12
00
11
92
13
00
11
45
14
00
39
10
ukyk
00
02
10
25
00
11
06
ukyk
00
04
91
24
00
07
13
34
00
09
63
39
00
01
78
38
00
10
02
35
00
05
14
37
00
22
78
51
00
10
40
50
00
12
16
49
00
21
24
48
00
20
50
67
00
18
49
68
00
31
48
69
00
14
51
64
00
15
52
63
00
00
65
jkLrk
00
04
38
102
00
09
02
dPpk jkLrk
00
02
19
103
00
24
14
111
00
25
86
110
00
35
64
142
00
03
76
143
00
07
83
144
00
10
91
145
00
43
90
ukyk
00
01
23
146
00
14
38
147
00
06
67
148
00
03
44
149
00
07
36
151
00
02
97
152
00
02
10
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7299
153
00
02
58
154
00
00
80
ugj
00
02
74
155
00
00
51
dqlekM+h
ugj
00
01
35
433 iSdh
00
25
76
jkLrk
00
01
79
400
00
23
42
399
00
23
42
394
00
26
49
393
00
17
68
391
00
10
43
390
00
11
74
389
00
07
99
387
00
08
45
385
00
29
30
382
00
00
20
379
00
03
59
nf{k.k jsYos
00
05
39
378
00
03
43
374
00
31
16
373
00
00
71
368
00
04
33
367
00
09
89
363
00
22
68
364
00
25
37
362
00
00
35
359
00
16
29
jkLrk
00
07
13
/kkeksM+s
jkLrk
00
01
51
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
75
72
00
25
00
77
00
03
45
78
00
12
55
79
00
13
42
82
00
05
82
84
00
08
41
87
00
09
31
7300
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
89
00
17
01
dPpk jkLrk
00
02
32
90
00
30
78
91
00
50
93
94
00
46
14
112
00
05
45
ukyk
00
04
16
145
00
01
69
144
00
05
48
131
00
12
29
130
00
11
75
jkLrk
00
02
85
227
00
11
27
230
00
14
24
229
00
09
33
228
00
29
36
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
49
237
00
13
32
236
00
15
28
333
00
30
29
255
00
21
40
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
53
268
00
14
57
269
00
00
20
jkLrk
00
06
63
329
00
32
31
328
00
51
54
319
00
06
64
279
00
01
37
280
00
15
71
281
00
11
09
282
00
07
13
288
00
33
28
289
00
13
64
316
00
44
56
293
00
04
70
315
00
00
20
294
00
15
64
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7301
295
00
12
33
296
00
07
35
297
00
06
96
298
00
07
39
300
00
04
34
jkLrk
00
03
90
299
00
41
93
x.ks'kiqj
48
00
15
49
49
00
01
68
uxjlqy
1046
00
09
98
1045
00
30
85
1043
00
23
02
1042
00
10
93
1041
00
05
58
1040
00
06
51
1039
00
04
16
1038
00
12
49
ekrqyBk.k
243
00
48
33
247
00
29
54
250
00
15
74
251
00
11
99
253
00
02
77
240
00
26
07
239
00
11
75
237
00
13
63
236
00
02
58
256@v
00
22
45
228
00
53
24
227
00
04
64
,l ,p&26
00
02
91
212
00
01
40
ukyk
00
04
05
210
00
27
33
211
00
12
02
214
00
02
07
213
00
09
49
214 iSdh
00
11
15
221
00
22
75
7302
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ukyk
00
12
03
173
00
09
42
160
00
00
91
162
00
17
02
161
00
12
01
159
00
59
19
158
00
11
85
153
00
08
45
152
00
29
65
cYgsxkao
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
15
17
00
03
14
jkLrk
00
04
34
18
00
46
88
20
00
51
43
ukyk
00
04
39
51
00
00
54
50
00
37
08
48
00
33
39
46
00
12
91
47
00
35
62
43
00
46
75
55
00
01
72
42
00
00
44
56
00
58
39
ugj
00
07
55
jkLrk
00
03
22
58
00
33
14
ukyk
00
06
05
59
00
31
43
60
00
29
19
61
00
04
10
ugj
00
03
53
/kke.kxkao
117
00
02
58
116
00
12
09
,e Mh vkj&31
00
04
28
114
00
00
20
115
00
30
63
99
00
33
03
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7303
98
00
19
90
100
00
04
03
94
00
65
96
93
00
00
20
86
00
11
26
87
00
17
01
jkLrk
00
02
31
88
00
14
22
69
00
14
66
68
00
47
16
ukyk
00
03
15
vanjlqy
jkLrk
00
01
29
861
00
00
28
862
00
43
74
ukyk
00
03
15
863
00
39
71
864
00
28
68
870
00
09
17
ukyk
00
02
33
869
00
03
10
867
00
51
45
866
00
02
97
,l ,p&30
00
09
12
824
00
42
82
823
00
39
20
822
00
30
50
NksVh ugj
00
01
43
749
00
26
99
754
00
19
87
ukyk
00
01
44
753
00
35
41
752
00
34
37
743
00
13
66
jkLrk
00
02
82
756
00
05
37
757
00
02
70
NksVh ugj
00
02
34
jkLrk
00
03
19
7304
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
720
00
45
45
721
00
01
57
724
00
38
56
723
00
48
25
jkLrk
00
03
24
ugj
00
00
78
624
00
48
16
623
00
63
60
jkLrk
00
03
30
589
00
34
84
588
00
48
74
ugj
00
04
16
587
00
22
94
582
00
03
71
583
00
24
60
586
00
31
81
585
00
45
37
jkLrk
00
05
17
480
00
25
27
ugj
00
03
72
481
00
15
82
482
00
42
74
529
00
49
25
528
00
07
11
526
00
01
67
527
00
50
09
dPpk jkLrk ¼525½
00
00
78
524
00
13
04
523
00
07
91
522
00
06
76
521
00
33
56
jkLrk
00
01
15
520
00
09
52
519
00
00
64
517
00
10
38
518
00
00
20
jkLrk
00
02
02
cksdVs
200
00
20
24
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7305
198
00
20
16
197@4
00
20
38
197@5
00
21
11
196
00
26
81
jkLrk
00
00
36
jkLrk
00
03
78
177
00
41
30
129
00
40
62
ukyk
00
01
53
128
00
27
00
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
59
132
00
61
40
133
00
19
44
134
00
16
29
135
00
08
46
136
00
09
14
137
00
09
48
jkLrk
00
02
49
71
00
02
74
70
00
33
23
69
00
23
49
ukyk
00
01
59
67
00
17
26
66
00
17
51
64
00
35
31
nqxyxkao
jkLrk
00
01
43
143
00
05
35
142
00
00
49
141
00
13
59
148
00
09
41
138
00
11
71
137
00
07
38
151
00
35
11
152
00
15
73
jkLrk
00
02
66
35
00
12
03
36
00
03
28
ukyk
00
07
19
7306
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
34
00
28
58
32
00
44
11
33
00
00
20
31
00
09
17
[फा. सं. आर-25011/41/2017-ओआर-I]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2017
S.O. 2219.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for the
transportation of Petroleum from the State of Maharashtra a pipeline should be laid for implementing Koyali -
Ahmednagar – Solapur Pipeline Project under Koyali – Ahmednagar Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is
necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is
described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and
Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby
declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person who is interested in the land described in the said Schedule may submit objection in writing to
Shri A.B. Mohekar, Deputy Collector (Retd.) Competent Authority Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Second floor, 4/1,
Varad Sankul Nandgaon Road, Manmad – 423104, Maharashtra within twenty one days from the date on which the
copies of this notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India,
are made available to the general public.
SCHEDULE
Taluka:- Yeola
District:- Nashik
State :- Maharashtra
Mauje / Village
Survey/Block No.
Sub-Div-No.
Area
Hectare
Are
Sq.mtr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Vasantnagar
Cart Track
00
00
55
21
00
40
78
18
00
01
72
22
00
00
20
25
00
36
75
24
00
06
56
26
00
35
32
27
00
54
25
14
00
58
36
Cart Track
00
03
75
13
00
92
50
31
00
55
26
Cart Track
00
00
63
32
00
10
60
33
00
76
96
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7307
1
00
79
52
1 Nala
00
01
75
4
00
74
03
Road
00
03
67
Ankai
442
00
34
98
405
00
24
50
400
00
68
32
Nala
00
01
44
399
00
35
18
Cart Track
00
02
31
365
00
00
20
366
00
24
37
367
00
14
81
368
00
05
26
370
00
34
89
Nala
00
03
10
Road
00
02
55
372
00
24
38
373
00
12
78
374
00
56
14
271
00
54
24
268
00
05
31
272
00
23
11
273
00
05
89
277
00
72
29
Road
00
02
37
237/A
00
02
51
237
00
02
43
237/B
00
05
90
233
00
11
17
234
00
41
36
216
00
00
20
215
00
40
03
212
00
18
42
208
00
25
63
211
00
01
09
209
00
15
94
210
00
36
17
Road
00
03
59
203
00
38
37
204
00
32
57
7308
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Road
00
02
99
196
00
01
34
CT
00
01
81
201
00
10
84
192
00
21
54
Nala
00
03
61
189
00
33
57
188
00
56
34
Nala
00
02
37
Kusur
10
00
39
50
11
00
19
01
12
00
11
92
13
00
11
45
14
00
39
10
Nala
00
02
10
25
00
11
06
Nala
00
04
91
24
00
07
13
34
00
09
63
39
00
01
78
38
00
10
02
35
00
05
14
37
00
22
78
51
00
10
40
50
00
12
16
49
00
21
24
48
00
20
50
67
00
18
49
68
00
31
48
69
00
14
51
64
00
15
52
63
00
00
65
Road
00
04
38
102
00
09
02
Cart Track
00
02
19
103
00
24
14
111
00
25
86
110
00
35
64
142
00
03
76
143
00
07
83
144
00
10
91
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7309
145
00
43
90
Nala
00
01
23
146
00
14
38
147
00
06
67
148
00
03
44
149
00
07
36
151
00
02
97
152
00
02
10
153
00
02
58
154
00
00
80
Canal
00
02
74
155
00
00
51
Kusmadi
Unlined Canal
00
01
35
433 Paiky
00
25
76
Asphalt Road
00
01
79
400
00
23
42
399
00
23
42
394
00
26
49
393
00
17
68
391
00
10
43
390
00
11
74
389
00
07
99
387
00
08
45
385
00
29
30
382
00
00
20
379
00
03
59
Southern Railway
Main Line
00
05
39
378
00
03
43
374
00
31
16
373
00
00
71
368
00
04
33
367
00
09
89
363
00
22
68
364
00
25
37
362
00
00
35
359
00
16
29
Asphalt Road
00
07
13
Dhamode
Asphalt Road
00
01
51
Field Cart Track
00
00
75
72
00
25
00
7310
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
77
00
03
45
78
00
12
55
79
00
13
42
82
00
05
82
84
00
08
41
87
00
09
31
89
00
17
01
Cart Track
00
02
32
90
00
30
78
91
00
50
93
94
00
46
14
112
00
05
45
Nala
00
04
16
145
00
01
69
144
00
05
48
131
00
12
29
130
00
11
75
Asphalted Road
00
02
85
227
00
11
27
230
00
14
24
229
00
09
33
228
00
29
36
Cart Track
00
00
49
237
00
13
32
236
00
15
28
333
00
30
29
255
00
21
40
Cart Track
00
00
53
268
00
14
57
269
00
00
20
Metal Road
00
06
63
329
00
32
31
328
00
51
54
319
00
06
64
279
00
01
37
280
00
15
71
281
00
11
09
282
00
07
13
288
00
33
28
289
00
13
64
316
00
44
56
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7311
293
00
04
70
315
00
00
20
294
00
15
64
295
00
12
33
296
00
07
35
297
00
06
96
298
00
07
39
300
00
04
34
Asphalted Road
00
03
90
299
00
41
93
Ganeshpur
48
00
15
49
49
00
01
68
Nagarsul
1046
00
09
98
1045
00
30
85
1043
00
23
02
1042
00
10
93
1041
00
05
58
1040
00
06
51
1039
00
04
16
1038
00
12
49
Matulthan
243
00
48
33
247
00
29
54
250
00
15
74
251
00
11
99
253
00
02
77
240
00
26
07
239
00
11
75
237
00
13
63
236
00
02
58
256/A
00
22
45
228
00
53
24
227
00
04
64
SH-26
00
02
91
212
00
01
40
Nala
00
04
05
210
00
27
33
211
00
12
02
214
00
02
07
213
00
09
49
214 Paiky
00
11
15
221
00
22
75
7312
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Nala
00
12
03
173
00
09
42
160
00
00
91
162
00
17
02
161
00
12
01
159
00
59
19
158
00
11
85
153
00
08
45
152
00
29
65
Balhegaon
Field Cart Track
00
01
15
17
00
03
14
Asphalted Road
00
04
34
18
00
46
88
20
00
51
43
Nala
00
04
39
51
00
00
54
50
00
37
08
48
00
33
39
46
00
12
91
47
00
35
62
43
00
46
75
55
00
01
72
42
00
00
44
56
00
58
39
Unlined Canal
00
07
55
Metal Road
00
03
22
58
00
33
14
Nala
00
06
05
59
00
31
43
60
00
29
19
61
00
04
10
Unlined Canal
00
03
53
Dhamangaon
117
00
02
58
116
00
12
09
MDR - 31
00
04
28
114
00
00
20
115
00
30
63
99
00
33
03
98
00
19
90
100
00
04
03
94
00
65
96
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7313
93
00
00
20
86
00
11
26
87
00
17
01
Metal Road
00
02
31
88
00
14
22
69
00
14
66
68
00
47
16
Nala
00
03
15
Andarsul
Metal Road
00
01
29
861
00
00
28
862
00
43
74
Nala
00
03
15
863
00
39
71
864
00
28
68
870
00
09
17
Nala
00
02
33
869
00
03
10
867
00
51
45
866
00
02
97
SH-30
00
09
12
824
00
42
82
823
00
39
20
822
00
30
50
Minor Canal
00
01
43
749
00
26
99
754
00
19
87
Nala
00
01
44
753
00
35
41
752
00
34
37
743
00
13
66
Asphalted Road
00
02
82
756
00
05
37
757
00
02
70
Minor
Unlined Canal
00
02
34
Asphalted Road
00
03
19
720
00
45
45
721
00
01
57
724
00
38
56
723
00
48
25
Asphalted Road
00
03
24
7314
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Unlined Drain
00
00
78
624
00
48
16
623
00
63
60
Asphalted Road
00
03
30
589
00
34
84
588
00
48
74
Unlined Canal
00
04
16
587
00
22
94
582
00
03
71
583
00
24
60
586
00
31
81
585
00
45
37
Asphalted Road
00
05
17
480
00
25
27
Unlined Canal
00
03
72
481
00
15
82
482
00
42
74
529
00
49
25
528
00
07
11
526
00
01
67
527
00
50
09
Field Cart Track (525)
00
00
78
524
00
13
04
523
00
07
91
522
00
06
76
521
00
33
56
Metal Road
00
01
15
520
00
09
52
519
00
00
64
517
00
10
38
518
00
00
20
Metal Road
00
02
02
Bokate
200
00
20
24
198
00
20
16
197/4
00
20
38
197/5
00
21
11
196
00
26
81
Foot Path
00
00
36
Asphalted Road
00
03
78
177
00
41
30
129
00
40
62
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7315
Nala
00
01
53
128
00
27
00
Field Cart Track
00
01
59
132
00
61
40
133
00
19
44
134
00
16
29
135
00
08
46
136
00
09
14
137
00
09
48
Asphalted Road
00
02
49
71
00
02
74
70
00
33
23
69
00
23
49
Nala
00
01
59
67
00
17
26
66
00
17
51
64
00
35
31
Dugalgaon
Metal Road
00
01
43
143
00
05
35
142
00
00
49
141
00
13
59
148
00
09
41
138
00
11
71
137
00
07
38
151
00
35
11
152
00
15
73
Asphalted Road
00
02
66
35
00
12
03
36
00
03
28
Nala
00
07
19
34
00
28
58
32
00
44
11
33
00
00
20
31
00
09
17
[F. No. R-25011/41/2017-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
7316
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
नई दली, 14 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2220
2220
2220
2220.—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksdfgr esa ;g vko’;d gS fd egkjk"Vª jkT; esa
iSVªksfy;e inkFkksZ ds ifjogu ds fy, Þdks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj iSVªksfy;e ikbiykbu ifj;kstuk ds fdz;kUo;u gsrq
bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg,%
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko’;d izrhr gksrk gS fd ,slh Hkwfe esa tks bl
ls mikCk) vuqlwfp esa of.kZr gS] vkSj ftlesa mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS] mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k
tk,(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] iSVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e] 1962
¼1962 dk 50½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ml Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu
djus ds vius vk’k; dh ?kks"k.kk djrh gS%
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwPkh esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks bl vf/klwpuk esa ;qDr “kjr ds
jkti= dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gSa] bDdhl fnu ds “hrj] Hkwfe ds uhps ikbiykbZu fcNk, tkus
ds fy, mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds lacU?k esa Jh ,- ch- eksgsdj uk;c dysDVj ¼vodk’k izkIr½ l{ke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u
vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM] nwljh eafty 4@1] ojn ladqy नांदगांव lM+d] euekM egkjk"Vª & 423104 dks fyf[kr :i eas
vk{ksi Hkst ldsxkA
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
rkyqdk%&uokiqj
ftyk%& uanqjckj
jkT;%& egkjk"Vª
ekSts @xzke
losZ@Cykd@ la-
¼IyksV la-½
lc&Mho&la-
{ks=Qy
हेQटर
आर
oxZ ehVj
1
2
3
4
5
6
yddMdksV
47
00
19
48
48
00
24
23
49
00
35
86
56
00
15
18
55
00
56
67
jkLrk
00
01
32
54
00
39
56
ca/kkjQyh
ukyk
00
04
28
jkLrk
00
02
42
13
00
47
95
14
00
24
52
12
00
02
93
15
00
43
67
16
00
01
76
9
00
00
31
17
00
68
87
jkLrk
00
01
36
41
00
55
79
40
00
04
34
22
00
84
98
29
00
00
24
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7317
26
00
33
94
25
00
26
70
24
00
12
17
okdhikMk
15
00
24
95
jkLrk
00
05
44
47
00
41
49
13
00
06
45
11
00
50
10
10
00
45
40
9
00
27
78
8
00
20
55
6
00
00
20
7
00
47
45
4
00
21
67
3
00
17
60
2
00
19
12
1
00
01
96
djath [kqnZ
25
00
55
40
ukyk
00
04
47
jkLrk
00
03
28
dPpk jkLrk
00
05
25
27
00
13
17
28
00
15
94
29
00
41
38
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
95
30
00
00
38
Ukokiqj ,e lh vkb
208
00
38
25
207
00
10
43
206
00
19
10
205
00
10
12
204
00
22
01
203
00
32
03
200
00
40
24
200&jkLrk
00
04
67
188
00
37
93
189
00
03
69
187
00
16
59
185
00
11
59
7318
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
186
00
21
45
183
00
33
44
183&ukyk
00
02
40
jkLrk
00
03
93
182
00
43
29
unh
00
12
18
178
00
20
96
174
00
00
20
177
00
42
41
176
00
34
85
171
00
15
99
170
00
34
75
169
00
23
12
168
00
00
20
fotkiqj
44
00
23
51
46
00
25
10
47
00
05
27
51
00
35
02
ukyk
00
04
20
50
00
28
89
Ukkano.k
34
00
13
79
35
00
15
27
36
00
36
70
36&ukyk
00
01
43
44&ukyk
00
07
81
44
00
40
26
64
00
31
28
jkLrk
00
01
85
78
00
15
35
79
00
36
39
82
00
19
25
82&ukyk
00
01
24
84
00
29
95
jkLrk
00
03
21
uokikMk
103
00
13
87
104
00
21
72
105
00
22
26
107
00
38
82
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7319
95
00
12
27
51
00
18
06
52
00
27
05
50
00
03
88
53
00
18
83
jkLrk
00
03
41
55
00
40
32
jkLrk
00
01
80
62
00
52
19
63
00
47
59
85
00
34
95
jkLrk
00
02
55
82
00
33
69
ukyk
00
01
94
83
00
18
56
80
00
29
26
jkLrk
00
06
13
79
00
31
84
lqyh
67
00
05
12
63
00
50
18
63&ukyk
00
00
99
62
00
31
80
34
00
12
24
jkLrk
00
02
68
33
00
34
55
32
00
05
55
36
00
45
32
ukyk
00
07
48
37
00
36
93
39
00
63
18
40
00
39
26
jkLrk
00
02
06
225
00
20
79
224
00
13
89
223
00
12
96
207
00
00
20
222
00
03
46
208
00
11
50
7320
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
209
00
16
62
210
00
32
82
211
00
45
00
211&ukyk
00
03
55
211&jkLrk
00
02
03
213
00
00
20
214
00
11
86
j;kuxUukMk unh
00
07
41
[फा. सं. आर-25011/43/2017-ओआर-I]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2017
S.O. 2220.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for
the transportation of Petroleum from the State of Maharashtra a pipeline should be laid for implementing Koyali -
Ahmednagar – Solapur Pipeline Project under Koyali – Ahmednagar Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is
necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is
described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and
Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby
declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person who is interested in the land described in the said Schedule may submit objection in writing to
Shri A.B.Mohekar, Deputy Collector (Retd.) Competent Authority Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Second floor, 4/1,
Varad Sankul Nandgaon Road, Manmad – 423104, Maharashtra within twenty one days from the date on which the
copies of this notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India,
are made available to the general public.
SCHEDULE
Taluka:- Navapur
District:- Nandurbar
State :- Maharashtra
Mauje / Village
Survey/Block No.
Sub-Div-No.
Area
Hectare
Are
Sq.mtr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Lakkadkot
47
00
19
48
48
00
24
23
49
00
35
86
56
00
15
18
55
00
56
67
Asphalt Road
00
01
32
54
00
39
56
Bandharfali
Nala
00
04
28
Road
00
02
42
13
00
47
95
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7321
14
00
24
52
12
00
02
93
15
00
43
67
16
00
01
76
9
00
00
31
17
00
68
87
Road
00
01
36
41
00
55
79
40
00
04
34
22
00
84
98
29
00
00
24
26
00
33
94
25
00
26
70
24
00
12
17
Wakipada
15
00
24
95
Road
00
05
44
47
00
41
49
13
00
06
45
11
00
50
10
10
00
45
40
9
00
27
78
8
00
20
55
6
00
00
20
7
00
47
45
4
00
21
67
3
00
17
60
2
00
19
12
1
00
01
96
Karanji Khurd
25
00
55
40
Nala
00
04
47
Road
00
03
28
Cart Track
00
05
25
27
00
13
17
28
00
15
94
29
00
41
38
Cart Track
00
00
95
30
00
00
38
Navapur MCI
208
00
38
25
207
00
10
43
206
00
19
10
205
00
10
12
7322
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
204
00
22
01
203
00
32
03
200
00
40
24
200-Road
00
04
67
188
00
37
93
189
00
03
69
187
00
16
59
185
00
11
59
186
00
21
45
183
00
33
44
183-Nala
00
02
40
Road
00
03
93
182
00
43
29
River
00
12
18
178
00
20
96
174
00
00
20
177
00
42
41
176
00
34
85
171
00
15
99
170
00
34
75
169
00
23
12
168
00
00
20
Vijapur
44
00
23
51
46
00
25
10
47
00
05
27
51
00
35
02
Nala
00
04
20
50
00
28
89
Nandvan
34
00
13
79
35
00
15
27
36
00
36
70
36-Nala
00
01
43
44-Nala
00
07
81
44
00
40
26
64
00
31
28
Road
00
01
85
78
00
15
35
79
00
36
39
82
00
19
25
82-Nala
00
01
24
84
00
29
95
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7323
Road
00
03
21
Navapada
103
00
13
87
104
00
21
72
105
00
22
26
107
00
38
82
95
00
12
27
51
00
18
06
52
00
27
05
50
00
03
88
53
00
18
83
Road
00
03
41
55
00
40
32
Road
00
01
80
62
00
52
19
63
00
47
59
85
00
34
95
Road
00
02
55
82
00
33
69
Nala
00
01
94
83
00
18
56
80
00
29
26
Road
00
06
13
79
00
31
84
Suli
67
00
05
12
63
00
50
18
63-Nala
00
00
99
62
00
31
80
34
00
12
24
Road
00
02
68
33
00
34
55
32
00
05
55
36
00
45
32
Nala
00
07
48
37
00
36
93
39
00
63
18
40
00
39
26
Road
00
02
06
225
00
20
79
224
00
13
89
223
00
12
96
207
00
00
20
7324
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
222
00
03
46
208
00
11
50
209
00
16
62
210
00
32
82
211
00
45
00
211-Nala
00
03
55
211-Road
00
02
03
213
00
00
20
214
00
11
86
Rayangannada River
00
07
41
[F. No. R-25011/43/2017-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
नई दली, 14 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2221
2221
2221
2221.—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksdfgr esa ;g vko’;d gS fd egkjk"Vª jkT; esa
iSVªksfy;e inkFkksZ ds ifjogu ds fy, Þdks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj iSVªksfy;e ikbiykbu ifj;kstuk ds fdz;kUo;u gsrq
bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg,%
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko’;d izrhr gksrk gS fd ,slh Hkwfe esa tks bl
ls mikCk) vuqlwfp esa of.kZr gS] vkSj ftlesa mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS] mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k
tk,(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] iSVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e] 1962
¼1962 dk 50½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ml Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu
djus ds vius vk’k; dh ?kks"k.kk djrh gS%
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwPkh esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks bl vf/klwpuk esa ;qDr “kjr ds
jkti= dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gSa] bDdhl fnu ds “hrj] Hkwfe ds uhps ikbiykbZu fcNk, tkus
ds fy, mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds lacU?k esa Jh ,- ch- eksgsdj uk;c dysDVj ¼vodk’k izkIr½ l{ke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u
vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM] nwljh eafty 4@1] ojn ladqy नांदगांव lM+d] euekM egkjk"Vª & 423104 dks fyf[kr :i eas
vk{ksi Hkst ldsxkA
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
rkyqdk%&uokiqj
ftyk%& uanqjckj
jkT;%& egkjk"Vª
ekSts @xzke
losZ @ Cykd @ la-
¼IyksV la-½
lc&Mho&la-
{ks=Qy
हेQटर
आर
oxZ ehVj
1
2
3
4
5
6
dksyMs
ukyk
00
09
39
206
00
82
88
208
00
00
44
204
00
36
89
203
00
25
47
jkLrk
00
02
70
djath cqnqzd
ukyk
00
03
35
161
00
00
20
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7325
163
00
29
14
164
00
12
94
166
00
37
50
165
00
11
09
jkLrk
00
01
26
168
00
18
61
169
00
10
23
171
00
22
60
173
00
40
66
174
00
16
37
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
54
176
00
45
45
177
00
36
54
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
05
182
00
34
27
jkLrk
00
02
22
181
00
40
02
ukyk
00
02
09
9
00
18
57
8
00
36
34
13
00
23
68
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
55
14
00
44
94
7
00
00
68
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
66
15
00
00
21
jkLrk
00
02
74
6
00
03
21
5
00
02
63
4
00
19
24
23
00
31
69
33
00
13
61
32
00
33
10
35
00
17
56
36
00
18
01
52
00
01
97
jkLrk
00
02
99
53
00
47
35
7326
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ukyk
00
01
16
54
00
24
38
55
00
14
00
56
00
09
21
59
00
34
51
cksjikMk
290
00
02
35
288@2
00
23
38
222
00
22
56
224
00
03
93
223
00
23
38
225
00
02
49
226
00
18
18
234@2
00
14
27
234@1
00
17
68
236
00
06
48
233
00
00
20
239
00
41
91
238
00
20
51
269
00
02
73
268
00
27
09
265
00
38
94
dkeksn
75
00
31
61
jkLrk
00
02
58
74
00
10
81
ukyk
00
13
19
73
00
11
91
72
00
13
82
71
00
19
13
70
00
35
77
65
00
18
13
66
00
12
16
69
00
40
42
68
00
55
91
67
00
00
20
188
00
58
37
189
00
30
10
190
00
28
69
jkLrk
00
00
63
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7327
191
00
21
82
192
00
21
71
199
00
22
25
200
00
30
72
201
00
29
74
202
00
48
63
212
00
52
40
211
00
60
39
26
00
59
82
21
00
22
49
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
54
20@2
00
00
31
22
00
51
53
ukyk
00
03
49
15@2
00
00
89
15@3
00
20
72
14
00
48
69
jkLrk
00
02
80
12
00
09
88
24
00
10
99
27
02
23
70
dksV[kkac
5
00
61
87
[kksdls
72
00
20
60
[फा. सं. आर-25011/43/2017-ओआर-I]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2017
S.O. 2221.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for
the transportation of Petroleum from the State of Maharashtra a pipeline should be laid for implementing Koyali -
Ahmednagar – Solapur Pipeline Project under Koyali – Ahmednagar Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is
necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is
described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and
Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby
declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person who is interested in the land described in the said Schedule may submit objection in writing to Shri
A.B. Mohekar, Deputy Collector (Retd.) Competent Authority Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Second floor, 4/1,
Varad Sankul, Nandgaon Road, Manmad – 423104, Maharashtra. Within twenty one days from the date on which the
copies of this notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India,
are made available to the general public.
7328
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
SCHEDULE
Taluka:- Navapur
District:- Nandurbar
State :- Maharashtra
Mouje / Village
Survey/Block No.
Sub-Div-No.
Area
Hectare
Are
Sq.mtr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Kolde
Nala
00
09
39
206
00
82
88
208
00
00
44
204
00
36
89
203
00
25
47
Asphalt Road
00
02
70
Karanji
Budruk
Nala
00
03
35
161
00
00
20
163
00
29
14
164
00
12
94
166
00
37
50
165
00
11
09
Metal Road
00
01
26
168
00
18
61
169
00
10
23
171
00
22
60
173
00
40
66
174
00
16
37
Cart Track
00
00
54
176
00
45
45
177
00
36
54
Cart Track
00
01
05
182
00
34
27
Metal Road
00
02
22
181
00
40
02
Nala
00
02
09
9
00
18
57
8
00
36
34
13
00
23
68
Cart Track
00
01
55
14
00
44
94
7
00
00
68
Cart Track
00
00
66
15
00
00
21
Asphalt Road
00
02
74
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7329
6
00
03
21
5
00
02
63
4
00
19
24
23
00
31
69
33
00
13
61
32
00
33
10
35
00
17
56
36
00
18
01
52
00
01
97
Asphalt Road
00
02
99
53
00
47
35
Nala
00
01
16
54
00
24
38
55
00
14
00
56
00
09
21
59
00
34
51
Borpada
290
00
02
35
288/2
00
23
38
222
00
22
56
224
00
03
93
223
00
23
38
225
00
02
49
226
00
18
18
234/2
00
14
27
234/1
00
17
68
236
00
06
48
233
00
00
20
239
00
41
91
238
00
20
51
269
00
02
73
268
00
27
09
265
00
38
94
Kamod
75
00
31
61
Road
00
02
58
74
00
10
81
Nala
00
13
19
73
00
11
91
72
00
13
82
7330
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
71
00
19
13
70
00
35
77
65
00
18
13
66
00
12
16
69
00
40
42
68
00
55
91
67
00
00
20
188
00
58
37
189
00
30
10
190
00
28
69
Metal Road
00
00
63
191
00
21
82
192
00
21
71
199
00
22
25
200
00
30
72
201
00
29
74
202
00
48
63
212
00
52
40
211
00
60
39
26
00
59
82
21
00
22
49
Cart Track
00
01
54
20/2
00
00
31
22
00
51
53
Nala
00
03
49
15/2
00
00
89
15/3
00
20
72
14
00
48
69
Asphalt Road
00
02
80
12
00
09
88
24
00
10
99
27
02
23
70
Kotkhanb
5
00
61
87
Khokse
72
00
20
60
[F. No. R-25011/43/2017-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7331
नई दली, 14 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2222
2222
2222
2222.—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksdfgr esa ;g vko’;d gS fd egkjk"Vª jkT; esa
iSVªksfy;e inkFkksZ ds ifjogu ds fy, Þdks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj iSVªksfy;e ikbiykbu ifj;kstuk ds fdz;kUo;u gsrq
bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg,%
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko’;d izrhr gksrk gS fd ,slh Hkwfe esa tks bl
ls mikCk) vuqlwfp esa of.kZr gS] vkSj ftlesa mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS] mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k
tk,(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] iSVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e] 1962
¼1962 dk 50½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ml Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu
djus ds vius vk’k; dh ?kks"k.kk djrh gS%
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwPkh esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks bl vf/klwpuk esa ;qDr “kjr ds
jkti= dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gSa] bDdhl fnu ds “hrj] Hkwfe ds uhps ikbiykbZu fcNk, tkus
ds fy, mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds lacU?k esa Jh ,- ch- eksgsdj uk;c dysDVj ¼vodk’k izkIr½ l{ke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u
vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM] nwljh eafty 4@1] ojn ladqy नांदगांव lM+d] euekM egkjk"Vª & 423104 dks fyf[kr :i eas
vk{ksi Hkst ldsxkA
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
rkyqdk%&रारी
ftyk%& vgenuxj
jkT;%& egkjk"Vª
ekStk @xzke
losZ @ Cykd @ la-
¼IyksV la-½
lc&Mho&la-
{ks=Qy
gsDVj
vkj
oxZ ehVj
1
2
3
4
5
6
मालुंजे बु ूक
jkLrk
00
01
88
152
00
38
53
ugj
00
02
72
jkLrk
00
01
91
महालगांव
वरा नदी
00
11
48
115
00
32
76
117
00
00
68
114
00
09
04
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
60
112
00
30
36
106
00
01
81
dPpk jkLrk
00
02
64
दरडगांव ¼बेलापुर½
5
00
00
20
6@2
00
10
43
7@2
00
16
95
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
42
10
00
20
37
89
00
00
20
11
00
29
92
jkLrk
00
01
70
7332
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
12
00
26
69
13
00
01
70
17
00
24
60
18
00
27
85
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
67
20
00
16
69
72
00
07
17
ugj
00
04
29
96
00
08
44
74
00
15
10
95
00
29
80
ugj
00
00
81
94
00
21
08
90
00
10
65
66
00
27
54
91
00
11
87
64
00
19
42
61
00
17
44
63@v
00
48
89
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
04
yk[k
10
00
25
93
117
00
06
10
ugj
00
00
66
118
00
03
93
119
00
05
78
120
00
06
66
121
00
06
54
122
00
12
55
123
00
02
11
124
00
15
13
125
00
08
00
128
00
04
59
129
126
00
00
00
09
88
01
127
00
13
62
136
00
03
91
jkLrk
00
01
72
137
00
16
40
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
84
142
00
01
06
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7333
141
00
24
21
140
00
01
96
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
57
139
00
14
04
206
00
61
52
ugj
00
01
01
205
00
43
02
dPpk jkLrk
00
02
03
199
00
34
83
197
00
17
59
ugj
00
00
55
196
00
21
42
f=acdiqj
मय रेवे (दड मनमाड
शाखा)
00
06
59
57
00
30
90
60
00
39
06
59&jkLrk
00
00
91
टाकलीिमया
48
00
24
22
50
00
29
33
47
00
00
20
51
00
11
74
53
00
12
04
ugj
00
00
77
54
00
07
44
55
00
19
78
ugj
00
01
55
36
00
00
65
35
00
21
36
59
00
10
64
29
00
04
05
62
00
21
00
63
00
14
85
64
00
06
53
73
00
22
87
74
00
10
49
75
00
08
79
87
00
32
01
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
63
86
00
27
88
98
00
27
28
7334
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
97
00
08
30
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
57
133
00
15
41
134
00
22
93
137
00
22
65
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
45
136
00
22
07
jkLrk
00
02
22
387
00
14
48
388
00
14
69
379
00
04
29
378
00
53
76
ugj
00
00
42
jkLrk
00
01
54
369
00
15
74
368
00
40
46
367
00
19
54
360
00
06
32
jkLrk
00
03
19
419
00
22
57
ugj
00
00
86
357
00
11
33
358
00
08
27
359
00
10
50
ugj
00
05
38
293
00
04
09
292
294
00
00
27
00
28
48
290
288
00
00
21
17
14
03
jkLrk
00
01
79
आरडगांव
80
00
32
91
79
00
25
78
78@1
00
15
59
78@2
00
15
63
77
00
06
28
76
00
23
48
75
00
27
56
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
44
57
00
35
62
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7335
58
00
28
12
तांदूलवाडी
jkLrk
00
01
33
109
00
75
93
110
00
37
41
111
00
30
15
112
00
06
28
82@2
00
43
34
ugj
00
01
55
78
00
35
77
73@2
00
20
27
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
58
68
00
17
44
69@2
00
24
73
69@3
00
03
52
64
00
42
98
रारी ¼,e lh ,y½
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
62
708
00
11
18
jkLrk
00
03
19
681
00
51
51
ugj
00
04
22
683
00
24
97
jkLrk
00
02
95
686
00
29
17
688
00
55
44
eqyk unh
00
10
23
देसवडी
eqyk unh
00
11
90
58
00
19
07
64
00
04
75
65
00
36
71
66
00
28
44
dPpk jkLrk
00
02
09
67
00
05
33
jkLrk
00
01
51
45
00
02
70
44
00
17
32
jkLrk
00
01
97
26
00
22
77
25
00
30
11
24
00
07
16
22
00
01
54
7336
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
23
00
18
33
5
00
19
75
6
00
09
59
7
00
06
92
8
00
04
97
9
00
16
05
10
00
22
64
jkLrk
00
01
73
204
00
21
28
208
00
01
80
203
00
15
96
ueuj vk[kkMk
71@c
00
15
99
71@v
00
28
84
84
00
03
47
83
00
27
33
82
00
40
15
81
00
01
97
113
00
11
84
112
00
09
63
110
00
11
08
109
00
11
39
119
00
17
18
126
00
05
88
125
00
11
83
123
00
08
27
162
00
08
04
163
00
07
96
164
00
08
64
165
00
08
28
166
00
07
65
159
00
00
76
पंपरी आवघड
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
85
11
00
00
20
47
00
27
23
46
00
24
05
42
00
22
51
jkLrk
,e Mh vkj&37
00
05
13
13
00
04
99
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7337
15
00
12
15
29
00
09
73
28
00
12
83
26
00
10
22
25
00
02
96
24
00
00
20
32@2
00
25
18
234
00
09
19
233
00
28
33
ugj
00
05
36
232
00
26
00
237
00
29
76
238
00
04
53
239
00
04
59
240
00
11
70
241
00
10
18
243
00
22
25
244@iSdh
00
57
23
251
00
34
14
252
00
13
63
253
00
11
94
ugj
00
02
59
LkMs
62
00
25
98
ugj
00
08
61
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
49
61
00
22
71
60
00
08
04
58
00
23
02
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
59
189
00
79
96
190
00
00
20
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
81
191
00
02
22
192
00
29
26
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
28
195
257
00
00
28
15
63
10
217
00
00
20
256
00
22
46
255
00
19
46
7338
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
219
00
09
74
jkLrk
00
00
75
227
00
06
89
228
00
05
94
229
00
07
91
230
00
08
03
231
00
01
58
232
00
09
26
233
00
09
21
234
00
06
79
235
00
07
46
236
00
06
91
237
00
04
75
jkLrk
00
02
33
416
00
22
49
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
52
nso unh
00
01
66
434
00
01
48
433
00
12
76
435
00
10
67
437
00
07
21
438
00
06
54
439
00
01
56
430
00
14
67
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
45
34@10
00
01
20
34@11
00
36
39
429
00
00
33
dPpk jkLrk
00
03
51
427
00
01
01
34@12
00
38
94
ugj
00
10
90
34@12@iSdh
00
31
56
[kMkacs cqæwd
152@24
00
51
34
jkLrk
00
04
35
jkLrk
00
01
86
152@23
00
34
68
152@22
00
43
83
ugj
00
00
20
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7339
152@20
00
71
57
185
00
07
31
187
00
19
53
192
00
03
07
191
00
24
11
190
00
10
36
198
00
15
25
199
00
11
65
jkLrk
00
04
16
81
00
04
26
80
00
14
08
79
00
08
90
78
00
11
07
77
00
22
86
76
00
24
36
96
00
00
20
75
00
17
90
74
00
00
28
97
00
23
82
99
00
21
48
jkLrk
00
02
11
100
00
54
21
66
00
01
39
65
00
35
64
64
00
13
36
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
65
ukyk
00
05
75
धामोरी बु ुक
ukyk
00
03
72
167
00
17
82
168
00
27
27
jkLrk
00
03
28
147
00
34
13
149
00
04
64
148
00
29
13
127
00
07
61
126
00
07
60
125
00
15
03
80
00
18
45
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
55
85
00
33
45
7340
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
,l ,p&10
00
04
34
84
00
29
45
92
00
14
94
93
00
07
53
94
00
12
99
95
00
13
47
jkLrk
00
04
03
96
00
21
93
97
00
15
27
98
00
21
02
100
00
60
74
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
57
[फा. सं. आर-25011/42/2017-ओआर-I]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2017
S.O. 2222.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for the
transportation of Petroleum from the State of Maharashtra a pipeline should be laid for implementing Koyali -
Ahmednagar – Solapur Pipeline Project under Koyali – Ahmednagar Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is
necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is
described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and
Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby
declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person who is interested in the land described in the said Schedule may submit objection in writing to Shri
A.B.Mohekar, Deputy Collector (Retd.) Competent Authority Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Second floor, 4/1, Varad
Sankul, Nandgaon Road, Manmad – 423 104, Maharashtra. Within twenty one days from the date on which the copies
of this notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India, are
made available to the general public.
SCHEDULE
Tehsil:- Rahuri
District:- Ahmadnagar
State :- Maharashtra
Mouje / Village
Survey/Block No.
Sub-Div-No.
Area
Hectare
Are
Sq.mtr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Malunje BK
Metal Road
00
01
88
152
00
38
53
Unlined Canal
00
02
72
Asphalt Road
00
01
91
Mahalgaon
Parvara River
00
11
48
115
00
32
76
117
00
00
68
114
00
09
04
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7341
Cart Track
00
00
60
112
00
30
36
106
00
01
81
Cart Track
00
02
64
Daradgaon (Belapur)
5
00
00
20
6/2
00
10
43
7/2
00
16
95
Cart Track
00
00
42
10
00
20
37
89
00
00
20
11
00
29
92
Asphalted Road
00
01
70
12
00
26
69
13
00
01
70
17
00
24
60
18
00
27
85
Cart Track
00
00
67
20
00
16
69
72
00
07
17
Unlined Canal
00
04
29
96
00
08
44
74
00
15
10
95
00
29
80
Field Channel
00
00
81
94
00
21
08
90
00
10
65
66
00
27
54
91
00
11
87
64
00
19
42
61
00
17
44
63/A
00
48
89
Cart Track
00
01
04
Lakh
10
00
25
93
117
00
06
10
Field Channel
00
00
66
118
00
03
93
119
00
05
78
120
00
06
66
121
00
06
54
122
00
12
55
123
00
02
11
124
00
15
13
125
00
08
00
7342
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
128
00
04
59
129
00
00
88
126
00
09
01
127
00
13
62
136
00
03
91
Metal Road
00
01
72
137
00
16
40
Cart Track
00
00
84
142
00
01
06
141
00
24
21
140
00
01
96
Cart Track
(ONLY IN ROU)
00
00
57
139
00
14
04
206
00
61
52
Field Channel
00
01
01
205
00
43
02
Cart Track
00
02
03
199
00
34
83
197
00
17
59
Field Channel
00
00
55
196
00
21
42
Trimbakpur
Central Railway
(Daund Manmad
Branch)
00
06
59
57
00
30
90
60
00
39
06
59-Metal Road
00
00
91
Takalimiya
48
00
24
22
50
00
29
33
47
00
00
20
51
00
11
74
53
00
12
04
Field Channel
00
00
77
54
00
07
44
55
00
19
78
Field Channel
(ONLY IN ROU)
00
01
55
36
(ONLY IN ROU)
00
00
65
35
00
21
36
59
00
10
64
29
00
04
05
62
00
21
00
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7343
63
00
14
85
64
00
06
53
73
00
22
87
74
00
10
49
75
00
08
79
87
00
32
01
Cart Track
00
00
63
86
00
27
88
98
00
27
28
97
00
08
30
Cart Track
00
00
57
133
00
15
41
134
00
22
93
137
00
22
65
Cart Track
00
00
45
136
00
22
07
Asphalted Road
00
02
22
387
00
14
48
388
00
14
69
379
00
04
29
378
00
53
76
Field Channel
00
00
42
Metal Road
00
01
54
369
00
15
74
368
00
40
46
367
00
19
54
360
00
06
32
Asphalted Road
00
03
19
419
00
22
57
Field Channel
00
00
86
357
00
11
33
358
00
08
27
359
00
10
50
Pravara Right Bank
Canal
00
05
38
293
00
04
09
292
00
27
28
294
00
00
48
290
00
21
14
288
00
17
03
Metal Road
00
01
79
Aradgaon
80
00
32
91
79
00
25
78
7344
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
78/1
00
15
59
78/2
00
15
63
77
00
06
28
76
00
23
48
75
00
27
56
Cart Track
00
00
44
57
00
35
62
58
00
28
12
Tandulwadi
Asphalted Road
00
01
33
109
00
75
93
110
00
37
41
111
00
30
15
112
00
06
28
82/2
00
43
34
Field Channel
00
01
55
78
00
35
77
73/2
00
20
27
Cart Track
00
00
58
68
00
17
44
69/2
00
24
73
69/3
00
03
52
64
00
42
98
Rahuri (MCL)
Cart Track
00
00
62
708
00
11
18
Asphalted Road
00
03
19
681
00
51
51
Lined Canal
00
04
22
683
00
24
97
Asphalted Road
00
02
95
686
00
29
17
688
00
55
44
Mula River
00
10
23
Deswadi
Mula River
00
11
90
58
00
19
07
64
00
04
75
65
00
36
71
66
00
28
44
Cart Track
00
02
09
67
00
05
33
Metal Road
00
01
51
45
00
02
70
44
00
17
32
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7345
Metal Road
00
01
97
26
00
22
77
25
00
30
11
24
00
07
16
22
00
01
54
23
00
18
33
5
00
19
75
6
00
09
59
7
00
06
92
8
00
04
97
9
00
16
05
10
00
22
64
Asphalted Road
00
01
73
204
00
21
28
208
00
01
80
203
00
15
96
Namnar Akhada
71/B
00
15
99
71/A
00
28
84
84
00
03
47
83
00
27
33
82
00
40
15
81
00
01
97
113
00
11
84
112
00
09
63
110
00
11
08
109
00
11
39
119
00
17
18
126
00
05
88
125
00
11
83
123
00
08
27
162
00
08
04
163
00
07
96
164
00
08
64
165
00
08
28
166
00
07
65
159
00
00
76
Pimpri Avaghad
Cart Track
00
00
85
11
00
00
20
47
00
27
23
46
00
24
05
42
00
22
51
Asphalted Road
MDR-37
00
05
13
7346
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
13
00
04
99
15
00
12
15
29
00
09
73
28
00
12
83
26
00
10
22
25
00
02
96
24
00
00
20
32/2
00
25
18
234
00
09
19
233
00
28
33
Mula Right Bank
Canal
00
05
36
232
00
26
00
237
00
29
76
238
00
04
53
239
00
04
59
240
00
11
70
241
00
10
18
243
00
22
25
244/Paiky
00
57
23
251
00
34
14
252
00
13
63
253
00
11
94
Mula Right Bank
Canal
00
02
59
Sade
62
00
25
98
Mula Right
Bank Canal
00
08
61
Cart Track
00
00
49
61
00
22
71
60
00
08
04
58
00
23
02
Cart Track
00
00
59
189
00
79
96
190
00
00
20
Cart Track
00
00
81
191
00
02
22
192
00
29
26
Cart Track
00
01
28
195
257
00
00
28
15
63
10
217
00
00
20
256
00
22
46
255
00
19
46
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7347
219
00
09
74
Metal Road
00
00
75
227
00
06
89
228
00
05
94
229
00
07
91
230
00
08
03
231
00
01
58
232
00
09
26
233
00
09
21
234
00
06
79
235
00
07
46
236
00
06
91
237
00
04
75
Asphated Road
00
02
33
416
00
22
49
Cart Track
00
00
52
Dev Nadi
00
01
66
434
00
01
48
433
00
12
76
435
00
10
67
437
00
07
21
438
00
06
54
439
00
01
56
430
00
14
67
Cart Track
00
01
45
34/10
00
01
20
34/11
00
36
39
429
00
00
33
Cart Track
00
03
51
427
00
01
01
34/12
00
38
94
Mula Right Bank
Canal
00
10
90
34/12/Paiky
00
31
56
Khadambe Bk
152/24
00
51
34
Murram Road
00
04
35
Murram Road
00
01
86
152/23
00
34
68
152/22
00
43
83
Lined Drain
00
00
20
152/20
00
71
57
185
00
07
31
187
00
19
53
7348
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
192
00
03
07
191
00
24
11
190
00
10
36
198
00
15
25
199
00
11
65
Metal Road
00
04
16
81
00
04
26
80
00
14
08
79
00
08
90
78
00
11
07
77
00
22
86
76
00
24
36
96
00
00
20
75
00
17
90
74
00
00
28
97
00
23
82
99
00
21
48
Metal Road
00
02
11
100
00
54
21
66
00
01
39
65
00
35
64
64
00
13
36
Cart Track
00
00
65
Nala
00
05
75
Dhamori Bk
Nala
00
03
72
167
00
17
82
168
00
27
27
Asphalted Road
00
03
28
147
00
34
13
149
00
04
64
148
00
29
13
127
00
07
61
126
00
07
60
125
00
15
03
80
00
18
45
Cart Track
00
00
55
85
00
33
45
SH-10
00
04
34
84
00
29
45
92
00
14
94
93
00
07
53
94
00
12
99
95
00
13
47
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7349
Asphalted Road
00
04
03
96
00
21
93
97
00
15
27
98
00
21
02
100
00
60
74
Cart Track
00
00
57
[F. No. R-25011/42/2017-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
नई दली, 14 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2223
2223
2223
2223.—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksdfgr esa ;g vko’;d gS fd egkjk"Vª jkT; esa
iSVªksfy;e inkFkks± ds ifjogu ds fy, Þdks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj iSVªksfy;e ikbiykbu ifj;kstuk ds fdz;kUo;u gsrq
bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg,%
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko’;d izrhr gksrk gS fd ,slh Hkwfe esa tks bl
ls mikCk) vuqlwph esa of.kZr gS] vkSj ftlesa mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS] mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k
tk,(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] iSVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e] 1962
¼1962 dk 50½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ml Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu
djus ds vius vk’k; dh ?kks"k.kk djrh gS%
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwPkh esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks bl vf/klwpuk esa ;qDr “kjr ds
jkti= dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gSa] bDdhl fnu ds “hrj] Hkwfe ds uhps ikbiykbZu fcNk, tkus
ds fy, mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds lacU/k esa Jh ,- ch- eksgsdj uk;c dysDVj ¼vodk’k izkIr½ l{ke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u
vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM] nwljh eafty 4@1] ojn ladqy नांदगांव lM+d] euekM egkjk"Vª & 423104 dks fyf[kr :i eas
vk{ksi Hkst ldsxkA
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
rkyqdk%&Jhjkeiqj
ftyk%& vgenuxj
jkT;%& egkjk"Vª
e©t¢@xzke
losZ @ CykWd @ la-
¼IykWV la-½
lc&Mho&la-
{ks=Qy
gsDVs;j
vkj
oxZ ehVj
1
2
3
4
5
6
ukSj
ukyk
00
01
44
176
00
57
48
175
00
15
75
174
00
55
14
173
00
04
41
jkLrk
¼,l ,p&47 iqjkuk½
00
01
98
218
00
38
37
219
00
52
17
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
17
225
00
01
10
224
00
33
19
223
00
35
39
7350
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Xkksnkojh unh
00
37
06
233
00
65
84
234
00
21
20
2
00
42
05
10
00
10
51
9
00
10
72
8
00
19
85
jkLrk
00
01
87
jkeiqj
69
00
13
63
65
00
58
53
61
00
66
12
53 d
00
36
92
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
95
60
00
00
20
53 c
00
36
93
53 v
00
46
17
50
00
37
64
48
00
15
23
47
00
17
17
fxey ukyk
00
01
48
46
00
17
59
45
00
03
04
44
00
24
28
43
00
14
22
42
00
11
80
41
00
46
61
31
00
06
75
32
00
13
76
,l ,p&47
00
01
70
40
00
28
51
38@2
00
24
09
36
00
08
93
37
00
38
65
34
00
00
20
33
00
53
12
सराला
197
00
09
79
196
00
09
67
195
00
21
65
194
00
22
27
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7351
ekysokMh
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
34
41
00
02
34
42
00
00
20
44
00
19
94
46
00
25
05
47
00
30
71
49
00
13
54
50
00
10
52
51
00
07
32
53
00
15
16
54
00
40
89
55
00
24
25
56
00
86
93
jkLrk
00
01
64
13
00
29
24
52
00
24
81
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
49
mafnjxkao
222
00
23
78
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
60
191
00
09
98
223
00
12
05
461
00
30
44
224
00
20
89
225
00
50
49
ukyk
00
01
66
226
00
00
29
227
00
32
34
190
00
32
76
189
00
30
48
187
00
81
96
184
00
23
36
182
00
24
53
180
00
15
76
179
00
04
32
178
00
05
19
177
00
13
92
jkLrk
00
01
53
175
00
18
45
174
00
14
88
173
00
18
88
7352
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
171
00
17
78
159
00
04
67
158
00
05
53
157
00
19
01
156
00
20
04
155
00
39
99
146
00
18
09
jkLrk
00
03
70
139 iSdh
00
08
02
jkLrk
00
02
20
139
00
31
83
ugj
00
02
31
138@2
00
16
35
98 v
00
38
42
98 c
00
70
21
ukyk
00
01
36
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
61
85
00
05
79
84
00
07
56
83
00
50
07
82
00
20
89
gjsxkoa
v
00
02
46
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
84
v
01
38
67
ukyk
00
01
19
d
00
01
61
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
50
d
01
05
88
ugj
00
00
61
d
01
35
96
ाहणगांव वेताल
9
00
20
82
8
00
10
42
12
00
10
01
jkLrk
00
03
80
15
00
23
66
14
00
02
45
147
00
38
71
13
00
01
22
oMkyk egknso
ugj
00
00
60
177
00
86
70
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7353
jkLrk
00
08
20
188
00
23
81
ugj
00
03
50
187
00
07
96
189@c
00
03
54
190
00
39
96
191
00
54
98
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
84
226
00
40
47
ugj
00
07
78
225
00
14
05
224
00
27
40
221
00
16
47
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
52
238
00
32
32
239
00
00
38
243
00
54
16
242
00
45
88
jkLrk
00
01
88
389
00
25
51
367
00
17
31
370
00
22
26
ukyk
00
03
26
382
00
20
09
381
00
28
71
380
00
01
59
jkLrk
00
01
73
378
00
39
58
8
00
31
63
7
00
13
11
ugj
00
01
40
,l ,p&44
00
05
43
22
00
07
49
jkLrk
00
04
09
24
00
56
43
ugj
00
00
61
25
00
51
10
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
90
50
00
63
81
ukyk
00
01
22
7354
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
uhikuh oMxkao
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
49
34
00
30
16
ugj
00
00
65
ugj
00
00
85
ugj
00
00
63
35
00
19
24
jkLrk
00
03
38
41
00
09
20
42
00
09
87
48
00
39
01
ugj
00
00
99
47
00
15
74
58
00
17
22
ugj
00
00
98
57
00
16
93
88
00
35
67
87
00
01
03
jkLrk
00
01
18
84
00
69
89
ugj
00
00
57
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
45
93
00
29
13
92
00
19
94
97
00
29
55
98
00
17
78
90
00
05
97
90 iSdh
00
09
57
jkLrk
00
02
24
100
00
10
04
102
00
32
54
320
00
08
14
ugj
00
09
53
jkLrk
00
03
14
106
00
28
32
105
00
00
84
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
57
111
00
48
69
110
00
16
88
112
00
05
48
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
37
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7355
114
00
05
67
115
00
22
86
jkLrk
00
01
38
130
00
12
77
129
00
67
53
123
00
11
56
122
00
25
24
121
00
20
64
120
00
24
04
118
00
19
48
117
00
12
08
dkjsxkao
a
dPpk jkLrk
325
00
00
00
40
62
30
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
74
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
58
314
00
12
68
312
00
15
42
307
00
32
29
304
00
09
25
303
00
25
91
300
00
22
25
299
00
47
22
jkLrk
00
02
51
263
00
21
08
262
00
19
41
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
50
259
00
11
61
258
00
25
63
257
00
11
28
256
00
21
23
255
00
39
84
jkLrk
00
03
85
241
00
30
23
240
00
24
16
238
00
26
76
236
00
19
54
234
00
03
47
232
00
21
42
231
00
21
64
227
00
50
58
7356
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
226
00
71
31
पढेगांव
dPpk jkLrk
00
02
47
362
00
03
52
365
00
23
68
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
57
366
00
25
05
367
00
16
86
368
00
18
66
ugj
00
03
75
369
00
28
42
370
00
00
90
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
68
लाडगांव
113
00
02
85
112
00
62
93
ugj
00
01
95
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
83
111
00
38
91
118
00
35
82
ugj
00
00
00
126
00
27
52
jkLrk
00
04
09
121
00
27
08
ugj
00
00
53
125
00
44
61
124
00
05
16
123
00
17
67
134
00
66
89
140
00
04
99
ugj
00
05
11
152
00
21
12
jkLrk
00
01
93
154
00
14
53
167
00
15
55
168
00
25
79
वरा नदी
00
08
83
[फा. सं. आर-25011/42/2017-ओआर-I]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7357
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2017
S.O. 2223.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for
the transportation of Petroleum from the State of Maharashtra a pipeline should be laid for implementing Koyali -
Ahmednagar – Solapur Pipeline Project under Koyali – Ahmednagar Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is
necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is
described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and
Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby
declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person who is interested in the land described in the said Schedule may submit objection in writing to Shri
A.B. Mohekar Deputy Collector (Retd.) Competent Authority Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Second floor, 4/1, Varad
Sankul Nandgaon Road, Manmad – 423104, Maharashtra. Within twenty one days from the date on which the copies
of this notification issued under sub-ection(1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India, are
made available to the general public.
SCHEDULE
Taluka:- Shrirampur
District:- Ahmadnagar
State :- Maharashtra
Mouje / Village
Survey/Block No.
Sub-Div-No.
Area
Hectare
Are
Sq.mtr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Naur
Nala
00
01
44
176
00
57
48
175
00
15
75
174
00
55
14
173
00
04
41
Metal Road
(SH-47 Old)
00
01
98
218
00
38
37
219
00
52
17
Cart Track
00
01
17
225
00
01
10
224
00
33
19
223
00
35
39
Godavari River
00
37
06
233
00
65
84
234
00
21
20
2
00
42
05
10
00
10
51
9
00
10
72
8
00
19
85
Asphalt Road
00
01
87
Rampur
69
00
13
63
65
00
58
53
61
00
66
12
53 C
00
36
92
7358
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Cart Track
00
01
95
60
00
00
20
53 B
00
36
93
53 A
00
46
17
50
00
37
64
48
00
15
23
47
00
17
17
Girnal Nala
00
01
48
46
00
17
59
45
00
03
04
44
00
24
28
43
00
14
22
42
00
11
80
41
00
46
61
31
00
06
75
32
00
13
76
SH-47
00
01
70
40
00
28
51
38/2
00
24
09
36
00
08
93
37
00
38
65
34
00
00
20
33
00
53
12
Sarala
197
00
09
79
196
00
09
67
195
00
21
65
194
00
22
27
Malewadi
Cart Track
00
01
34
41
00
02
34
42
00
00
20
44
00
19
94
46
00
25
05
47
00
30
71
49
00
13
54
50
00
10
52
51
00
07
32
53
00
15
16
54
00
40
89
55
00
24
25
56
00
86
93
Murram Road
00
01
64
13
00
29
24
52
00
24
81
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7359
Cart Track
00
00
49
Undirgaon
222
00
23
78
Cart Track
00
00
60
191
00
09
98
223
00
12
05
461
00
30
44
224
00
20
89
225
00
50
49
Nala
00
01
66
226
00
00
29
227
00
32
34
190
00
32
76
189
00
30
48
187
00
81
96
184
00
23
36
182
00
24
53
180
00
15
76
179
00
04
32
178
00
05
19
177
00
13
92
Asphalt Road
00
01
53
175
00
18
45
174
00
14
88
173
00
18
88
171
00
17
78
159
00
04
67
158
00
05
53
157
00
19
01
156
00
20
04
155
00
39
99
146
00
18
09
Metal Road
00
03
70
139 Paiky
00
08
02
Asphalt Road
00
02
20
139
00
31
83
Lined Drain
00
02
31
138/2
00
16
35
98 A
00
38
42
98B
00
70
21
Nala
00
01
36
Cart Track
00
01
61
85
00
05
79
84
00
07
56
7360
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
83
00
50
07
82
00
20
89
Haregaon
A
00
02
46
Cart Track
00
01
84
A
01
38
67
Nala
00
01
19
C
00
01
61
Cart Track
00
00
50
C
01
05
88
Unlined Drain
00
00
61
C
01
35
96
Bramhangaon Vetal
9
00
20
82
8
00
10
42
12
00
10
01
Asphalt Road
00
03
80
15
00
23
66
14
00
02
45
147
00
38
71
13
00
01
22
Wadala Mahadeo
Unlined Drain
00
00
60
177
00
86
70
Asphalt Road
00
08
20
188
00
23
81
Unlined Canal
00
03
50
187
00
07
96
189/B
00
03
54
190
00
39
96
191
00
54
98
Cart Track
00
00
84
226
00
40
47
Unlined Canal
00
07
78
225
00
14
05
224
00
27
40
221
00
16
47
Cart Track
00
00
52
238
00
32
32
239
00
00
38
243
00
54
16
242
00
45
88
Asphalt Road
00
01
88
389
00
25
51
367
00
17
31
370
00
22
26
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7361
Nala
00
03
26
382
00
20
09
381
00
28
71
380
00
01
59
Asphalt Road
00
01
73
378
00
39
58
8
00
31
63
7
00
13
11
Canal
Distributary
No.40
00
01
40
SH-44
00
05
43
22
00
07
49
Asphalt Road
00
04
09
24
00
56
43
Field Channel
00
00
61
25
00
51
10
Cart Track
00
00
90
50
00
63
81
Nala
00
01
22
Nipani Wadgaon
Cart Track
00
00
49
34
00
30
16
Field Channel
00
00
65
Field Channel
00
00
85
Field Channel
00
00
63
35
00
19
24
Asphalt Road
00
03
38
41
00
09
20
42
00
09
87
48
00
39
01
Field Channel
00
00
99
47
00
15
74
58
00
17
22
Field Channel
00
00
98
57
00
16
93
88
00
35
67
87
00
01
03
Metal Road
00
01
18
84
00
69
89
Field Channel
00
00
57
Cart Track
00
00
45
93
00
29
13
92
00
19
94
7362
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
97
00
29
55
98
00
17
78
90
00
05
97
90 Paiky
00
09
57
Asphalt Road
00
02
24
100
00
10
04
102
00
32
54
320
00
08
14
Pravara Left Bank
Canal
00
09
53
Asphalt Road
00
03
14
106
00
28
32
105
00
00
84
Cart Track
00
00
57
111
00
48
69
110
00
16
88
112
00
05
48
Cart Track
00
00
37
114
00
05
67
115
00
22
86
Metal Road
00
01
38
130
00
12
77
129
00
67
53
123
00
11
56
122
00
25
24
121
00
20
64
120
00
24
04
118
00
19
48
117
00
12
08
Karegaon
Cart Track
00
00
62
325
00
40
30
Cart Track
00
00
74
Cart Track
00
00
58
314
00
12
68
312
00
15
42
307
00
32
29
304
00
09
25
303
00
25
91
300
00
22
25
299
00
47
22
Metal Road
00
02
51
263
00
21
08
262
00
19
41
Cart Track
00
00
50
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7363
259
00
11
61
258
00
25
63
257
00
11
28
256
00
21
23
255
00
39
84
Asphalt Road
00
03
85
241
00
30
23
240
00
24
16
238
00
26
76
236
00
19
54
234
00
03
47
232
00
21
42
231
00
21
64
227
00
50
58
226
00
71
31
Padhegaon
Cart Track
00
02
47
362
00
03
52
365
00
23
68
Cart Track
00
00
57
366
00
25
05
367
00
16
86
368
00
18
66
Unlined Canal
00
03
75
369
00
28
42
370
00
00
90
Cart Track
00
00
68
Ladgaon
113
00
02
85
112
00
62
93
Field Channel
00
01
95
Cart Track
00
00
83
111
00
38
91
118
00
35
82
Canal
00
00
00
126
00
27
52
Asphalt Road
00
04
09
121
00
12
61
Field Channel
00
00
53
125
00
44
61
124
00
05
16
123
00
17
67
134
00
66
89
140
00
04
99
7364
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Unlined Canal
00
05
11
152
00
21
12
Asphalt Road
00
01
93
154
00
14
53
167
00
15
55
168
00
25
79
Pravara River
00
08
83
[F. No. R-25011/42/2017-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
नई दली, 14 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2224
2224
2224
2224.—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksdfgr esa ;g vko’;d gS fd egkjk"Vª jkT; esa
iSVªksfy;e inkFkksZ ds ifjogu ds fy, Þdks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj iSVªksfy;e ikbiykbu ifj;kstuk ds fdz;kUo;u gsrq
bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg,%
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko’;d izrhr gksrk gS fd ,slh Hkwfe esa tks bl
ls mikCk) vuqlwfp esa of.kZr gS] vkSj ftlesa mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS] mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k
tk,(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] iSVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e] 1962
¼1962 dk 50½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ml Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu
djus ds vius vk’k; dh ?kks"k.kk djrh gS%
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwPkh esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks bl vf/klwpuk esa ;qDr “kjr ds
jkti= dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gSa] bDdhl fnu ds “hrj] Hkwfe ds uhps ikbiykbZu fcNk, tkus
ds fy, mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds lacU?k esa Jh ,- ch- eksgsdj uk;c dysDVj ¼vodk’k izkIr½ l{ke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u
vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM] nwljh eafty 4@1] ojn ladqy नांदगांव lM+d] euekM egkjk"Vª & 423104 dks fyf[kr :i eas
vk{ksi Hkst ldsxkA
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
rkyqdk%&d¨ijxkao
ftyk%& vgenuxj
jkT;%& egkjk"Vª
ekSts @xzke
losZ @ Cykd @ la-
¼IyksV la-½
lc&Mho&la-
{ks=Qy
gsDVj
vkj
oxZ ehVj
1
2
3
4
5
6
सावलगांव
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
94
113
00
22
60
112
00
13
45
121
00
02
58
116
00
11
05
111
00
14
45
109
00
14
14
jkLrk
00
02
25
27
00
19
40
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7365
28
00
04
11
25
00
05
70
22
00
03
32
21
00
04
12
20
00
05
31
17
00
06
46
14
00
06
41
13
00
05
59
9
00
06
30
8
00
08
78
7
00
03
83
5
00
00
20
6
00
15
58
3
00
07
46
jkLrk
00
02
94
2
00
28
68
dksy ukyk
00
03
39
fryo.kh
dksy ukyk
00
03
55
16
00
40
37
14
00
35
88
13
00
17
38
jkLrk
00
05
18
59
00
08
73
ukyk
00
00
95
60
00
09
75
61
00
01
91
86
00
07
40
87
00
06
29
88
00
06
92
89
00
06
91
91
00
10
55
93
00
03
49
94
00
12
38
95
00
03
39
96
00
00
20
101
00
29
80
jkLrk
00
03
64
108
00
08
37
109
00
07
88
111
00
09
21
7366
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
113
00
08
39
114
00
03
25
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
34
117
00
43
97
ukyk
00
06
04
133
00
30
08
132
00
43
34
216
00
00
20
131
00
38
43
jkLrk
00
04
31
ugj
00
02
61
218
00
19
10
219
00
17
15
220
00
05
79
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
85
221
00
48
87
227
00
02
63
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
56
vkisxkao
57
00
22
54
55
00
12
96
54
00
06
37
53
00
08
85
52
00
17
87
50
00
10
61
ukyk
00
02
88
160
00
16
39
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
65
162
00
16
75
163
00
00
20
161
00
03
46
165
00
06
79
166
00
05
28
167
00
05
37
jkLrk
00
01
72
155
00
07
54
154
00
07
11
jkLrk
00
00
93
183
00
07
85
153
00
10
16
152
00
00
57
185
00
14
27
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7367
186
00
03
07
147
00
28
47
188
00
07
78
145
00
72
98
jkLrk
00
07
31
192
00
13
43
jkLrk
00
05
56
193
00
38
70
201
00
23
45
200
00
20
17
?kks;sxkao
43
00
36
28
44
00
32
08
45
00
17
85
46
00
07
66
rysxkao eys
70
00
01
97
61
00
45
30
60
00
01
78
62
00
10
74
63
00
11
99
64
00
12
57
65
00
14
09
55
00
03
09
54
00
26
44
53
00
27
65
52
00
42
73
49
00
00
78
51
00
10
90
jkLrk
00
01
14
ukyk
00
01
73
111
00
12
44
110
00
08
00
109
00
12
84
108
00
12
35
105
00
23
28
104
00
12
98
ugj
00
10
73
119
00
52
61
118
00
07
33
120
00
07
35
125
00
56
53
7368
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
136
00
40
89
ugj
00
03
59
jkLrk
00
04
76
138
00
23
56
137
00
03
67
139
00
07
55
140
00
04
11
141
00
00
24
142
00
13
43
144
00
00
20
[फा. सं. आर-25011/42/2017-ओआर-I]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2017
S.O. 2224.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for
the transportation of Petroleum from the State of Maharashtra a pipeline should be laid for implementing Koyali -
Ahmednagar – Solapur Pipeline Project under Koyali – Ahmednagar Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is
necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is
described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and
Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby
declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person who is interested in the land described in the said Schedule may submit objection in writing to
Shri A.B. Mohekar Deputy Collector (Retd.) Competent Authority Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Second floor, 4/1,
Varad Sankul, Nandgaon Road, Manmad – 423104, Maharashtra. Within twenty one days from the date on which the
copies of this notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India,
are made available to the general public.
SCHEDULE
Taluka:- Kopargaon
District:- Ahmadnagar
State :- Maharashtra
Mouje / Village
Survey/Block No.
Sub-Div-No.
Area
Hectare
Are
Sq.mtr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Sawalgaon
Field Cart Track
00
00
94
113
00
22
60
112
00
13
45
121
00
02
58
116
00
11
05
111
00
14
45
109
00
14
14
Metal Road
00
02
25
27
00
19
40
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7369
28
00
04
11
25
00
05
70
22
00
03
32
21
00
04
12
20
00
05
31
17
00
06
46
14
00
06
41
13
00
05
59
9
00
06
30
8
00
08
78
7
00
03
83
5
00
00
20
6
00
15
58
3
00
07
46
Asphalted Road
00
02
94
2
00
28
68
Kol Nala
00
03
39
Tilvani
Kol Nala
00
03
55
16
00
40
37
14
00
35
88
13
00
17
38
Metal Road
00
05
18
59
00
08
73
Nala
00
00
95
60
00
09
75
61
00
01
91
86
00
07
40
87
00
06
29
88
00
06
92
89
00
06
91
91
00
10
55
93
00
03
49
94
00
12
38
95
00
03
39
96
00
00
20
101
00
29
80
Metal Road
00
03
64
108
00
08
37
109
00
07
88
111
00
09
21
113
00
08
39
7370
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
114
00
03
25
Field Cart Track
00
00
34
117
00
43
97
Nala
00
06
04
133
00
30
08
132
00
43
34
216
00
00
20
131
00
38
43
Asphalt Road
00
04
31
Unlined Canal
00
02
61
218
00
19
10
219
00
17
15
220
00
05
79
Field Cart Track
00
00
85
221
00
48
87
227
00
02
63
Field Cart Track
00
00
56
Aapegaon
57
00
22
54
55
00
12
96
54
00
06
37
53
00
08
85
52
00
17
87
50
00
10
61
Nala
00
02
88
160
00
16
39
Field Cart Track
00
00
65
162
00
16
75
163
00
00
20
161
00
03
46
165
00
06
79
166
00
05
28
167
00
05
37
Metal Road
00
01
72
155
00
07
54
154
00
07
11
Metal Road
00
00
93
183
00
07
85
153
00
10
16
152
00
00
57
185
00
14
27
186
00
03
07
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7371
147
00
28
47
188
00
07
78
145
00
72
98
Metal Road
00
07
31
192
00
13
43
Metal Road
00
05
56
193
00
38
70
201
00
23
45
200
00
20
17
Ghoyegaon
43
00
36
28
44
00
32
08
45
00
17
85
46
00
07
66
Talegaon Male
70
00
01
97
61
00
45
30
60
00
01
78
62
00
10
74
63
00
11
99
64
00
12
57
65
00
14
09
55
00
03
09
54
00
26
44
53
00
27
65
52
00
42
73
49
00
00
78
51
00
10
90
Murram Road
00
01
14
Nala
00
01
73
111
00
12
44
110
00
08
00
109
00
12
84
108
00
12
35
105
00
23
28
104
00
12
98
Godavari Left
Bank Canal
00
10
73
119
00
52
61
118
00
07
33
120
00
07
35
125
00
56
53
136
00
40
89
7372
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Unlined Canal
00
03
59
Asphalt Road
00
04
76
138
00
23
56
137
00
03
67
139
00
07
55
140
00
04
11
141
00
00
24
142
00
13
43
144
00
00
20
[F. No. R-25011/42/2017-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
नई दली, 14 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2225
2225
2225
2225.—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksdfgr esa ;g vko’;d gS fd egkjk"Vª jkT; esa
iSVªksfy;e inkFkksZ ds ifjogu ds fy, Þdks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj iSVªksfy;e ikbiykbu ifj;kstuk ds fdz;kUo;u gsrq
bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg,%
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko’;d izrhr gksrk gS fd ,slh Hkwfe esa tks bl
ls mikCk) vuqlwfp esa of.kZr gS] vkSj ftlesa mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS] mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k
tk,(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] iSVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e] 1962
¼1962 dk 50½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ml Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu
djus ds vius vk’k; dh ?kks"k.kk djrh gS%
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwPkh esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks bl vf/klwpuk esa ;qDr “kjr ds
jkti= dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gSa] bDdhl fnu ds “hrj] Hkwfe ds uhps ikbiykbZu fcNk, tkus
ds fy, mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds lacU?k esa Jh ,- ch- eksgsdj uk;c dysDVj ¼vodk’k izkIr½ l{ke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u
vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM] nwljh eafty 4@1] ojn ladqy नांदगांव lM+d] euekM egkjk"Vª & 423104 dks fyf[kr :i eas
vk{ksi Hkst ldsxkA
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
rkyqdk%&uxj
ftyk%& vgenuxj
jkT;%& egkjk"Vª
मौजे @xzke
losZ @ Cykd @ la-
¼IyksV la-½
lc&Mho&la-
{ks=Qy
gsDVj
vkj
oxZ ehVj
1
2
3
4
5
6
नांदगांव
163
00
40
99
166
00
29
95
165
00
20
65
ukyk
00
05
13
176
00
21
90
jkLrk
00
02
02
173
00
36
97
174
00
23
42
175
00
33
12
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7373
jkLrk
00
02
15
46
00
10
58
29
00
65
58
27
00
22
06
30
00
21
68
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
74
31
00
36
04
33
00
48
31
ukyk
00
02
29
flaxkos
ukyk
00
02
23
110
00
43
42
91
00
57
19
92
00
03
24
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
97
96
00
39
69
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
70
blekyiqj
173
00
56
71
172
00
24
31
161
00
06
48
162
00
06
55
163 ¼ rkykc ½
00
02
45
164 ¼ rkykc ½
00
06
99
165 ¼ rkykc ½
00
00
27
ukyk
00
03
18
uhac nsgsj
ukyk
00
02
84
192
00
37
28
190
00
95
20
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
64
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
79
177
00
76
35
176
00
00
44
178
00
34
65
179
00
75
67
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
73
113
00
08
80
112
00
66
64
109
00
00
90
108
00
20
73
7374
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
107
00
31
13
jkLrk
00
01
87
106
00
29
81
118
00
21
58
119
00
52
31
cso unh
00
05
90
91
00
48
24
90
00
00
80
89
00
25
62
88
00
30
53
foyn
129
00
39
25
128
00
52
82
127
00
14
89
125
00
82
64
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
67
122
00
72
02
119
00
50
33
ukyk
00
02
60
114
00
99
97
jkLrk
00
01
50
223
00
93
36
218
00
11
41
216
00
47
57
215
00
11
66
213
00
18
24
212
00
20
87
211
00
01
42
214
00
21
47
jkLrk
00
03
31
ukyk
00
02
79
5
00
14
96
6
00
55
93
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
55
7
00
16
40
ukyk
00
02
48
207
00
19
98
ukyk
00
02
34
8
00
75
03
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7375
_नंबलक
119
00
37
38
120
00
24
31
124
00
48
71
122
00
01
25
123
00
37
56
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
15
125
00
57
34
126
00
25
39
127
00
04
43
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
72
128
00
72
55
112@2
00
40
94
ukyk
00
03
92
112@1
00
52
49
54
00
56
46
52
00
69
28
jkLrk
00
04
27
549
00
49
66
553
00
22
88
554
00
43
71
544
00
29
64
csUn ukyk
00
02
93
543
00
09
03
542
00
36
07
529
00
33
67
531
00
33
39
514
00
40
58
521
00
10
09
515
00
14
11
520
00
02
27
519
00
02
37
518
00
01
10
516
00
17
13
513
517
00
00
16
01
0944
512
00
72
37
511
00
00
72
510
00
00
25
7376
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
blyd
247
00
59
22
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
54
246
00
02
51
193
00
18
26
192
00
24
47
191
00
31
72
190
00
18
53
1
00
01
60
,l ,p&145
00
03
76
2
00
05
04
3
00
06
13
4
00
07
37
5
00
18
06
7
00
05
30
8
00
10
03
9
00
03
82
10
00
13
20
41
00
11
87
40
00
17
18
38
00
67
75
jkLrk
00
01
83
27
00
44
76
ukyk
00
01
67
28
00
00
33
29
00
17
12
gfeniqj
203
00
00
57
209
00
35
83
210
00
11
89
211
00
08
02
212
00
09
20
213
00
27
64
223
00
30
41
224
00
42
36
ugj
00
02
35
286
00
31
74
281
00
58
50
jkLrk
00
02
53
248
00
34
49
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7377
244
00
09
07
249
00
00
20
255 c
00
25
25
fluk unh
00
03
80
fuacxkao ok?kk
fluk unh
00
03
38
479
00
22
69
476
00
19
25
,u ,p&222
00
04
40
477
00
12
47
467
00
18
16
475
00
10
12
468
00
15
66
469
00
16
54
470
00
16
04
465
00
39
94
459
00
06
90
460
00
72
33
458
00
17
41
457
00
17
74
456
00
50
13
452
00
02
93
453
00
21
01
454
00
53
01
jkLrk
00
01
91
435
00
04
67
jkLrk
00
03
13
402
00
23
68
401
00
25
23
400
00
29
24
399
00
18
54
404
00
10
36
405
00
21
35
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
76
395
00
39
79
jkLrk
00
03
34
297
00
01
68
ukyk
00
01
83
304
00
33
29
7378
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
239 iSdh
00
08
55
239
00
45
00
241
00
08
36
242
00
07
75
243
00
09
21
245
00
29
23
227
00
06
97
228
00
23
88
218
00
06
36
217
00
26
61
216
00
00
93
220
00
00
92
ukyk
00
03
14
167
00
09
91
165
00
12
25
166
00
07
91
164
00
19
21
162
00
34
90
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
88
159
00
56
25
160
00
82
06
,l ,p&146
00
03
27
122
00
14
51
pkl
72
00
39
13
69
00
14
77
71
00
00
20
1084
00
38
79
75
00
20
14
76
00
16
43
77
00
18
11
53
00
13
31
50
00
05
76
49
00
09
16
48
00
14
24
47
00
12
77
46
00
15
84
45
00
12
32
44
00
10
82
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7379
42
00
03
75
dPpk jkLrk
00
02
05
128
00
06
58
129
00
16
23
130
00
12
56
146
00
05
69
142
00
18
04
143 iSdh
00
07
76
,l ,p&60
00
05
26
143
00
24
18
221
00
11
57
220
00
09
45
219
00
06
36
234
00
08
74
233
00
05
56
231
00
05
43
ukyk
00
02
72
225
00
11
21
224
00
12
74
esandk unh
00
06
37
447
00
03
91
442
00
08
32
449
00
14
40
450
00
09
32
454@2@v
00
01
57
454
00
00
66
ukyk
00
03
70
453
00
06
95
455
00
00
64
456
00
06
36
457
00
03
81
458
00
08
99
459
00
11
32
460
00
00
20
jkLrk
00
01
98
521
00
45
87
516
00
24
33
515
00
13
90
7380
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
514
00
12
25
505
00
07
28
504
00
02
71
jkLrk
00
04
04
544
00
18
99
545
00
14
19
546
00
09
55
547
00
18
07
548
00
41
93
558
00
35
23
559
00
42
89
ukyk
00
01
15
vdksyusj
ukyk
00
01
13
182
00
42
10
183
00
44
03
196
00
53
78
ukyk
00
01
03
197
00
14
79
198
00
05
73
199
00
04
69
200
00
05
52
202
00
03
61
203
00
07
23
204
00
05
24
205
00
02
27
206
00
02
13
207
00
02
43
208
00
07
07
216
00
12
92
dPpk jkLrk ¼235½
00
01
76
231
00
08
09
236
00
08
51
237
00
23
88
240
00
00
20
241
00
11
75
286
00
36
54
287
00
24
73
288
00
00
24
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7381
289
00
05
28
290
00
19
94
291
00
20
64
292
00
67
59
jkLrk
¼,e Mh vkj-&65½
00
03
58
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
10
346
00
26
72
344
00
42
55
345
00
05
29
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
58
294
00
06
05
342
00
32
67
jkLrk
00
00
53
341
00
33
57
vkb vks lh ,y VfeZuy
00
16
99
[फा. सं. आर-25011/42/2017-ओआर-I]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2017
S.O. 2225.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for
the transportation of Petroleum from the State of Maharashtra a pipeline should be laid for implementing Koyali -
Ahmednagar – Solapur Pipeline Project under Koyali – Ahmednagar Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is
necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is
described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and
Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby
declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person who is interested in the land described in the said Schedule may submit objection in writing to Shri
A.B.Mohekar Deputy Collector (Retd.) Competent Authority Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Second floor, 4/1, Varad
Sankul, Nandgaon Road, Manmad – 423104, Maharashtra. Within twenty one days from the date on which the copies
of this notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India, are
made available to the general public.
SCHEDULE
Tehsil:- Nagar
District:- Ahmadnagar
State :- Maharashtra
Mouje / Village
Survey/Block No.
Sub-Div-No.
Area
Hectare
Are
Sq.mtr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Nandgaon
163
00
40
99
166
00
29
95
165
00
20
65
7382
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Nala
00
05
13
176
00
21
90
Metal Road
00
02
02
173
00
36
97
174
00
23
42
175
00
33
12
Asphalt Road
00
02
15
46
00
10
58
29
00
65
58
27
00
22
06
30
00
21
68
Cart Track
00
00
74
31
00
36
04
33
00
48
31
Nala
00
02
29
Shingawe
Nala
00
02
23
110
00
43
42
91
00
57
19
92
00
03
24
Cart Track
00
00
97
96
00
39
69
Cart Track
00
01
70
Ismalpur
173
00
56
71
172
00
24
31
161
00
06
48
162
00
06
55
163(Pond)
00
02
45
164(Pond)
00
06
99
165(Pond)
00
00
27
Nala
00
03
18
Nimb Dehere
Nala
00
02
84
192
00
37
28
190
00
95
20
Cart Track
00
00
64
Cart Track
00
00
79
177
00
76
35
176
00
00
44
178
00
34
65
179
00
75
67
Cart Track
00
00
73
113
00
08
80
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7383
112
00
66
64
109
00
00
90
108
00
20
73
107
00
31
13
Metal Road
00
01
87
106
00
29
81
118
00
21
58
119
00
52
31
Bev River
00
05
90
91
00
48
24
90
00
00
80
89
00
25
62
88
00
30
53
Vilad
129
00
39
25
128
00
52
82
127
00
14
89
125
00
82
64
Cart Track
00
00
67
122
00
72
02
119
00
50
33
Nala
00
02
60
114
00
99
97
Asphalt Road
00
01
50
223
00
93
36
218
00
11
41
216
00
47
57
215
00
11
66
213
00
18
24
212
00
20
87
211
00
01
42
214
00
21
47
Asphalt Road
00
03
31
Nala
00
02
79
5
00
14
96
6
00
55
93
Field Cart Track
00
00
55
7
00
16
40
Nala
00
02
48
207
00
19
98
Nala
00
02
34
8
00
75
03
7384
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Nimbalak
119
00
37
38
120
00
24
31
124
00
48
71
122
00
01
25
123
00
37
56
Cart Track
00
01
15
125
00
57
34
126
00
25
39
127
00
04
43
Cart Track
00
00
72
128
00
72
55
112/2
00
40
94
Nala
00
03
92
112/1
00
52
49
54
00
56
46
52
00
69
28
Asphalt Road
00
04
27
549
00
49
66
553
00
22
88
554
00
43
71
544
00
29
64
Bend Nala
00
02
93
543
00
09
03
542
00
36
07
529
00
33
67
531
00
33
39
514
00
40
58
521
00
10
09
515
00
14
11
520
00
02
27
519
00
02
37
518
00
01
10
516
00
17
13
513
517
00
00
16
01
09
44
512
00
72
37
511
00
00
72
510
00
00
25
Islak
247
00
59
22
Cart Track
00
00
54
246
00
02
51
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7385
193
00
18
26
192
00
24
47
191
00
31
72
190
00
18
53
1
00
01
60
SH-145
00
03
76
2
00
05
04
3
00
06
13
4
00
07
37
5
00
18
06
7
00
05
30
8
00
10
03
9
00
03
82
10
00
13
20
41
00
11
87
40
00
17
18
38
00
67
75
Metal Road
00
01
83
27
00
44
76
Nala
00
01
67
28
00
00
33
29
00
17
12
Hamidpur
203
00
00
57
209
00
35
83
210
00
11
89
211
00
08
02
212
00
09
20
213
00
27
64
223
00
30
41
224
00
42
36
Canal
00
02
35
286
00
31
74
281
00
58
50
Asphalt Road
00
02
53
248
00
34
49
244
00
09
07
249
00
00
20
255B
00
25
25
Sina River
00
03
80
Nimbgaon Wagha
Sina River
00
03
38
479
00
22
69
7386
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
476
00
19
25
NH-222
00
04
40
477
00
12
47
467
00
18
16
475
00
10
12
468
00
15
66
469
00
16
54
470
00
16
04
465
00
39
94
459
00
06
90
460
00
72
33
458
00
17
41
457
00
17
74
456
00
50
13
452
00
02
93
453
00
21
01
454
00
53
01
Metal Road
00
01
91
435
00
04
67
Metal Road
00
03
13
402
00
23
68
401
00
25
23
400
00
29
24
399
00
18
54
404
00
10
36
405
00
21
35
Cart Track
00
01
76
395
00
39
79
Asphalt Road
00
03
34
297
00
01
68
Nala
00
01
83
304
00
33
29
239 Paiky
00
08
55
239
00
45
00
241
00
08
36
242
00
07
75
243
00
09
21
245
00
29
23
227
00
06
97
228
00
23
88
218
00
06
36
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7387
217
00
26
61
216
00
00
93
220
00
00
92
Nala
00
03
14
167
00
09
91
165
00
12
25
166
00
07
91
164
00
19
21
162
00
34
90
Cart Track
00
00
88
159
00
56
25
160
00
82
06
SH-146
00
03
27
122
00
14
51
Chas
72
00
39
13
69
00
14
77
71
00
00
20
1084
00
38
79
75
00
20
14
76
00
16
43
77
00
18
11
53
00
13
31
50
00
05
76
49
00
09
16
48
00
14
24
47
00
12
77
46
00
15
84
45
00
12
32
44
00
10
82
42
00
03
75
Cart Track
00
02
05
128
00
06
58
129
00
16
23
130
00
12
56
146
00
05
69
142
00
18
04
143 Paiky
00
07
76
SH-60
00
05
26
143
00
24
18
221
00
11
57
220
00
09
45
7388
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
219
00
06
36
234
00
08
74
233
00
05
56
231
00
05
43
Nala
00
02
72
225
00
11
21
224
00
12
74
Mendka River
00
06
37
447
00
03
91
442
00
08
32
449
00
14
40
450
00
09
32
454/2/A
00
01
57
454
00
00
66
Nala
00
03
70
453
00
06
95
455
00
00
64
456
00
06
36
457
00
03
81
458
00
08
99
459
00
11
32
460
00
00
20
Asphalt Road
00
01
98
521
00
45
87
516
00
24
33
515
00
13
90
514
00
12
25
505
00
07
28
504
00
02
71
Metal Road
00
04
04
544
00
18
99
545
00
14
19
546
00
09
55
547
00
18
07
548
00
41
93
558
00
35
23
559
00
42
89
Nala
00
01
15
Akolner
Nala
00
01
13
182
00
42
10
183
00
44
03
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7389
196
00
53
78
Nala
00
01
03
197
00
14
79
198
00
05
73
199
00
04
69
200
00
05
52
202
00
03
61
203
00
07
23
204
00
05
24
205
00
02
27
206
00
02
13
207
00
02
43
208
00
07
07
216
00
12
92
Cart Track (235)
00
01
76
231
00
08
09
236
00
08
51
237
00
23
88
240
00
00
20
241
00
11
75
286
00
36
54
287
00
24
73
288
00
00
24
289
00
05
28
290
00
19
94
291
00
20
64
292
00
67
59
Asphalt Road
(MDR-65)
00
03
58
Cart Track
00
01
10
346
00
26
72
344
00
42
55
345
00
05
29
Field Cart Track
00
00
58
294
00
06
05
342
00
32
67
Footpath
00
00
53
341
00
33
57
IOCL Terminal
Akolner
00
16
99
[F. No. R-25011/42/2017-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
7390
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
नई दली, 18 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2226
2226
2226
2226.— के ीय सरकार ने पेोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइन (भूिम म उपयोग के अिधकार का अज%न) अिधिनयम
1962, (1962 का 50) क' धारा 2 के ख( ड (अ) के अनुसरण म 2 फ़रवरी 2015 को भारत के राजप, म -कािशत, भारत सरकार के
पेोिलयम और -ाकृितक गैस मं,ालय क' अिधसूचना सं4 या का.आ. 307 (अ) तारीख 23 जनवरी, 2015 म िन निलिखत 5प म
संशोधन करती है
संशोधन करती है
संशोधन करती है
संशोधन करती है,
6ी बी. वी. एस. -साद, व:र; -चालन -बधक” शद
शद
शद
शद के
के
के
के थान
थान
थान
थान पर
पर
पर
पर, ‘’6ी के. वी. एस. मू<त%, -चालन -बधक, ” शद
शद
शद
शद रखे
रखे
रखे
रखे
जाएंगे
जाएंगे
जाएंगे
जाएंगे।
यह अिधसूचना जारी होने क' तारीख से लागू होगी ।
[फा. सं. आर-25011/14/2012-ओआर-I (पाट%)/48578]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2017
S.O. 2226.—In pursuance of clause (a) of Section 2 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of
Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby makes the following amendment in the
notification of Government of India in Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas S.O. 308 (E) dated 23rd January 2015,
namely:
In the said notification, for the words “Shri B. V. S. Prasad, Senior Operations Manager” the words “Shri K. V.
S. Murthy, Operations Manager” shall be substituted.
The notification is applicable from the date of issue.
[F. No. R-25011/14/2012-OR-I (Pt.)/48578]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
नई दली, 18 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2227
2227
2227
2227.—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksdfgr esa ;g vko’;d gS fd egkjk"Vª jkT; esa
isVªksfy;e inkFkksZ ds ifjogu ds fy, Þdks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj isVªksfy;e ikbiykbu ifj;kstuk ds fdz;kUo;u gsrq
bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg,%
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko’;d izrhr gksrk gS fd ,slh Hkwfe esa tks bl
ls mikCk) vuqlwfp esa of.kZr gS] vkSj ftlesa mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS] mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k
tk,(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] isVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e] 1962
¼1962 dk 50½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ml Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu
djus ds vius vk’k; dh ?kks"k.kk djrh gS%
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwPkh esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks bl vf/klwpuk esa ;qDr “kjr ds
jkti= dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gSa] bDdhl fnu ds “hrj] Hkwfe ds uhps ikbiykbZu fcNk, tkus
ds fy, mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds lacU?k esa Jh ,- ch- eksgsdj uk;c dysDVj ¼vodk’k izkIr½ l{ke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u
vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM] nwljh eafty 4@1] ojn ladqy नांदगांव lM+d] euekM egkjk"Vª & 423104 dks fyf[kr :i eas
vk{ksi Hkst ldsxkA
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
rkyqdk%&oStkiqj
ftyk%& vkSjaxkckn
jkT;%& egkjk"Vª
ekSts@xzke
losZ @ Cykd @ la-
¼IyksV la-½
lc&Mho&la-
{ks=Qy
gsDVj
vkj
oxZ ehVj
1
2
3
4
5
6
lqjkyk
262
00
05
38
261
00
20
97
260
00
11
31
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7391
256
00
31
56
252
00
10
87
ugj
00
05
08
251
00
50
94
250
00
33
92
277
00
23
81
275
00
14
87
274
00
03
59
278
00
34
66
jkLrk
00
02
04
243
236
00
00
00
22
68
98
242
241
00
00
00
14
60
32
238
00
32
20
ugj
00
05
35
117
00
20
25
118
00
55
88
ugj
00
03
31
120
00
21
57
jkLrk
00
03
23
124
00
24
22
125
00
10
04
126
00
09
41
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
46
127
00
03
93
134
01
46
83
ugj
00
02
45
ugj
00
03
14
163
00
12
86
164
00
14
95
165
00
12
35
171
00
13
52
172
00
27
48
175
00
25
44
ugj
00
02
33
176
00
06
41
jkLrk
00
11
79
dhjriqj
67
00
37
07
7392
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
60
00
28
61
Pksj ukyk
00
02
00
61
00
37
79
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
97
58
00
27
70
ugj
00
04
15
47
00
15
56
48
00
44
36
49
00
02
68
45
00
38
06
,e Mh vkj&31
00
01
85
44
00
07
96
ugj
00
04
62
Hkmj
134
00
07
64
135
00
10
80
xks;xkao
18
00
27
41
17
00
26
90
15
00
13
53
ukjaxh ukyk
00
11
11
43
00
00
20
44
00
12
58
50
00
20
50
51
00
18
11
52
00
10
66
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
58
54
00
22
32
ugj
00
02
48
56
00
18
77
68
00
12
26
65
00
13
86
66
00
02
93
62
00
14
18
61
00
10
53
105
00
31
49
107
00
16
61
108
00
17
10
111
00
17
08
112
00
18
28
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7393
113
00
01
94
ugj
00
02
86
ykMxkao
307
00
06
02
308
00
14
00
ugj
00
04
24
305
00
28
96
304
00
09
35
294
00
92
44
ugj
00
02
03
jkLrk
00
04
93
292
00
52
70
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
66
283
00
56
07
jkLrk
00
01
48
226
00
17
62
227
00
37
71
228
00
13
11
234
00
11
96
235
00
07
94
237
00
10
44
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
90
194
00
12
99
193
00
14
08
ugj
00
02
99
182
00
12
70
181
00
12
79
180
00
27
82
179
00
25
15
178
00
18
72
ukyk
00
05
13
177
00
14
25
ukyk
00
01
59
174
00
36
53
173
00
08
79
172
00
10
68
171
00
16
33
170
00
17
96
169
00
07
24
167
00
07
70
7394
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
lko[ksM xaxk
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
02
179
00
76
16
ugj
00
02
23
180
00
24
51
181
00
24
52
ugj
00
04
49
182
00
12
54
183
00
14
17
jkLrk
00
01
06
184
00
29
80
185
00
10
01
186
00
19
14
187
00
16
43
188
00
48
08
189
00
18
20
190
00
18
22
191
00
15
94
jkLrk
00
01
44
193
00
31
09
192
00
02
55
195
00
00
31
194
00
50
83
ugj
00
03
05
146
00
29
04
147
00
18
03
145
00
53
11
144
00
11
84
jkLrk
00
01
92
136
00
57
30
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
36
135
00
63
50
,l ,p&47
00
02
21
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
79
116
00
40
88
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
59
ukyk
00
01
10
[फा. सं. आर-25011/44/2017-ओआर-I]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7395
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2017
S.O. 2227 .—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for
the transportation of Petrolium from the State of Maharashtra a pipeline should be laid for implementing Koyali -
Ahmednagar – Solapur Pipeline Project under Koyali – Ahmednagar Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is
necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is
described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and
Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby
declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person who is interested in the land described in the said Schedule may submit objection in writing to Shri
A.B.Mohekar, Deputy Collector (Retd.) Competent Authority Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Second floor, 4/1, Varad
Sankul, Nandgaon Road, Manmad – 423104, Maharashtra within twenty one days from the date on which the copies
of this notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India, are
made available to the general public.
SCHEDULE
Tahsil:- Vaijapur
District:- Aurangabad
State :- Maharashtra
Mauje / Village
Survey/Block No.
Sub-Div-No.
Area
Hectare
Are
Sq.mtr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Surala
262
00
05
38
261
00
20
97
260
00
11
31
256
00
31
56
252
00
10
87
Unlined Canal
00
05
08
251
00
50
94
250
00
33
92
277
00
23
81
275
00
14
87
274
00
03
59
278
00
34
66
Metal Road
00
02
04
243
00
00
68
236
00
22
98
242
00
00
60
241
00
14
32
238
00
32
20
Unlined Canal
00
05
35
117
00
20
25
118
00
55
88
Unlined Canal
00
03
31
120
00
21
57
7396
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Metal Road
00
03
23
124
00
24
22
125
00
10
04
126
00
09
41
Cart Track
00
00
46
127
00
03
93
134
01
46
83
Unlined Canal
00
02
45
Unlined Canal
00
03
14
163
00
12
86
164
00
14
95
165
00
12
35
171
00
13
52
172
00
27
48
175
00
25
44
Unlined Canal
00
02
33
176
00
06
41
Asphalted Road
00
11
79
Keeratpur
67
00
37
07
60
00
28
61
Chor Nala
00
02
00
61
00
37
79
Field Cart Track
00
00
97
58
00
27
70
Unlined Canal
00
04
15
47
00
15
56
48
00
44
36
49
00
02
68
45
00
38
06
Mdr-31
00
01
85
44
00
07
96
Unlined Canal
00
04
62
Bhaur
134
00
07
64
135
00
10
80
Goygaon
18
00
27
41
17
00
26
90
15
00
13
53
Narangi Nala
00
11
11
43
00
00
20
44
00
12
58
50
00
20
50
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7397
51
00
18
11
52
00
10
66
Cart Track
00
00
58
54
00
22
32
Unlined Canal
00
02
48
56
00
18
77
68
00
12
26
65
00
13
86
66
00
02
93
62
00
14
18
61
00
10
53
105
00
31
49
107
00
16
61
108
00
17
10
111
00
17
08
112
00
18
28
113
00
01
94
Unlined Drain
00
02
86
Ladgaon
307
00
06
02
308
00
14
00
Unlined Canal
00
04
24
305
00
28
96
304
00
09
35
294
00
92
44
Unline Canal
00
02
03
Metal Road
00
04
93
292
00
52
70
Cart Track
00
01
66
283
00
56
07
Asphalted Road
00
01
48
226
00
17
62
227
00
37
71
228
00
13
11
234
00
11
96
235
00
07
94
237
00
10
44
Cart Track
00
01
90
194
00
12
99
193
00
14
08
Canal
00
02
99
182
00
12
70
7398
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
181
00
12
79
180
00
27
82
179
00
25
15
178
00
18
72
Nala
00
05
13
177
00
14
25
Nala
00
01
59
174
00
36
53
173
00
08
79
172
00
10
68
171
00
16
33
170
00
17
96
169
00
07
24
167
00
07
70
Sawkhed Ganga
Cart Track
00
01
02
179
00
76
16
Canal
00
02
23
180
00
24
51
181
00
24
52
Canal
00
04
49
182
00
12
54
183
00
14
17
Metal Road
00
01
06
184
00
29
80
185
00
10
01
186
00
19
14
187
00
16
43
188
00
48
08
189
00
18
20
190
00
18
22
191
00
15
94
Metal Road
00
01
44
193
00
31
09
192
00
02
55
195
00
00
31
194
00
50
83
Canal
00
03
05
146
00
29
04
147
00
18
03
145
00
53
11
144
00
11
84
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7399
Asphalted Road
00
01
92
136
00
57
30
Cart Track
00
00
36
135
00
63
50
SH-47
00
02
21
Cart Track
00
00
79
116
00
40
88
Cart Track
00
00
59
Nala
00
01
10
[F. No. R-25011/44/2017-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
नई दली, 18 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2228
2228
2228
2228.—केीय सरकार को लोकिहत म यह आवAयक -तीत होता है क तिमलनाडु राBय म एCूर से मदुरै तक वाया
च गलपDटु-ि,ची एलपीजी प:रवहन के िलए इंिडयन ऑयल - पांिडचेरी- कॉपFरेशन िलिमटेड के Gारा एक पाइपलाइन िबछाई जानी
चािहए;
और केीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन िबछाने के -योजन के िलए यह आवAयक -तीत होता है क ऐसी भूिम मे जो इससे
उपाबJ अनुसूची म व<ण%त है ओर िजसम उL पाइपलाइन िबछाऐ जाने का -Mताव है, उपयोग के अिधकार का अज%न कया जाए;
अत: अब, केीय सरकार, पेNोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइस ( भूिम म उपयोग के अिधकार का अज%न) अिधिनयम, 1962
(1962 का 50) क' धारा 3 क' उपधारा (1) Gारा -दO शिLयP का -योग करते Qए, उस भूिम म उपयोग के अिधकार का अज%न करने
के अपने आशय क' घोषणा करती है;
कोई TिL, जो उL अनुसूची म व<ण%त भूिम म िहतबJ है, उस तारीख से िजसको इस अिधसूचना से युL भारत के राजप,
क' -ितयाँ साधारण जनता को उपलVध करा दी जाती है, इW'स दन के भीतर भूिम के नीचे पाइपलाइन िबछाए जाने के िलए उसम
उपयोग के अिधकार के अज%न के सबध म 6ी एस. पी. मधुसूधनन, सXम -ािधकारी, भूिम अज%न अिधकारी, इंिडयन ऑयल कॉपFरेशन
िलिमटेड, पाइपलाइन प:रयोजना , Zलाट सं-14, जय-काश MNीट, वी. जी. पी नगर, राजािजपुरम, ित[वलुर, तिमलनाडु-602001 को
िलिखत 5प म आXेप भेज सकेगा I
vuqlwph
uqlwph
uqlwph
uqlwph
तालुका : िव]वांडी
िजला : िवलुपुरम
राBय : तिमलनाडु
गाँव का नाम
सव^Xण सं.- ख(ड सं.
उप ख(ड सं.
Xे,फल
हे`टेर
एयर
वग% मीटर
1
2
3
4
5
6
31.मंदगपDटु
154
13बी
0
07
20
154
14
0
05
95
155
1ए
0
04
15
155
2ए
0
09
40
155
2बी
0
01
85
155
4ए
0
11
35
155
5बी
0
02
65
155
6
0
05
30
7400
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
146
19
0
07
00
146
20ए
0
03
40
146
20बी
0
00
40
146
21ए
0
01
60
146
21बी
0
01
60
146
21ई
0
00
75
146
22डी
0
01
30
146
22ई
0
01
10
146
23डी
0
00
40
149
2बी
0
00
70
149
2सी
0
02
50
[फा. सं. आर-25011/45/2017-ओआर-I]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2017
S.O. 2228.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the
transportation of Liquefied Petroleum Gas from Ennore to Madurai Via Chengalpattu, Pondicherry(UT) and Trichy, a
pipeline should be laid in the State of Tamil Nadu by Indian Oil Corporation Limited.
And whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying such pipeline, it is necessary to
acquire the right of user in land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid and which is described in the
Schedule annexed hereto;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and
Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby
declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person interested in the land described in the said schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on
which copies of the Gazette of India containing this notification are made available to the general public, object in
writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri
S.P.Madhusudhanan, Competent Authority, Land Acquisition Officer Indian Oil Corporation Limited, For Petroleum
Pipeline Projects, Plot No.14, Jayaprakash Street, V.G.P. Nagar, Rajajipuram, Tiruvallur, TamilNadu – 602 001.
SCHEDULE
Taluk : Vikravandi
District : Villupuram
State : Tamil Nadu
Name of the Village
Survey No.
Sub Division No.
Area
Hectare
Are
Square
Meter
1
2
3
4
5
6
31.Mandagapattu
154
13B
0
07
20
154
14
0
05
95
155
1A
0
04
15
155
2A
0
09
40
155
2B
0
01
85
155
4A
0
11
35
155
5B
0
02
65
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7401
155
6
0
05
30
146
19
0
07
00
146
20A
0
03
40
146
20B
0
00
40
146
21A
0
01
60
146
21B
0
01
60
146
21E
0
00
75
146
22D
0
01
30
146
22E
0
01
10
146
23D
0
00
40
149
2B
0
00
70
149
2C
0
02
50
[F. No. R-25011/45/2017-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
नई दली, 18 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2229
2229
2229
2229.—dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd yksdfgr esa ;g vko’;d gS fd egkjk"Vª jkT; esa
isVªksfy;e inkFkksZ ds ifjogu ds fy, Þdks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj isVªksfy;e ikbiykbu ifj;kstuk ds fdz;kUo;u gsrq
bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkuh pkfg,%
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dks ,slh ikbiykbu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, vko’;d izrhr gksrk gS fd ,slh Hkwfe esa tks bl
ls mikCk) vuqlwph esa of.kZr gS] vkSj ftlesa mDr ikbiykbu fcNkbZ tkus dk izLrko gS] mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k
tk,(
vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj] isVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e] 1962
¼1962 dk 50½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ml Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/akdkj dk vtZu
djus ds vius vk’k; dh ?kks"k.kk djrh gS%
dksbZ O;fDr] tks mDr vuqlwPkh esa of.kZr Hkwfe esa fgrc) gS] ml rkjh[k ls ftldks bl vf/klwpuk esa ;qDr “kjr ds
jkti= dh izfr;ka lk/kkj.k turk dks miyC/k djk nh tkrh gSa] bDdhl fnu ds “hrj] Hkwfe ds uhps ikbiykbZu fcNk, tkus
ds fy, mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds lacU?k esa Jh ,- ch- eksgsdj uk;c dysDVj ¼vodk’k izkIr½ l{ke izkf/kdkjh bafM;u
vkW;y dkWiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM] nwljh eafty 4@1] ojn ladqy नांदगांव lM+d] euekM egkjk"Vª & 423104 dks fyf[kr :i eas
vk{ksi Hkst ldsxkA
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
vuqlwph
rkyqdk%&lkdzh
ftyk%& /kqys
jkT;%& egkjk"Vª
ekSts @xzke
losZ @ CykWd @ la-
¼IykWV la-½
lc&Mho&la-
{ks=Qy
हे`टेयर
आर
oxZ ehVj
1
2
3
4
5
6
pkSikys
taxy
01
35
23
yOgkjrksMh
127
00
17
79
126
00
15
80
125
00
16
55
7402
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
135
00
17
37
123
00
56
97
142
00
04
01
144
00
44
21
ukyk
00
07
73
145
00
17
43
148
00
28
48
jkLrk
00
03
38
151
00
31
69
152
00
08
90
153
00
04
95
94
00
08
23
93
00
24
11
85
00
34
51
87
00
09
00
88
00
33
37
89
00
01
38
81
00
16
70
80
00
13
38
79
00
19
24
78
00
03
61
77
00
24
87
76
00
33
57
guqearuxj
12
00
18
01
,e Mh vkj 35
00
02
44
10
00
02
70
11
00
17
39
09
00
01
95
14
00
82
70
jkLrk
00
01
99
18
00
09
26
dkdjns
175
00
08
91
jkLrk
00
02
15
170
00
55
71
ukyk
00
03
80
jkLrk
00
01
60
100
00
52
23
101
00
43
86
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7403
163
00
01
45
162
00
11
79
142
00
50
00
141
00
09
78
140
00
09
97
139
00
09
79
138
00
09
82
jkLrk
00
01
52
137
00
30
19
121
00
22
22
122
00
14
69
123
00
09
51
124
00
18
47
134
00
23
68
127
00
54
72
jkLrk
00
01
34
dqVsj
jkLrk
00
04
30
107
00
11
28
98
00
31
42
105
00
25
45
99
00
13
36
100
00
30
26
101
00
39
15
ukyk
00
01
35
91
00
45
08
ckxqyuxj
18
00
84
60
17
00
18
90
10
00
60
58
11
00
07
38
jkLrk
00
01
91
13
00
35
97
f’kokthuxj
62
00
38
75
61
00
60
83
58
00
32
28
63
00
29
84
jkLrk
00
01
67
49
00
48
09
50
00
20
70
7404
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
18
00
97
88
jkLrk
00
05
52
17
00
23
33
10
00
58
44
9
00
23
92
8
00
85
20
jkLrk
00
00
21
dqrqj[kkc
jkLrk
00
04
07
83
00
00
39
82
00
46
15
79
00
03
29
80
00
56
38
74
00
33
14
73
00
16
60
tke[ksjh unh
00
09
33
t;jkeuxj
tke[ksjh unh
00
08
30
65
00
27
42
66
00
22
26
61
00
46
75
60
00
51
61
59
00
10
84
44
00
41
48
45
00
49
33
okdh
108
01
21
29
124
01
05
42
215
00
36
27
214
00
24
16
213
00
27
94
212
00
48
60
209
00
40
15
207
00
43
13
202
00
50
29
203
00
44
22
198
00
49
58
194
00
56
55
191
00
57
49
246
00
34
29
dSykluxj
17
00
29
00
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7405
16
00
23
53
15
00
06
28
ey;kPkkikMk
44
00
37
94
45
02
37
39
31
00
00
55
46
00
50
09
48
00
73
73
ihiyusj
1067iSdh
00
35
65
jkLrk
00
02
56
1069
00
25
03
1070
00
35
70
1074
00
27
45
1077
00
17
85
1057
00
02
76
1082
00
42
11
dsuky
00
02
20
1057
00
34
40
1056
00
40
41
,l-,p-14
00
04
21
1019
00
05
92
1020
00
08
98
1021
00
11
04
1022
00
00
20
808
00
02
56
807
00
07
57
806
00
08
15
776
00
09
96
777
00
00
20
775
00
03
38
778
00
03
78
768
00
08
64
766
00
03
67
767
00
03
92
764
00
06
24
763
00
12
11
751
00
08
92
752
00
02
36
719
00
29
65
7406
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
jkLrk
00
00
61
718
00
09
92
unh
00
17
22
672
00
11
58
jkLrk
00
01
90
686
00
02
08
687
00
02
17
688
00
00
66
689
00
00
20
685
00
02
41
691
00
10
25
683
00
03
18
692
00
00
35
700
00
08
28
1225
00
08
78
701
00
00
89
716
00
05
69
715
00
01
00
714
00
05
78
,l-,p-7
00
05
45
588
00
01
80
589
00
06
62
590
00
04
70
591
00
04
14
583
00
07
09
582
00
00
50
585
00
05
15
445
00
05
84
460
00
00
59
459
00
11
05
456
00
01
29
458
00
13
53
454
00
01
59
562
00
05
30
551
00
05
22
558
00
07
37
553
00
03
01
554
00
03
58
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7407
541
00
05
17
540
00
05
65
539
00
04
91
538
00
00
20
537
00
03
92
536
00
62
47
532
00
19
40
531
00
18
41
dsuky
00
01
40
507
00
41
73
[krxy ukyk
00
03
24
fpdls
ukyk
00
05
18
307
00
24
95
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
46
ns’kf’kjokMs
66
00
00
20
67
00
08
85
68
00
11
22
71
00
08
00
72
00
06
92
74
00
12
34
86
00
06
47
87
00
13
39
51
00
00
20
85
00
02
21
88
00
07
47
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
49
jkLrk
00
01
64
ugj
00
00
62
89
00
06
29
91
00
05
56
92
00
14
86
94
00
01
20
93
00
11
17
100
00
12
50
99
00
10
57
112
00
00
26
dkn;kys
5
00
21
67
4
00
42
38
7408
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
jkLrk
00
03
80
ugj
00
00
54
31
00
37
48
32
00
01
22
33
00
35
50
34
00
08
10
41
00
13
68
40
00
59
21
ukyk
00
08
05
39
00
34
31
xOgk.khikMk
45
00
39
67
44
00
45
86
40
00
07
56
jkLrk
00
01
00
dPpk jkLrk
00
00
40
ugj
00
00
98
39
00
17
61
’¨oMh
135
00
14
81
136
00
14
33
137
00
03
11
139
00
14
78
142
00
25
51
141
00
32
23
144
00
21
65
ukyk
00
09
70
91
00
12
38
148
00
07
40
150
00
22
30
jkLrk
00
00
48
151
00
33
32
152
00
01
04
87
00
34
58
3
00
00
63
4
00
11
07
5
00
10
20
ugj
00
00
75
29
00
38
25
26
00
05
28
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7409
28
00
02
70
27
00
13
92
19
00
17
40
18
00
14
04
dPpk jkLrk
00
02
54
17
00
00
20
37
00
15
29
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
01
38
00
21
17
48
00
18
55
ugj
00
01
83
47
00
40
17
maHkjs
jkLrk
00
02
33
39
00
16
78
34
00
36
35
33
00
20
59
35
00
15
26
32
00
54
27
jkLrk
00
02
11
166
00
11
38
169
00
30
63
ukyk
00
03
18
168
00
32
83
113
00
43
80
ukyk
00
02
81
114
00
19
39
116
00
42
67
ukyk
00
02
61
118
00
47
15
121
00
14
80
119
00
58
91
120
00
01
86
ukyk
00
04
11
maÒVhZ
45
00
04
62
62
00
35
07
jkLrk
00
00
84
44
00
07
93
40
00
13
31
7410
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
28
135
00
37
30
151
00
30
59
150
00
04
38
dPpk jkLrk
00
01
77
152
00
26
41
153
00
18
36
156
00
13
94
157
00
07
63
171
00
12
65
158
00
19
42
170
00
26
08
164
00
27
11
98
00
45
94
fn?kkos
549
00
98
03
226
00
41
72
225
00
23
60
219
00
15
59
218
00
19
68
217
00
14
00
215
00
09
28
214
00
13
53
213
00
22
10
212
00
10
87
211
00
30
36
210
00
12
01
209
00
15
03
208
00
00
36
196
00
37
60
jkLrk&52
00
01
50
197
00
57
54
198
00
48
70
199
00
41
07
200
00
43
08
201
00
01
57
[फा. सं. आर-25011/47/2017-ओआर-I]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7411
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2017
S.O. 2229.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for
the transportation of Petroleum from the State of Maharashtra a pipeline should be laid for implementing Koyali -
Ahmednagar – Solapur Pipeline Project under Koyali – Ahmednagar Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation;
And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is
necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is
described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and
Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby
declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;
Any person who is interested in the land described in the said Schedule may submit objection in writing to Shri
A.B. Mohekar, Deputy Collector (Retd.) Competent Authority Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Second floor, 4/1,
Varad Sankul, Nandgaon Road, Manmad – 423104, Maharashtra. Within twenty one days from the date on which the
copies of this notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India,
are made available to the general public.
SCHEDULE
Taluka:- Sakri
District:- Dhule
State :- Maharashtra
Mauje / Village
Survey/Block No.
Sub-Div-No.
Area
Hectare
Are
Sq.mtr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Chaupale
Forest Area
01
35
23
Lavhardoudi
127
00
17
79
126
00
15
80
125
00
16
55
135
00
17
37
123
00
56
97
142
00
04
01
144
00
44
21
Nala
00
07
73
145
00
17
43
148
00
28
48
Asphalt Road
00
03
38
151
00
31
69
152
00
08
90
153
00
04
95
94
00
08
23
93
00
24
11
85
00
34
51
87
00
09
00
88
00
33
37
89
00
01
38
81
00
16
70
80
00
13
38
7412
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
79
00
19
24
78
00
03
61
77
00
24
87
76
00
33
57
Hanumantnagar
12
00
18
01
M.D.R 35
00
02
44
10
00
02
70
11
00
17
39
09
00
01
95
14
00
82
70
Metal Road
00
01
99
18
00
09
26
Kakarde
175
00
08
91
Asphalt Road
00
02
15
170
00
55
71
Nala
00
03
80
Asphalt Road
00
01
60
100
00
52
23
101
00
43
86
163
00
01
45
162
00
11
79
142
00
50
00
141
00
09
78
140
00
09
97
139
00
09
79
138
00
09
82
Murrum Road
00
01
52
137
00
30
19
121
00
22
22
122
00
14
69
123
00
09
51
124
00
18
47
134
00
23
68
127
00
54
72
Asphalt Road
00
01
34
Kuter
Asphalt Road
00
04
30
107
00
11
28
98
00
31
42
105
00
25
45
99
00
13
36
100
00
30
26
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7413
101
00
39
15
Nala
00
01
35
91
00
45
08
Bagulnagar
18
00
84
60
17
00
18
90
10
00
60
58
11
00
07
38
Metal Road
00
01
91
13
00
35
97
Shivajinagar
62
00
38
75
61
00
60
83
58
00
32
28
63
00
29
84
Asphalted Road
00
01
67
49
00
48
09
50
00
20
70
18
00
97
88
Asphalted Road
00
05
52
17
00
23
33
10
00
58
44
9
00
23
92
8
00
85
20
Asphalted Road
00
00
21
Kuturkhab
Ashaphalt Road
00
04
07
83
00
00
39
82
00
46
15
79
00
03
29
80
00
56
38
74
00
33
14
73
00
16
60
Jamkheri Nadi
00
09
33
Jayramnagar
Jamkheri Nadi
00
08
30
65
00
27
42
66
00
22
26
61
00
46
75
60
00
51
61
59
00
10
84
44
00
41
48
45
00
49
33
Waki
108
01
21
29
7414
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
124
01
05
42
215
00
36
27
214
00
24
16
213
00
27
94
212
00
48
60
209
00
40
15
207
00
43
13
202
00
50
29
203
00
44
22
198
00
49
58
194
00
56
55
191
00
57
49
246
00
34
29
Kailashnagar
17
00
29
00
16
00
23
53
15
00
06
28
Malyachapada
44
00
37
94
45
02
37
39
31
00
00
55
46
00
50
09
48
00
73
73
Pipalner
1067PAIKI
00
32
65
Asphalt Road
00
02
56
1069
00
25
03
1070
00
35
70
1074
00
27
45
1077
00
17
85
1057
00
02
76
1082
00
42
11
Unlined Canal
00
02
20
1057
00
34
40
1056
00
40
41
SH-14
00
04
21
1019
00
05
92
1020
00
08
98
1021
00
11
04
1022
00
00
20
808
00
02
56
807
00
07
57
806
00
08
15
776
00
09
96
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7415
777
00
00
20
775
00
03
38
778
00
03
78
768
00
08
64
766
00
03
67
767
00
03
92
764
00
06
24
763
00
12
11
751
00
08
92
752
00
02
96
719
00
29
65
Cart track
00
00
61
718
00
09
92
River
00
17
22
672
00
11
58
Cart Track
00
01
90
686
00
02
08
687
00
02
17
688
00
00
66
689
00
00
20
685
00
02
41
691
00
10
25
683
00
03
18
692
00
00
35
700
00
08
28
1225
00
08
78
701
00
00
89
716
00
05
69
715
00
01
00
714
00
05
78
SH-7
00
05
45
588
00
01
80
589
00
06
62
590
00
04
70
591
00
04
14
583
00
07
09
582
00
00
50
585
00
05
15
445
00
05
84
460
00
00
59
459
00
11
05
7416
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
456
00
01
29
458
00
13
53
454
00
01
59
562
00
05
30
551
00
05
22
558
00
07
37
553
00
03
01
554
00
03
58
541
00
05
17
540
00
05
65
539
00
04
91
538
00
00
20
537
00
03
92
536
00
62
47
532
00
19
40
531
00
18
41
Unlined Canal
00
01
40
507
00
41
73
Khatgal Nala
00
03
24
Chikse
Nala
00
05
18
307
00
24
95
Cart Track
00
00
46
Deshshirwade
66
00
00
20
67
00
08
85
68
00
11
22
71
00
08
00
72
00
06
92
74
00
12
34
86
00
06
47
87
00
13
39
51
00
00
20
85
00
02
21
88
00
07
47
Cart Track
00
00
49
Service Road
00
01
64
Unlined Canal
00
00
62
89
00
06
29
91
00
05
56
92
00
14
86
94
00
01
20
93
00
11
17
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7417
100
00
12
50
99
00
10
57
112
00
00
26
Kadyale
5
00
21
67
4
00
42
38
Service Road
00
03
80
Unlined Canal
00
00
54
31
00
37
48
32
00
01
22
33
00
35
50
34
00
08
10
41
00
13
68
40
00
59
21
Nala
00
08
05
39
00
34
31
Gavhanipada
45
00
39
67
44
00
45
86
40
00
07
56
Road
00
01
00
Cart Track
00
00
40
Unline Canal
00
00
98
39
00
17
61
Shewadi
135
00
14
81
136
00
14
33
137
00
03
11
139
00
14
78
142
00
25
51
141
00
32
23
144
00
21
65
Nala
00
09
70
91
00
12
38
148
00
07
40
150
00
22
30
Asphalt Road
00
00
48
151
00
33
32
152
00
01
04
87
00
34
58
3
00
00
63
4
00
11
07
5
00
10
20
7418
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Unlined Canal
00
00
75
29
00
38
25
26
00
05
28
28
00
02
70
27
00
13
92
19
00
17
40
18
00
14
04
Cart track
00
02
54
17
00
00
20
37
00
15
29
Cart track
00
01
01
38
00
21
17
48
00
18
55
Unlined Canal
00
01
83
47
00
40
17
Umbhare
Asphalt Road
00
02
33
39
00
16
78
34
00
36
35
33
00
20
59
35
00
15
26
32
00
54
27
Asphalt Road
00
02
11
166
00
11
38
169
00
30
63
Nala
00
03
18
168
00
32
83
113
00
43
80
Nala
00
02
81
114
00
19
39
116
00
42
67
Nala
00
02
61
118
00
47
15
121
00
14
80
119
00
58
91
120
00
01
86
Nala
00
04
11
Umbharti
45
00
04
62
62
00
35
07
Road
00
00
84
44
00
07
93
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7419
40
00
13
31
CTR
00
01
28
135
00
37
30
151
00
30
59
150
00
04
38
CTR
00
01
77
152
00
26
41
153
00
18
36
156
00
13
94
157
00
07
63
171
00
12
65
158
00
19
42
170
00
26
08
164
00
27
11
98
00
45
94
Dighawe
549
00
98
03
226
00
41
72
225
00
23
60
219
00
15
59
218
00
19
68
217
00
14
00
215
00
09
28
214
00
13
53
213
00
22
10
212
00
10
87
211
00
30
36
210
00
12
01
209
00
15
03
208
00
00
36
196
00
37
60
Asphalted Road T-52
00
01
50
197
00
57
54
198
00
48
70
199
00
41
07
200
00
43
08
201
00
01
57
[F. No. R-25011/47/2017-OR-I]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
7420
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
नई दली, 20 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2230
2230
2230
2230.—केीय सरकार, पेNोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइन (भूिम म उपयोग के अिधकार का अज%न) अिधिनयम
1962 (1962 का 50) (िजसे इसम इसके पaात उL अिधिनयम कहा गया है) क' धारा 3 क' उप-धारा (1) भारत के राजप,,
(असाधारण) के अधीन जारी क' गयी भारत सरकार के पेNोिलयम और -ाकृितक गैस मं,ालय क' अिधसूचना का. आ. 905(अ), तारीख
20 माच% 2015, Gारा तिमलनाडु राBय म एCूर से मदुरै तक वाया च गलपDटु-पांिडचेरी-ि,ची एलपीजी प:रवहन के िलए इंिडयन ऑयल
कॉपFरेशन िलिमटेड के Gारा एक पाइपलाइन िबछाने के -योजन के िलए उL अिधसूचना से संलb अनुसूची म िविनcद%d भूिम म उपयोग
के अिधकार का अज%न के अपने आशय क' घोषणा क' थी।
और उL आिधसूचना क' -ितयाँ जनता को तारीख 08.04.2015 को उपलVध करा दी गई थी।
और उL अिधिनयम क' धारा 6 क' उप- धारा (1) के अनुसरण म सXम -ािधकारी ने केीय सरकार को अपनी :रपोट% दे दी
है।
और केीय सरकार का उL :रपोट% पर िवचार करने के पaात यह समाधान हो गया है क इस अिधसूचना से संलb अनुसूची
म िविनcद%d भूिम म उपयोग के अिधकार का अज%न कया जाना चािहए।
अत: अब, केीय सरकार,उL अिधिनयम क' धारा 6 क' उप-धारा (1) Gारा -दO शिLयP का -योग करते Qए यह घोषणा
करती है क इस अिधसूचना के संलb अनुसूची म िविनcद%d उL भूिम म पाइपलाइन िबछाने के िलए उपयोग का अिधकार अ<ज%त कया
जाता है।
यह और क केीय सरकार, उL अिधिनयम क' धारा 6 क' उप-धारा (4) Gारा -दO शिLयP का -योग करते Qए यह िनद^श
देती है क उL भूिम के उपयोग का अिधकार इस अिधसूचना के -काश क' तारीख से केीय सरकार म िनिहत होने क' बजाए, सभी
िवलंगमP से मुL हो कर इंिडयन ऑयल कॉपFरेशन िलिमटेड म िनिहत होगा।
पैNोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइन अिधिनयम, 1962 क' धारा 10 के अधीन कसी भी Xितपू<त% के िलए इंिडयन ऑयल
कॉपFरेशन िलिमटेड पूण%तया उOरदायी होगी और पाइपलाइन से सबिधत कसी भी मामले पर केीय सरकार के िव[J कोई वाद
दावा या कानूनी काय%वाही नहf हो सकेगी।
vuqlwph
uqlwph
uqlwph
uqlwph
तालुका : पोCेरी
िजला : ित[वलूर
राBय : तिमलनाडु
गाँव का नाम
सव^Xण सं.- ख(ड सं.
उप ख(ड सं.
Xे,फल
हे`टेर
एयर
वग% मीटर
1
2
3
4
5
6
43. अिgयपददु -II
9
1ए
0
01
10
9
1बी1ए
0
00
40
6
3
0
10
10
141. पुिhहिधवWम
153
1डी
0
10
80
155
10डी
0
08
00
155
10सी
0
10
50
155
10बी
0
06
10
155
10ए
0
06
00
155
5
0
11
50
154
2सी2
0
05
35
154
2सी1
0
01
75
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7421
154
3बी1
0
01
30
154
3ए2
0
02
40
154
3ए1
0
03
70
175
2बी5
0
09
60
175
1बी2
0
02
70
175
2बी3
0
01
10
175
2बी4
0
00
40
175
1ए5
0
04
50
175
1ए3
0
08
50
175
1ए2
0
08
90
169
3
0
06
50
169
1
0
01
00
168
2
0
00
40
168
1
0
00
80
167
0
03
65
166
0
07
10
164
4ए
0
07
40
164
4बी
0
05
80
162
1ए
0
01
10
163
2
0
08
50
[फा. सं. आर-25011/10/2014-ओआर-I/33247]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
New Delhi, the 20th September, 2017
S.O. 2230.—Whereas, by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural
Gas number S.O.No.905(E) dated: 20-03-2015 issued under sub section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals
Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), (herein after referred to as the said Act) the
Central Government declared its intention to acquire the Right of User in the Lands specified in the Schedule appended
to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of Liquefied Petroleum Gas from Ennore to
Madurai (Via) Chengalpattu, Pondicherry (UT) Trichy in the State of Tamil Nadu, a pipeline should be laid by the
Indian Oil Corporation Limited, for implementing the Ennore – Trichy – Madurai Pipeline Project.
And whereas, copies of the said notifications were made available to the public from 08.04.2015.
And whereas, the Competent Authority in pursuance of sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act has submitted
his report to the Central Government;
And whereas, the Central Government, after considering the said report is satisfied that the Right of User in the
Land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification should be acquired;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act, the Central
Government hereby declares that the Right of User in the said Land specified in the Schedule appended to this
notification is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;
7422
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of section 6 of the said Act, the Central
Government hereby directs that the Right of User in the said Land shall instead of vesting in the Central Government,
vest from the date of publication of this declaration, in the Indian Oil Corporation Limited free from all encumbrances.
Indian Oil Corporation Limited shall be exclusively liable for any compensation in terms of section 10 of the P
& M P Act, 1962 and no suit, claim or legal proceeding would lie against the Central Government on any matter
relating to pipeline.
SCHEDULE
Taluk : Ponneri
District : Tiruvallur
State : Tamil Nadu
Name of the Village
Survey No.
Sub Division
No.
Area
Hectare
Are
Square
Meter
1
2
3
4
5
6
43. Athipattu-II
9
1A
0
01
10
9
1B1A
0
00
40
6
3
0
10
10
141. Puzhidhivakkam
153
1D
0
10
80
155
10D
0
08
00
155
10C
0
10
50
155
10B
0
06
10
155
10A
0
06
00
155
5
0
11
50
154
2C2
0
05
35
154
2C1
0
01
75
154
3B1
0
01
30
154
3A2
0
02
40
154
3A1
0
03
70
175
2B5
0
09
60
175
1B2
0
02
70
175
2B3
0
01
10
175
2B4
0
00
40
175
1A5
0
04
50
175
1A3
0
08
50
175
1A2
0
08
90
169
3
0
06
50
169
1
0
01
00
168
2
0
00
40
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7423
168
1
0
00
80
167
0
03
65
166
0
07
10
164
4A
0
07
40
164
4B
0
05
80
162
1A
0
01
10
163
2
0
08
50
[F. No. R-25011/10/2014-OR-I/33247]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
नई दली, 21 िसत बर, 2017
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ.
का.आ. 2231
2231
2231
2231.—dsUnzh; ljdkj] isVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e]
1962 ¼1962 dk 50½ dh /kkjk 2 ds [k.M ¼d½ ds vuqlj.k esa mDr vf/kfu;e ds v/khu vkUËkz çns’k jkT; esa fgUnqLrku
isVªksfy;e dkiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM ds fot;okMk /keZiqjh ikbiykbu ifj;kstuk ds fy, l{ke izkf/kdkjh ds d`R;ksa ds ikyu ds fy,
Jh ,- o¢adVjko] mi dy¢DVj] dks vf/kdkjh ds :Ik esa izkf/kd`r djrh gSA
यह अिधसूचना जारी होने क' ितिथ से लागू होगी ।
[फा. सं. आर-31015/07/2011-ओआर-II/15210]
पवन कुमार, अवर सिचव
New Delhi, the 21st September, 2017
S.O. 2231.—In pursuance of clause (a) of section 2 of the Petroleum Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right
of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby authorizes Sri A.Venkata Rao, Deputy
Collector to perform the function of Competent Authority for Vijayawada Dharmapuri Pipeline Project, Hindustan
Petroleum Corporation Limited under the said Act within the territory of State of Andhra Pradesh.
This notification will be effective from the date of its issue.
[F. No. R-31015/07/2011-OR-II/15210]
PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
Je ,oa jkstxkj ea=kky;
ubZ fnYyh] 15 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2232-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eè; jsyos
ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k
,oa Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 60@2002) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 15-09-2017 dks çkIr
gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&41011@13@2002&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
ch- ,l- fc"V] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT
7424
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 15th September, 2017
S.O. 2232.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 60/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Central
Railway and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 15.09.2017.
[No. L-41011/13/2002-IR (B-I)]
B. S. BISHT, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.2, MUMBAI
PRESENT : M.V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO.CGIT-2/60 of 2002
EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF
CENTRAL RAILWAY
The Divisional Railway Manager (C)
Central Railway
Divisional Office, Commercial Branch
Mumbai CST
Mumbai-400 001
AND
THEIR WORKMEN
The Secretary,
Raigad Mazdoor Sangh
Shedge Building
Shivaji Chowk, At Post Mahad
Tal. Mahad
Distt. Raigad-402 301
APPEARANCES :
FOR THE EMPLOYER
:
Mr. Abhay Kulkarni, Advocate.
FOR THE WORKMEN
:
Mr. Anil Dhumne, Representative.
Mumbai, dated the 22nd May, 2017
AWARD
This is a Reference by the Central Government in exercise of the powers under Clause (d) of Sub Section (1)
and sub section (2 A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 vide Government of India, Ministry of Labour
& Employment, New Delhi vide its order No. L-41011/13/2002-IR (B-I) dt.25/07/2002. The terms of the Reference
given in the schedule are as follows:
“Whether the action of the management of Central Railway in discontinuing the services of 12 workmen
(Shown in Annexure ‘A’) without following principle of Natural Justice is proper and justified? If not, what
relief these workmen are entitled ?”
2.
The present reference is in respect of 12 workmen. The list of the concerned 12 workmen showing their names
and date of appointment is as per annexure ‘A’ which is given below:
Sr. No. Name
Date of appointment
1.
Mr. Narayan Vithal
01.10.1960
2.
Mr. Ramchandra Chimaji
01.10.1970
3.
Mr. Narayan Chimaji
01.10.1970
4.
Mr. Bhagu Narayan
01.10.1970
5.
Mr. Ramchandra Vithal
01.10.1970
6.
Mr.Genu Narayan
01.10.1970
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7425
7.
Mr.Kisan Kondiba
01.10.1980
8.
Mr. Pandurang Devji
01.10.1985
9.
Mr. Suresh Laxman
01.10.1998
10.
Mr. Anantha Hari
01.10.1980
11.
Mr. Vishnu Ganpat
01.10.1990
12.
Mr. Babu Dagdu
01.10.1998
3.
After receipt of reference notices were issued. Both the parties were served with the notices. They appeared
through their respective representatives. Second party union has filed Statement of Claim (Ex-7). According to the
Union concerned workmen were working at Matheran Railway Station under Central Railway, Mumbai Division,
Mumbai CST as daily rated workmen. These daily rated workmen were initially registered as Licensed Porters
(Hamal) by the C.R. Matheran Railway Station. License Porter means the person who carries the luggage of the railway
passenger at the Railway station. But they are not the employees of the Railway. The Parcel Porter means the worker
who is handling the luggage of parcel of the Railway but not passenger. Parcel Porters are the employees of Railway. It
is rule of the CR that when License Porter’s services are utilized for handling the parcels of Railway and they are paid
wages by the Central Government, then it is necessary and compulsory binding on the porters that when they are
working for the Railway for handling the parcels, they should surrender their license to the Railway administration.
4.
According to the Union the concerned workmen were employed in the Central Railway Mumbai CST on the
respective dates as daily rated workmen for handling the parcels of Railway at Matheran Station. Their services were
continued from their date of appointment. All the workmen have completed 240 days continuous and uninterrupted
services as daily rated workmen at Matheran Railway Station. They were working under the control and supervision of
Railway Official of C.R. Daily Attendance of daily rated workmen was maintained by Matheran Rly administration.
Railway Administration have paid wages to these workmen on hourly rated basis. They were not getting weekly off.
They were not enjoying national holidays. Matheran Railway Station Manager was preparing the pay sheets of all these
workmen and used to send them to the Divisional Railway Manager for sanction of every month wages.
5.
According to the union the concerned workmen were getting the wages including the DA. Since they have
worked for more than 240- days with the employer they are entitled to be declared as employees of Railway as per the
provisions of Industrial Disputes Act 1947. Even Chapter V B of I.D. Act is applicable to the employer and therefore it
is necessary for the employer to obtain permission from Central Govt. before retrenching the concerned workmen from
service. Employer i.e. C.R. have not applied for permission to the Govt. for retrenchment nor they were paid
retrenchment compensation. As such there is complete violation of chapter V-B and Section 25 N of the I.D. Act.
6.
According to the union concerned workmen were not given one month’s notice pay nor they were paid
compensation as per Sec 25 F (b) of the I.D. Act 1947. Employer has also failed to publish the seniority list of the
employees before effecting the retrenchment of the concerned workmen. However their services came to be terminated
without following the principles of natural justice. The Union is therefore asking to declare that the action of
termination of concerned workmen by employer as illegal, and unjustified. The union is also asking for direction to the
employer to reinstate the concerned workmen with full back wages, consequential benefits and continuity of service i.e.
from the date of termination of their services.
7.
First Party management (Railway Administration) resisted the statement of claim by filing their Written
Statement (Ex-15). It is condition of the management (Railway Admn) that second party Union has no locus standi to
espouse the cause of the workmen under reference. It is submitted that the concerned workmen are licensed porters.
There is no employer-employee relationship between the Central Railway and the License Porters i.e. the concerned
workmen. Management has at no point of time conferred status of workmen in respect of the concerned workmen. As
such the reference is not maintainable.
8.
It is also the case of the management that the concerned workmen were only license porter and not parcel porter.
Railway Boards Letter no. 409 ITG dt. 1/5/1947 says that the service of Licence Porter cannot be utilized for railway
work. The management therefore is not using license porter for Railway parcel handling work. The Licensed Porter
when worked for Railways were paid reasonable remuneration at the rate per hour. However the licensed porter cannot
be utilised for more than 4 hours in a day for Railway work.
9.
It is case of the management that the management is providing the licensed porter several facilities under the
welfare scheme on humanity ground even though they are not employee of the railway. Licensed Porters can transfer
their license to their relative or the persons of their choice as provided in Railway Board’s letter dt 21/08/1998. They
are not governed by the Railway Establishment Rules. Licensed porters are not railway employees. As such the
7426
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
concerned workmen cannot be given any benefits of Railway servants. Management has sought the rejection of
Reference.
10.
By way of rejoinder Ex-16, concerned workmen have come out a case that the union is a registered union under
the Trade Union Act 1926 and it has got right to espouse the cause of workers. It is contended that the concerned
workmen have surrendered their license and hence there was no question of renewal of the same. It is practice to
surrender the license as and when the porter was taken in the employment of the Railway.
11.
Following issues are framed at Ex-17. I reproduce the issues along with my findings thereon for the reasons to
follow:
Sr. No.
ISSUES
FINDINGS
1.
Whether the Raigad Mazdoor Sangh has locus standi to
represent the workmen?
Yes.
2.
Whether they are workmen and whether they were
employed by Railways as its daily rated workers?
No.
3.
Whether Chapter V-B and Section 25 N of the Industrial
Disputes Act was attracted under the facts and
circumstances of the case?
No.
4.
Whether the workmen were retrenched in violation of 25 F
of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947?
No.
REASONS
Issue no.1 :
12.
As a matter of fact, dispute which is espoused by the concerned union i.e. the Second party union is on the basis
of the failure report sent by the Assistant Labour Commissioner (C). That would show that the demand was made by
the Union espousing the cause of the concerned workmen.
13.
Ld. Counsel for the management submitted that the second party union has no locus-standi to espouse the
present Reference. But then the fact remains that the concerned second party union is a registered union under the
Trade Union Act 1926 bearing Registration no. 500 dt. 4/10/1994. By virtue of being a registered union, the union has
got right to espouse the cause of the workers since in their Statement of claim they are claiming themselves to be the
employees of the Railway Administration.
14.
In this respect it will have to be said that there is no resolution adopted by the majority union to espouse the
cause, but what is necessary is that the union in order to take the cause should be sufficiently represented to espouse the
cause. The proof of support by the union may also be available aliunde it would depend upon the facts of each case. In
view of that it can be said that the concerned second party union has every right to represent the cause of the workmen.
It has locus standi to represent them. This issue is accordingly answered in the affirmative.
Issues nos. 2 to 3 :
15.
From the pleadings it seems to be an admitted position that the concerned workmen were initially registered as
license Porters by the Central Railway, Matheran Railway Station. Admittedly therefore when they were registered as
Hamal (License Porters) they are engaged to carry the luggage of the Railway passengers at the Railway station and
they are not employees of the Railway.
16.
According to the concerned workmen, Railway administration engaged them in handling the luggage and parcels
of the Railway. As such the work they were doing the work as Parcel Porter/ daily rated workmen under Central
Railway Mumbai Division, Mumbai CST. Since they being the Parcel Porters they are the employees of the Railway.
The question is whether they were engaged as parcel porters / daily rated workmen by the Railway Administration.
17.
In this respect we have document Ex-42. It is the circular issued by Divisional Railway Manager Central
Railway, CST Mumbai. It is in respect of utilization of the License Porters for Railway parcel handling work. It
mentions that as per guidelines received from Railway board it has been decided that the License Porter should not be
utilized as Parcel Porters for handling luggage of the Railway as they are granted license for carrying passenger luggage
only. In case they are to be utilized for handling parcels, then they should surrender their coolie license. In view of that
the evidence of Narayan Kadam is to the effect that as per this circular, the concerned workmen were engaged for
carrying luggage of the Railway from the dates of their appointment and thereafter their services were continued as
parcel porters at Matheran Railway Station. To be precise his evidence is that, all the workmen have completed 240
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7427
days continuous and uninterrupted service as daily rated workmen at Matheran Railway Station and since they were
working under the control and supervision of Railway Administration there exists employer-employee relationship.
18.
However in his cross examination he has admitted that no any appointment letter was issued to him by Railway
authority appointing him as a parcel porter. He even admits that they were working for 6 hours in a day and were paid
for half a day. Admittedly there is no document to show that he did the work as a parcel porter for more than 240 days.
In view of his evidence it can be seen that though the concerned workmen were given license for handling the luggage
of the passengers, but then they have also not produced the license on record and as such it is not been established that
they were doing the work of handling the parcels of the Railway.
19.
Even if it is admitted for the sake of arguments that initially they were registered as license porters and
subsequently they were asked to do work of handling the luggage and parcels of the Railway. But then the fact remains
that they cannot be termed as the employees of the Railway Administration. In order to establish the relationship of
employer- employee it is necessary to establish that the workers were working under the direct control and supervision
of the first party employer. The so called register relied upon by the Union will not prove the employer-employee
relationship. It is because the concerned workman in his evidence has categorically admitted that the wage register is
maintained by Mukadam. The said mukadam has not been examined by second party. Said register is purportedly
maintained for license porter and not for parcel porters. It cannot be said therefore that the said register pertains to the
work of parcel porters as claimed by the union.
20.
The fact remains that the concerned workmen were initially registered as license porters and the nature of work
which were assigned to them was in respect of carrying the luggage of the passengers. Admittedly Matheran Railway
Station is having very light work of loading and unloading parcels. Since it is admitted that only 5 trains are coming to
and going from Matheran. It seems improbable therefore that all the concerned workmen were engaged as parcel
porters since there was no exigency of work. Admittedly the work as a parcel porter is intermittent and depending upon
the exigency of the work. In the absence of documentary evidence there is no substance in the contention that the
concerned workmen were performing the work for full day that too continuously without any break for 240 days or
more in 12 months immediately preceeding the month in which they were purportedly engaged.
21.
That apart, there is no evidence to show that the officials of the Railway Administration were supervising the
work of the concerned workmen. As per the circular they cannot be assigned the work as parcel porters. Even if they
are engaged for the said work as casual workers then they have no right to employment only for the reason that they
have been performing duties for large number of years.
22.
Ld. Counsel for the management seeks to rely on the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors V/s. Uma
Devi 2006 II CLR 261 to submit that temporary or contract labourers cannot be regularized in public Service as they
are not recruited by following recruitment process.
23.
Ld. Counsel for the management submitted that the concerned workmen were registered as Licence Porters
engaged in carrying the passenger luggage and therefore they cannot claim as Railway parcel porters. He submits that
the concerned workmen are not the employees of Central Railway because they could not have performed the duties
which can be assigned to the regular employees. Admittedly the concerned workmen had not participated in
recruitment exercise of the Central Railway. They were not doing the job for full day and as such there is no employee-
employer relationship between the management and them.
24.
Learned Counsel for concerned workmen has relied on the decision in case of Union of India V/s. Ramchndra
Tamti & Ors 2005 ICLR 604. He submits that set of Porters doing work of handling Railway Parcels and goods are
entitled to get benefits and seek regularization since Railways have treated them on different footing while emphasizing
at one point that those Porters engaged in carrying passengers Luggage could also opt for handling Railway Parcels and
goods if they surrendered their Licences. In view of this it is submitted that concerned workmen are to be absorbed
permanently on the basis of quantum of work available to them.
25.
In my considered view the evidence led so far by the concerned workmen is not sufficient to establish
employer–employer relationship. The register relied upon by them is of the license porters and that will not establish
that they were assigned the duties of the employees of Central Railway as Parcel Porters. There is no other evidence to
show or establish relationship of employer-employee between the First Party and concerned workmen. As such the
evidence as adduced by the concerned workmen is too skeletal to establish that they are the workmen and were
employed by the Railway Administration as daily rated workers.
26.
Since no employer-employee relationship has been established there is no question of paying compensation to
the concerned workmen in view of provision 25 F of the I.D. Act. Exhibit-78 in that respect makes it clear that they
being the licensed porters are not the Railway employees and therefore there was no question of their retrenchment.
7428
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
27.
Considering all these facts I hold that the concerned workmen are not the employees of Railway Administration
and they cannot seek regularization. It cannot be said therefore that their services came to be terminated without
following the principles of natural justice. In view of that all the issues are answered accordingly in terms of above
observations. In the circumstances I pass the following order:
ORDER
The Reference is rejected with no order as to cost.
Date: 22.05.2017
M. V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 15 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2233-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj if'pe
jsyos ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 50@2015) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 15-09-2017
dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&41012@42@2015&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
ch- ,l- fc"V] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 15th September, 2017
S.O. 2233.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 50/2015) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Western
Railway and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 15.09.2017.
[No. L-41012/42/2015-IR (B-I)]
B. S. BISHT, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.2, MUMBAI
PRESENT : M.V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO.CGIT-2/50 of 2015
EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF
WESTERN RAILWAY & ANR.
The Sr. Divisional Electrical Engineer (Sub-Urban)
Western Railway, Office of the DRM
Mumbai Division, Mumbai Central
Mumbai-400 008.
The Sr. Divisional Finance Manager
Western Railway, Office of the DRM
Mumbai Division, Mumbai Central
Mumbai-400 008.
AND
THEIR WORKMEN
The Dy. General Secretary
Paschim Railway Karmachari Parishad
33, Moti Bhavan
Dr. D’Silva Road
Dadar (W)
Mumbai-400 028.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7429
APPEARANCES:
FOR THE EMPLOYER
:
Ms. Jyoti Panvalkar, Advocate.
FOR THE UNION
:
No appearance.
Mumbai, the 30th May, 2017
AWARD
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment by its Order No.L-41011/42/2015-IR (B-I), dated
04.09.2015 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2 (A) of Section 10 of
the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:
“Whether the action of the management of Western Railway, Mumbai Division in denying overtime
allowances to 14 Class-III JEs working under Electrical Section Traction Distribution on the plea that they
are notified as a supervisory staff is just and legal? If not, what relief the workmen concerned are entitled
to ?”
2.
After receipt of the Reference, notices were served on both the parties. Matter was adjourned on several
occasions for filing Statement of Claim by second party/ Union. Second party/Union neither appeared before this
Tribunal nor filed Statement of claim. Without Statement of claim, the Reference cannot be decided on merits and the
same deserves to be dismissed. Orders were passed on Ex-1. Accordingly I pass the following order:
ORDER
Reference stands dismissed for want of prosecution.
Date: 30.05.2017
M. V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 15 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2234-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjrh;
LVsV cSad ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 22@2013) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 15-09-2017
dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12012@76@2012&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
ch- ,l- fc"V] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 15th September, 2017
S.O. 2234.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 22/2013) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of State
Bank of India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 15.09.2017.
[No. L-12012/76/2012-IR (B-I)]
B. S. BISHT, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.2, MUMBAI
PRESENT : M.V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO.CGIT-2/22 of 2013
EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF
STATE BANK OF INDIA
Assistant General Manager,
State Bank of India, Zonal Office,
Admn Office, Sharda Chamber,
7430
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
7th Floor, 386/2, Shankarseth Road,
Pune – 411 037.
AND
THEIR WORKMAN
Smt. Alka Bikan Gaikwad,
S No. 311, Bhavani Peth,
Kasewadi,
Pune – 411 042
APPEARANCES :
FOR THE EMPLOYER
:
Shri M.G. Nadkarni, Advocate
FOR THE WORKMAN
:
Mr. Umesh Vishwad, Advocate
Mumbai, dated the 14th July, 2017
AWARD
1.
This is reference made by the Central Government in exercise of powers under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and
sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 vide Government of India, Ministry of Labour &
Employment, New Delhi vide its order No. L-12012/76/2012 – IR (B-I) dated 25.03.2013. The terms of reference
given in the schedule are as follows :
“Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Pune in terminating the services
of Smt. Alka Bikan Gaikwad w.e.f. 16.1.2012 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is
entitled to ?”
2.
After the receipt of the reference, both the parties were served with the notices. They appeared through their
respective representatives. Second party workman filed statement of claim Ex.6. According to the concerned
workman, she was working with the first party bank since 1985 as a Sweeper. She has worked continuously from 1985
to 16.1.2012 with the first party bank. She was doing the work of cleaning and sweeping the premises of Zonal Office
Pune and the officers’ quarters of the first party bank under direct control and supervision of the first party bank. Her
work is regular and perennial. The first party bank was making payment to her. As such there is direct employer-
employee relationship between first party bank and second party workman.
3.
According to the second party workman, a group of workmen raised the industrial dispute against the
management of first party bank, Mumbai for non-absorption of workmen engaged through contractors in services of the
first party bank. The agreement was arrived at and the contract workers were absorbed in the service of Central office
and Mumbai Main Branch of the first party bank. However, the first party bank has failed to absorb the contact
employees working in Pune and were discriminated in same situation. Therefore, the union namely Thekedar Kamgar
Sangh has made demand of absorption of second party workman and other workers. The said union has filed writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 before Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The said petition was disposed of in the year
2006 in view of law laid down in case of Steel Authority of India. Since 1998, the first party bank has stopped paying
wages to the second party workman through the contractor and has started direct payment to the second party workman.
There is no contractor since 1998 and the wages were directly paid by Pune Zonal office of the first party bank. Even
after disposal of the said writ petition the second party workman was in service and wages were paid to her directly by
the first party bank.
4.
It is contention of the second party workman that she was in continuous service and had put continuously 240
days and more continuous service in every completed year of the service. However, the first party bank has terminated
the services of the second party workman without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947.
Therefore the said termination is illegal, improper, arbitrary and unjust. It also amounts to unfair labour practices. The
second party workman is therefore asking to declare that the termination of her services by the first party bank is illegal.
She is also asking for re-instatement with continuity of service and all other consequential benefits from the date of
termination till actual date of re-instatement along with interest and cost.
5.
First party bank has resisted the claim by filing written statement Ex.7. According to the first party bank, the
bank had engaged the contractor named M/s. Golden Enterprises since June 1981 who was entrusted with the job of
house-keeping at the Zonal office, located at East Street, Gulmohar, Pune and also at the bank’s residential quarters
namely Madhuban Bank House and Ashirwad Bldg. at Nagar Road, Pune. The bank was making payment to the
contractor for the service rendered to the bank and the contractor was in turn effect the payment to the workers engaged
by him for carrying out the job given to him by the bank. The said contractor abandoned the contract in November
1998 and ran away. The bank terminated the contract with M/s. Golden Enterprises sometimes in 1999 – 2000.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7431
However, with reference to the letter and sprit of the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court dated 21.3.2006, the bank
continued to engage the contract labours for doing the house-keeping jobs at the bank premises. Bank used to give
money to Shri Selvam, the Supervisor against the production of the bills. Subsequently, there was inter-se dispute and
the contract labours requested bank to pay money directly to them. Accordingly, the arrangement was worked out
whereby Shri Selvam used to submit bills and bank credited the amount to the account of each contract labour.
6.
It is also contention of the first party bank that on 10.9.2010 the bank published tender notice in local newspaper
for maintenance and house-keeping of the banks premises. The bank also suggested the contract labours to form a
society, partnership firm or a company for participating in the tender process. Contract labours did not pay heed to the
suggestion made by the bank. The tender process was completed on 16.12.2011 and the contract for maintenance and
house-keeping of the bank premises was awarded to contractor who had quoted the lowest rates. The new contractor
displayed the notice on the bank’s notice board stating that he was given contract for maintenance and house-keeping of
the banks premises and invited those who were interested to work with him to approach him. However, the concerned
workman and other workers did not avail this opportunity.
7.
It is also contention of the first party bank that there is no employer-employee relationship between the bank and
concerned workman. The tribunal has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute in question. Even as per order in writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 of Hon’ble Bombay High Court, the concerned workman did not approach the
competent authority to get the matter referred to tribunal for adjudication and as such dispute referred for adjudication
in the present reference has been raised belatedly. It is quite stale. The reference is not maintainable on that ground.
8.
According to the first party bank, the concerned workman was engaged by the contractor named M/s. Golden
Enterprises. The bank was making payment to the said contractor who in turn was effecting the payment to the
workmen engaged by him and therefore the claim of concerned workman that she was engaged by the bank is not
maintainable. It is, thus, contention of the bank that it has not discriminated the contract employees working at Pune
and therefore the claim of the workman is completely untenable.
9.
It is also contention of the first party bank that provisions of section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947 are not applicable in
the factual matrix of the case since the service of the concerned workman automatically came to an end after new
contractor was engaged by the bank after duly following tender process.
10.
It is then contention of the first party bank that the settlement / agreement that might have been reached at
Mumbai has no relation whatsoever with the present dispute and the workman concerned cannot base her claim on the
basis of settlement entered into in a different case. On this premises, the first party bank has sought rejection of the
reference.
11.
Following issues are framed at Ex.8. I reproduce the issues along with my findings thereon for the reasons to
follow:
Sr. No.
Issues
Findings
1
Whether the reference is maintainable ?
Yes
2.
Whether there exists employer-employer relationship between
the first party bank & concerned workman?
No
3.
Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India
in terminating the services of Smt. Alka Bikan Gaikwad w.e.f.
16/01/2012 is legal and justified ?
Yes
4.
If not, whether the concerned workman is entitled to be
reinstated in the services of first party with continuity of
service and all other consequential benefits ?
No
3.
What Order ?
As per final order
REASONS
Issue No. 1 :
12.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that admittedly the union namely Thekedar Kamgar
Sangh has made demand of absorption of second party workman and other workers. The said union has filed writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 before Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The main prayer of the petitioner was for
issuance of writ of mandamus to the bank for regularizing the services of the concerned workers in the banks service.
He submits that the said writ petition wad disposed of by the Division Bench of Hon’ble Bombay High Court vide
7432
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
order dated 9.3.2006. In the said order the Hon’ble Bombay High Court made it clear that in view of law laid down by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Steel Authority of India & Ors. V/S. National Union Waterfront Workers &
Ors., the relief claimed in the petition cannot be granted and that only remedy available to the petitioner was to seek a
reference to the tribunal. Accordingly, the petitioners were given liberty to make necessary application to the
competent authority within two weeks from the date of order and the competent authority was directed to make
reference as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of two months from the receipt of application of
the petitioners. Submission is to the effect that the petitioners in the writ petition did not approach the competent
authority to get the matter referred to the tribunal for adjudication within time. The contact labours of M/s. Golden
Enterprises filed industrial dispute before the Labour Commissioner, Pune through Zilla Mazdoor Sangh vide their
letter dated 23.12.2011. As such the dispute referred for adjudication in the present reference is belated i.e. after about
7 years from the date of order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. In view of this the submission is that the reference
is not maintainable.
13.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank seeks to rely on the decision in case of Nedungadi Bank Ltd. V/S.
K.P. Madhavankutty & Ors. 2000 (II SCC 455) to submit that the power of the appropriate government to exercise its
powers under section 10 of the I.D. Act, 1947 is to be exercised reasonably and in a rational manner. There appears to
be no rational basis on which the Central Govt. has exercised the powers in this case after a lapse of about 7 years of the
order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. As such the dispute is stale and could not be the subject matter of the
reference under section 10 of the I.D. Act, 1947.
14.
He also seeks to rely on the decision in case of Reserve Bank of India V/S. Gopinath Sharma & Anr. 2006 (6
SCC 221) to submit that delay of 4 years in raising the dispute even after re-employment of the most of the workmen
was held to be fatal.
15.
He then seeks to rely on the decision in case of State of Karnataka & Anr. V/S. Ravi Kumar 2009 III LLJ (206
SC) to submit that 14 years delay to challenge the termination was stale reference and the reference ought to have been
rejected on the ground alone.
16.
However, in view of the facts of the present case it is to be seen whether the second party workman and other
workers were diligent in raising the dispute before competent authority. We have document at Page 2 of list of
document dated 11.3.2016. It is a copy of the letter dated 31.5.2006 (Ex.15) addressed to the Dy. Commissioner of
Labour, Pune requesting him to intervene in the dispute and making reference within the time prescribed by the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court. That would show that Thekedar Kamgar Sangh has made an application for making the
reference within time prescribed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court.
17.
So far contention go, it is also a contention of the second party workman that even after the disposal of the said
writ petition second party workman was in service and the wages were paid by the first party bank to her directly. As
per her contention, the first party bank has terminated the services of the second party workman and as such the dispute
was raised by the second party workman for regularization of the services of the concerned workman. It is the
submission of the second party workman that the reference has not been arisen out of the demand of the union but the
said reference has arisen out of the demand of the individual workman. The demand is not for regularization but the
demand is for re-instatement of service. In view of these facts, it can be said that the individual workman has made the
demand for regularization of her service and the reference has arisen out of her demand. Even before that in 2006 it is
the union who has made application to the Dy. Commissioner of Labour, Pune requesting him to intervene into the
dispute and make the reference within the time prescribed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The said letter dated
31.5.2006 is at Ex.15. Therefore it can be said that the union was diligent in making the reference but then
subsequently the demand is made by the individual workman for re-instatement and not for regularization. It cannot be
said therefore that the reference is belated or otherwise it is stale and not maintainable. This point is therefore answered
accordingly in negative.
Issue No. 2 & 3 :
18.
This is the main contentions issue. At the first brush I would observe that admittedly M/s. Golden Enterprises
was engaged by the bank for doing house-keeping at Pune Zonal office and bank’s quarters at Pune since 1981. In her
evidence also the second party workman has stated that Thekedar Kamgar Sangh and Pune Mazdoor Sangh are not the
employees of S.B.I. She admits that due to dispute the inter-se between workers, they requested the bank to make the
payment directly to them and arrangement was worked out. She then admits that since M/s. Golden Enterprises has
abandoned the contract in 1998 and the trade union namely Thekedar Kamgar Sangh has filed writ petition bearing No.
6247 of 1998 in the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. In this writ petition the petitioners have made averments
categorically that they have been employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises and that they are working on behalf of M/s.
Golden Enterprises in the bank premises at Pune. It is admitted that in para 3(a) of statement of claim, it is stated that
she and other workers were on the muster of M/s. Golden Enterprises. She even admits that before 1998 M/s. Golden
Enterprises used to make payment to them and that they were not under the disciplinary control of the bank. Even it is
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7433
admitted that they were not getting the facilities as available to the other bank employees. In view of above categorical
and clear admission, the second party workman involved in the present reference cannot take a contradictory and
inconsistent plea and cannot claim employer-employee relationship with the first party bank.
19.
Even then the Learned Counsel for the second party workman submitted that after termination of the contract in
between the first party bank and M/s. Golden Enterprises, second party workman was continued in service and the
workers were directly paid by the bank at the same daily wages rate which was paid by the contractor. Submission is to
the effect that the contract workers of M/s. Golden Enterprises were engaged by the State Bank of India and therefore
they cannot be treated as contract employees because the contract of the contractor M/s. Golden Enterprises with the
bank was cancelled and since cancellation of the contract they were continued to be in the service which would show
that first party bank was the principal employer.
20.
In this respect, if we see the evidence of the concerned workman, she admits that in the writ petition it was
categorically shown that the contract labours were employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises and they are working on
behalf of the M/s. Golden Enterprises in the premises of bank at Pune. Admittedly, in the statement of claim in para
3(a), she and other workers were shown on the muster of M/s. Golden Enterprises. It is admitted by her that before
1998 M/s. Golden Enterprises use to make payment to them. She even admits that she and other workers were not
under the disciplinary control of the bank. Admittedly they were not getting the facility as available to the other bank
employees. In view of this it can be said that the concerned workman being the employee of the contractor, the
ultimate supervision and control was of the contractor.
21.
In this respect the evidence has come on record that one Shri Selvam used to submit the bills in respect of work
of concerned workman and other workers and then the bank used to credit the amount in the account of each of the
contract labour. The question is whether the said arrangement which was worked out is sufficient to show and establish
the employer-employer relationship in between the concerned workman and the first party bank. When initially the
concerned workman was engaged by the contractor and after termination of the contract in between the said contractor
and the bank she has been continued with such arrangement in respect of payment of wages to her by the bank by
depositing her wages directly in her account after the production of bills by the said Shri Selvam, then that would not be
sufficient to say that first party bank being the principal employer was making payment of wages to the concerned
workman. Merely because the amount was credited to the workman/s account under circumstances narrated above does
not in any way alter the factual position that the concerned workman was a labour contractor and not an employee of
the bank.
22.
I say so because there is well defined procedure in the bank for recruitment and employment in the bank is done
by inserting advertisement, holding competitive test for the employment, selection procedure through merit etc. etc. No
such procedure was adopted at the time of engagement of the concerned workman as a Sweeper. The fact remains
therefore that she was a contract labour for doing the house-keeping job at the banks premises and therefore she
continued to be a contract labour even after the contract between said contractor and bank was terminated somewhere
in 1999-2000.
23.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that the bank continued to engage contract labours for
doing the house-keeping jobs at the bank premises in view or order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court dated 21.3.2006
whereby the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in view of petition by the petitioners took out a motion for clarification of
order passed on 9.3.2006 by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and also protection till reference is made at the instance
of the petitioners to the tribunal for adjudication. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court observed that they do not see any
protection granted by the court which was sought to be continued but then the Hon’ble Bombay High Court observed
that the contract labours employed by the bank should be continued subject to the requirements and by following
statutory obligations including payment of wages etc. and they need not be dis-continued only because the petition has
been disposed of. That would show that in view of this order passed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court the concerned
workman was continued in services as per the requirement and after cancellation of contract with first party bank and
the contractor namely M/s. Golden Enterprises, the subsequent arrangement was made in respect of payment of wages
of the concerned employees who were engaged by the contractor and therefore the payment was made to them by
depositing the amount in their bank accounts on submission of the bills by one shri Selvam. That would again show
that the concerned workman was not considered to be the employee of the first party bank. All the while she was
continued to be contract labour even after the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court till her services automatically came
to an end.
24.
Even then the Learned Counsel for the second party workman submitted that the employees were the employees
of M/s. Golden Enterprises till that contract was not abandoned or cancelled. After cancellation of the contract in 1999-
2000 M/s. Golden Enterprises ceased to be contractor and these employees were ceased to the employees of M/s.
Golden Enterprises. He submits that Hon’ble Bombay High Court has not directed to keep contract employees of M/s.
Golden Enterprises in service in orders passed on 19.1.1999 and 1.2.1999. Therefore the relation between the S.B.I.
7434
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
and M/s. Golden Enterprises as principal employer and the contractor came to an end and after cancellation of the
contract in 1999-2000 the services of the employees employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises for performing the job of
cleaning, sweeping, house-keeping of S.B.I. premises automatically came to an end. These employees were ineligible
to work with S.B.I. as contract workers of M/s. Golden Enterprises. So after termination of contract of M/s. Golden
Enterprises and S.B.I., by oral orders by S.B.I. the employees were appointed to carry out the house-keeping, cleaning,
sweeping work and then since that date till the date of termination the concerned workman were employed continuously
by S.B.I. They worked for 10 – 12 years continuously on the basis of said oral order of S.B.I. and therefore there exists
employer-employee relationship in between bank and concerned employees.
25.
This submission is other way round and is not acceptable. A definite stand was taken by the concerned
employees in the WP No. 6247/1998 that they are employees employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises which has been
given a contract of house-keeping of S.B.I., Pune, Regional Office Pune has been employing several workers for
carrying out the same work. It would thus not lie in their mouth to take contradictory and inconsistent plea that they are
the workmen of the principal employer i.e. bank. To raise such a mutually destructive plea is impermissible in law.
Such mutually destructive plea should not be allowed to be raised. Common law principle of estoppel waiver and
acquaintance are applicable in the industrial adjudication. In the context the hand can be laid on decision in case of
Steel Authority of India V/S. Union of India 2006 (12 SC 243) wherein in para 28 of the judgment it has been observed
that such inconsistent plea is not permissible.
26.
On going through the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the said WP No. 6247/1998 it has been observed
as follows:
“We have gone through the orders passed by this court on 19.1.1999 and 1.2.1999 and we do not see any
protection granted by this court and as sought to be continued. Undoubtedly the contract labours employed
by Respondent bank shall be continued subject to the requirement and by following the statutory obligations
including the payment of wages etc. and they need not be dis-continued only because this petition has been
disposed of.”
27.
In view of these observations of Hon’ble Bombay High Court even after the termination of contract in between
M/s. Golden Enterprises and the bank the concerned workmen were continued and were paid wages by the bank by
depositing the wages in their respective bank accounts. That does not mean that the bank has orally appointed them as
its employees on regular basis even without following the statutory procedure.
28.
Learned Counsel for the concerned workman / union submitted that the bank was paying bonus to the concerned
employees. He refers to Ex.17 to submit that the bank was making payment through bankers’ cheque. Therefore the
submission is that as per Section 10 of Payment of Bonus Act, the employer is bound to pay the bonus. Section 2(14)
of Payment of Bonus Act defines employer and it says that in relation to any other establishment the person who or the
authority which was the ultimate control over the affairs of the establishment and the managing agent is the employer.
He submits that as per section 21(4) the principal employer is not liable to pay bonus, gratuity as wages does not
include it. He is liable to pay only wages if the contractors fails to pay wages. Since S.B.I. has paid bonus to the
concerned employees it can be said that S.B.I. has engaged concerned workman directly and the bank is the employer
of the concerned workmen who are covered under the Payment of Bonus Act.
29.
This submission is also not acceptable since in the decision in case of Indian Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. V/S. State of
West Bengal & Ors. 2011 (4 LLM 158), Calcutta, it has been observed in para 20 of the judgment that,
“There is no warrant for the proposition that in every case where the bonus is paid to an employee, the same
is an indicator of the employee being a regular employee. The company is an establishment in public sector.
The provisions of bonus act would apply to it only if it satisfies the conditions mentioned in sub section (1)
of section 20 thereof. If indeed the company was obliged to pay bonus to its regular employees and had in
the process shared its profits with the contract labours by paying the bonus in terms of bonus act, the very
action of extending benefits of the social welfare legislation to said labours would not change their status to
regular employees of the company.”
30.
Next submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman is that the contractor did not obtain necessary
licence. In this respect also it is necessary to refer the observations in para 20 of the citation cited supra. It has been
observed that if at all the contractor did not obtain the licence it would open to the authority concerned to take action
against it under section 23 of CLRA Act but for that the company cannot be penalized and the contract labours
employed by such erring contractor be thrust upon it. Non-obtaintion of licence without anything more would not
clothe the Respondent with any legal right to claim that they are the direct employees of the company and hence
entitled to continue in service despite the contract with KNYCEE not being renewed.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7435
In view of this legal position it can be said that even if the contract between the bank and the contractor namely M/s.
Golden Enterprises was cancelled and could not be renewed that does not give right to the concerned employee / union
to claim that they are direct employees of the bank.
31.
Next submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman is that there is no documentary evidence to
show that Shri Selvam was the contractor after the contract of M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned. He submits
that before RLC the settlement of Minimum wages was reached between the bank and workman / union and the bank
has accepted to pay the minimum wages to the concerned workman. In view of that the submission is that after the
contract with M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned, it was the bank who paid the wages to the concerned employees
by depositing the wages in their bank account and thereby the bank has accepted it to be the employer of the concerned
workman.
32.
It is no doubt true that there is no documentary evidence to prove that Selvam was submitting the bills on the
basis of which the wages were deposited in the bank account of each workman. But then Selvam was one of the worker
along with other employees. Even the workman herself has admitted in her cross-examination that due to inter-se
dispute between the workers they requested the bank to make the direct payment and arrangement was worked out. In
view of that it can be said that some arrangement was worked out in respect of payment to these workmen after the
contract between the bank and M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned.
33.
In view of this, it is the submission of Learned Counsel for the bank that the workmen concerned were continued
to be engaged by K.P. Selvam as a contract labour after original contractor ran away and no wages were directly paid to
them by the bank. In view of admission of the concerned workman that the arrangement was worked out after the inter-
se dispute between the workers it can be very well said that the concerned workmen were paid wages directly in their
bank account by way of this arrangement which was worked out. Therefore that will not give them the status of regular
employees since initially they were engaged by the contractor and then there is no documentary evidence to show that
the concerned workman was appointed by the bank.
34.
It is then submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman that the concerned workman was doing
the work of sweeping and cleaning under the direction, control and supervision of first party bank. He refers to copies
of attendance register to submit that those registers are maintained by the bank and it bears the signatures of Waze,
Kulkarni and Bhosale who are the bank officers. In view of this it is submitted that the bank officers were having
control over the work carried out by the concerned employees.
35.
In his cross examination witness Sudhir Ramchandra has denied the suggestion to the effect that the bank was
having control over the work carried out by the concerned employees and that Mr. Jatar, Sudhir Pawar, Dube,
Karkhanis were supervising the work and were allotting the work to the concerned employees. Even if some anxious
consideration is given to this submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman then also it can be said that
merely because the contract labour work is under the supervisions of officers of principal employer it cannot be taken
as evidence of direct employment under the principal employer. In the decision in case of International Airport
Authority of India V/S. International Air Cargo Union and Anr. 2009 (13 SCC 374) it has been observed in para 54 of
the judgment that,
“Exercise of some control over the activities of the contract labour while they discharge their duties as
labours is inevitable and such exercise is not sufficient to hold that the contract labour will become the direct
employee of the principal employer.”
36.
In the light of above observations I hold that there does not exist employer-employee relationship between the
first party bank and second party workman. But then it is submission of the Learned Counsel for the concerned
workman that the concerned workman had worked for 240 days and continuously in every completed year of service
and her services came to be terminated without following the procedure laid down under section 25 of I.D. Act, 1947.
In this view the submission is that the said termination is illegal and improper.
37.
This submission is also not acceptable since the fact remains that the concerned workman was engaged by the
contractor and after termination of the contract her services came to an end.
38.
For it is explicit from the evidence of Sudhir Jalanwar, the witness of the bank that on 10.11.2010 the bank
published tender notice in local newspapers for maintenance and house-keeping of bank premises. The bank also
suggested the contract labours to form a society, partnership firm or a company for participating in the tender process.
Contract labours did not pay heed to the suggestion made by the bank. The tender process was completed on
16.12.2011 and the contract for maintenance and house-keeping of the bank premises was awarded to contractor who
had quoted the lowest rates. The new contractor displayed the notice on the bank’s notice board stating that he was
given contract for maintenance and house-keeping of the banks premises and invited those who were interested to work
with him to approach him. However, the concerned workman and other workers did not avail this opportunity to work
7436
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
under the new contractor. The fact remains therefore that after termination of earlier contract the services of the
concerned workman automatically came to an end.
39.
In view of this, the Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that though concerned workman had
worked for 240 days in a year, her appointment was not from the regular stream of appointment and therefore is not
entitled for regularization. He seeks to rely on the decision in case of Dena Bank V/S. Ashraf Yalu Shaikh 2009 III
CLR 426 to submit that since the appointment of the concerned workman was not from the regular stream of
appointment they are not entitled to reinstatement but only compensation, as envisaged under section 25 of I.D. Act,
1947.
40.
So far the submission of the concerned workman to the effect that first party bank has terminated her services
without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947, it can be said that there is no employer-
employee relationship between the bank and workman and that the services of the workman automatically came to an
end after the new contractor was engaged by the bank after following tender process. It is not therefore possible to
accept the submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman that the termination is illegal on account that it
was without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947.
41.
Realising this difficulty, Learned Counsel for the concerned workman submitted that by way of settlement, the
similarly situated workmen and employees in Mumbai were absorbed in services of the bank and therefore the first
party bank has violated the principles of equity before law and gave different treatment to some set of employees in
Mumbai by neglecting section 12(3) and 18(3) of I.D. Act, 1947 and therefore the termination is illegal. The
submission is again other way round. There is no evidence of such discrimination. If any such agreement has been
reached then it has no relation with the present dispute. The present dispute is squarely covered by W.P. No.
6247/1998 and the same has to be dealt with in the light of order passed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the said
writ petition. In view of that the concerned workman cannot base a claim on the basis of settlement entered into in a
different matter under different circumstances.
42.
Considering all these facts, I hold that action of management in terminating the services of concerned workman
w.e.f. 6.1.2012 is legal and justified. The above issues are therefore answered accordingly as against each of them in
terms of above observations.
Issue No. 4 & 5 :
43.
In view of my finding the above issues, the concerned workman is not entitled to be re-instated in the services of
first party bank with continuity of service and other consequential benefits. He is not entitled to relief claimed. Thus
order.
ORDER
Reference is rejected with no order as to costs.
Date: 14.07.2017
M. V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 15 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2235-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjrh;
LVsV cSad ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 30@2013) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 15-09-2017
dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12012@104@2012&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
ch- ,l- fc"V] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 15th September, 2017
S.O. 2235.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 30/2013) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of State
Bank of India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 15.09.2017.
[No. L-12012/104/2012-IR (B-I)]
B. S. BISHT, Section Officer
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7437
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.2, MUMBAI
PRESENT : M.V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO.CGIT-2/30 of 2013
EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF
STATE BANK OF INDIA
Assistant General Manager,
State Bank of India, Zonal Office,
Admn. Office, Sharda Chamber,
7th Floor, 386/2, Shankarseth Road,
Pune – 411 037.
AND
THEIR WORKMAN
Shri Siddarth Jagtap,
406, Bhavani Peth,
Opp. Poona College,
Pune – 411 042.
APPEARANCES:
FOR THE EMPLOYER
:
Shri M.G. Nadkarni, Advocate
FOR THE WORKMAN
:
Mr. Umesh Vishwad, Advocate
Mumbai, the 14th July, 2017.
AWARD
1.
This is reference made by the Central Government in exercise of powers under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and
sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 vide Government of India, Ministry of Labour &
Employment, New Delhi vide its order No. L-12012/104/2012 – IR (B-I) dated 09.05.2013. The terms of reference
given in the schedule are as follows :
“Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Pune in terminating the
services of Shri Siddarth Jagtap w.e.f. 16.1.2012 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is
entitled to ?”
2.
After the receipt of the reference, both the parties were served with the notices. They appeared through their
respective representatives. Second party workman filed statement of claim Ex.6. According to the concerned
workman, he was working with the first party bank since 1990 as a Sweeper. He has worked continuously from 1990
to 16.1.2012 with the first party bank. He was doing the work of cleaning and sweeping the premises of Zonal Office
Pune and the officers’ quarters of the first party bank under direct control and supervision of the first party bank. His
work is regular and perennial. The first party bank was making payment to him. As such there is direct employer-
employee relationship between first party bank and second party workman.
3.
According to the second party workman, a group of workmen raised the industrial dispute against the
management of first party bank, Mumbai for non-absorption of workmen engaged through contractors in services of the
first party bank. The agreement was arrived at and the contract workers were absorbed in the service of Central office
and Mumbai Main Branch of the first party bank. However, the first party bank has failed to absorb the contact
employees working in Pune and were discriminated in same situation. Therefore, the union namely Thekedar Kamgar
Sangh has made demand of absorption of second party workman and other workers. The said union has filed writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 before Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The said petition was disposed of in the year
2006 in view of law laid down in case of Steel Authority of India. Since 1998, the first party bank has stopped paying
wages to the second party workman through the contractor and has started direct payment to the second party workman.
There is no contractor since 1998 and the wages were directly paid by Pune Zonal office of the first party bank. Even
after disposal of the said writ petition the second party workman was in service and wages were paid to him directly by
the first party bank.
4.
It is contention of the second party workman that He was in continuous service and had put continuously 240
days and more continuous service in every completed year of the service. However, the first party bank has terminated
the services of the second party workman without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947.
7438
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Therefore the said termination is illegal, improper, arbitrary and unjust. It also amounts to unfair labour practices. The
second party workman is therefore asking to declare that the termination of his services by the first party bank is illegal.
He is also asking for re-instatement with continuity of service and all other consequential benefits from the date of
termination till actual date of re-instatement along with interest and cost.
5.
First party bank has resisted the claim by filing written statement Ex.7. According to the first party bank, the
bank had engaged the contractor named M/s. Golden Enterprises since June 1981 who was entrusted with the job of
house-keeping at the Zonal office, located at East Street, Gulmohar, Pune and also at the bank’s residential quarters
namely Madhuban Bank House and Ashirwad Bldg. at Nagar Road, Pune. The bank was making payment to the
contractor for the service rendered to the bank and the contractor was in turn effect the payment to the workers engaged
by him for carrying out the job given to him by the bank. The said contractor abandoned the contract in November
1998 and ran away. The bank terminated the contract with M/s. Golden Enterprises sometimes in 1999 – 2000.
However, with reference to the letter and sprit of the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court dated 21.3.2006, the bank
continued to engage the contract labours for doing the house-keeping jobs at the bank premises. Bank used to give
money to Shri Selvam, the Supervisor against the production of the bills. Subsequently, there was inter-se dispute and
the contract labours requested bank to pay money directly to them. Accordingly, the arrangement was worked out
whereby Shri Selvam used to submit bills and bank credited the amount to the account of each contract labour.
6.
It is also contention of the first party bank that on 10.9.2010 the bank publiHed tender notice in local newspaper
for maintenance and house-keeping of the banks premises. The bank also suggested the contract labours to form a
society, partnership firm or a company for participating in the tender process. Contract labours did not pay heed to the
suggestion made by the bank. The tender process was completed on 16.12.2011 and the contract for maintenance and
house-keeping of the bank premises was awarded to contractor who had quoted the lowest rates. The new contractor
displayed the notice on the bank’s notice board stating that he was given contract for maintenance and house-keeping of
the banks premises and invited those who were interested to work with him to approach him. However, the concerned
workman and other workers did not avail this opportunity.
7.
It is also contention of the first party bank that there is no employer-employee relationship between the bank and
concerned workman. The tribunal has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute in question. Even as per order in writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 of Hon’ble Bombay High Court, the concerned workman did not approach the
competent authority to get the matter referred to tribunal for adjudication and as such dispute referred for adjudication
in the present reference has been raised belatedly. It is quite stale. The reference is not maintainable on that ground.
8.
According to the first party bank, the concerned workman was engaged by the contractor named M/s. Golden
Enterprises. The bank was making payment to the said contractor who in turn was effecting the payment to the
workmen engaged by him and therefore the claim of concerned workman that He was engaged by the bank is not
maintainable. It is, thus, contention of the bank that it has not discriminated the contract employees working at Pune
and therefore the claim of the workman is completely untenable.
9.
It is also contention of the first party bank that provisions of section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947 are not applicable in
the factual matrix of the case since the service of the concerned workman automatically came to an end after new
contractor was engaged by the bank after duly following tender process.
10.
It is then contention of the first party bank that the settlement / agreement that might have been reached at
Mumbai has no relation whatsoever with the present dispute and the workman concerned cannot base his claim on the
basis of settlement entered into in a different case. On this premises, the first party bank has sought rejection of the
reference.
11.
Following issues are framed at Ex.8. I reproduce the issues along with my findings thereon for the reasons to
follow:
Sr. No.
Issues
Findings
1
Whether the reference is maintainable ?
Yes
2.
Whether there exists employer-employer relationship between the first party
bank & concerned workman?
No
3.
Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India in terminating
the services of Shri Siddarth Jagtap w.e.f. 16/01/2012 is legal and justified ?
Yes
4.
If not, whether the concerned workman is entitled to be reinstated in the
services of first party with continuity of service and all other consequential
benefits ?
No
5.
What Order ?
As per final order
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7439
REASONS
Issue No. 1 :
12.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that admittedly the union namely Thekedar Kamgar
Sangh has made demand of absorption of second party workman and other workers. The said union has filed writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 before Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The main prayer of the petitioner was for
issuance of writ of mandamus to the bank for regularizing the services of the concerned workers in the banks service.
He submits that the said writ petition wad disposed of by the Division Bench of Hon’ble Bombay High Court vide
order dated 9.3.2006. In the said order the Hon’ble Bombay High Court made it clear that in view of law laid down by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Steel Authority of India & Ors. V/S. National Union Waterfront Workers &
Ors., the relief claimed in the petition cannot be granted and that only remedy available to the petitioner was to seek a
reference to the tribunal. Accordingly, the petitioners were given liberty to make necessary application to the
competent authority within two weeks from the date of order and the competent authority was directed to make
reference as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of two months from the receipt of application of
the petitioners. Submission is to the effect that the petitioners in the writ petition did not approach the competent
authority to get the matter referred to the tribunal for adjudication within time. The contact labours of M/s. Golden
Enterprises filed industrial dispute before the Labour Commissioner, Pune through Zilla Mazdoor Sangh vide their
letter dated 23.12.2011. As such the dispute referred for adjudication in the present reference is belated i.e. after about
7 years from the date of order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. In view of this the submission is that the reference
is not maintainable.
13.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank seeks to rely on the decision in case of Nedungadi Bank Ltd. V/S.
K.P. Madhavankutty & Ors. 2000 (II SCC 455) to submit that the power of the appropriate government to exercise its
powers under section 10 of the I.D. Act, 1947 is to be exercised reasonably and in a rational manner. There appears to
be no rational basis on which the Central Govt. has exercised the powers in this case after a lapse of about 7 years of the
order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. As such the dispute is stale and could not be the subject matter of the
reference under section 10 of the I.D. Act, 1947.
14.
He also seeks to rely on the decision in case of Reserve Bank of India V/S. Gopinath Sharma & Anr. 2006 (6
SCC 221) to submit that delay of 4 years in raising the dispute even after re-employment of the most of the workmen
was held to be fatal.
15.
He then seeks to rely on the decision in case of State of Karnataka & Anr. V/S. Ravi Kumar 2009 III LLJ (206
SC) to submit that 14 years delay to challenge the termination was stale reference and the reference ought to have been
rejected on the ground alone.
16.
However, in view of the facts of the present case it is to be seen whether the second party workman and other
workers were diligent in raising the dispute before competent authority. We have document at Page 2 of list of
document dated 11.3.2016. It is a copy of the letter dated 31.5.2006 (Ex.15) addressed to the Dy. Commissioner of
Labour, Pune requesting him to intervene in the dispute and making reference within the time prescribed by the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court. That would show that Thekedar Kamgar Sangh has made an application for making the
reference within time prescribed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court.
17.
So far contention go, it is also a contention of the second party workman that even after the disposal of the said
writ petition second party workman was in service and the wages were paid by the first party bank to him directly. As
per his contention, the first party bank has terminated the services of the second party workman and as such the dispute
was raised by the second party workman for regularization of the services of the concerned workman. It is the
submission of the second party workman that the reference has not been arisen out of the demand of the union but the
said reference has arisen out of the demand of the individual workman. The demand is not for regularization but the
demand is for re-instatement of service. In view of these facts, it can be said that the individual workman has made the
demand for regularization of his service and the reference has arisen out of his demand. Even before that in 2006 it is
the union who has made application to the Dy. Commissioner of Labour, Pune requesting him to intervene into the
dispute and make the reference within the time prescribed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The said letter dated
31.5.2006 is at Ex.15. Therefore it can be said that the union was diligent in making the reference but then
subsequently the demand is made by the individual workman for re-instatement and not for regularization. It cannot be
said therefore that the reference is belated or otherwise it is stale and not maintainable. This point is therefore answered
accordingly in negative.
Issue No. 2 & 3 :
18.
This is the main contentions issue. At the first brush I would observe that admittedly M/s. Golden Enterprises
was engaged by the bank as a contractor since 1981 for doing house-keeping at Pune Zonal office and bank’s quarters
at Pune. In his evidence also the second party workman has stated that He has joined the services in 1992 and initially
7440
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
his name was shown on the muster of M/s. Golden Enterprises. He admits in his evidence that from 1981, M/s. Golden
Enterprises was doing house-keeping and maintenance work for State Bank of India in Mumbai and Pune. He then
admits that M/s. Golden Enterprises has abandoned the contract in November 1998 and the trade union namely
Thekedar Kamgar Sangh has filed writ petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 on behalf of the contract workers in the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court. In this writ petition the petitioners have made averments categorically that they have
been employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises. In view of above categorical and clear admission, the second party
workman involved in the present reference cannot take a contradictory and inconsistent plea and cannot claim
employer-employee relationship with the first party bank.
19.
Even then the Learned Counsel for the second party workman submitted that after termination of the contract in
between the first party bank and M/s. Golden Enterprises, second party workman was continued in service and the
workers were directly paid by the bank at the same daily wages rate which was paid by the contractor. Submission is to
the effect that the contract workers of M/s. Golden Enterprises were engaged by the State Bank of India and therefore
they cannot be treated as contract employees because the contract of the contractor M/s. Golden Enterprises with the
bank was cancelled and since cancellation of the contract they were continued to be in the service which would show
that first party bank was the principal employer.
20.
In this respect, if we see the evidence of the concerned workman, He admits that in the writ petition it was
categorically shown that the contract labours were employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises and they are working on
behalf of the M/s. Golden Enterprises in the premises of bank at Pune. Admittedly, in the statement of claim in para
3(a), He and other workers were shown on the muster of M/s. Golden Enterprises. It is admitted by him that before
1998 M/s. Golden Enterprises use to make payment to them. He even admits that He and other workers were not under
the disciplinary control of the bank. Admittedly they were not getting the facility as available to the other bank
employees. In view of this it can be said that the concerned workman being the employee of the contractor, the
ultimate supervision and control was of the contractor.
21.
In this respect the evidence has come on record that one Shri Selvam used to submit the bills in respect of work
of concerned workman and other workers and then the bank used to credit the amount in the account of each of the
contract labour. The question is whether the said arrangement which was worked out is sufficient to show and establish
the employer-employer relationship in between the concerned workman and the first party bank. When initially the
concerned workman was engaged by the contractor and after termination of the contract in between the said contractor
and the bank He has been continued with such arrangement in respect of payment of wages to him by the bank by
depositing his wages directly in his account after the production of bills by the said Shri Selvam, then that would not be
sufficient to say that first party bank being the principal employer was making payment of wages to the concerned
workman. Merely because the amount was credited to the workman/s account under circumstances narrated above does
not in any way alter the factual position that the concerned workman was a labour contractor and not an employee of
the bank.
22.
I say so because there is well defined procedure in the bank for recruitment and employment in the bank is done
by inserting advertisement, holding competitive test for the employment, selection procedure through merit etc. etc. No
such procedure was adopted at the time of engagement of the concerned workman as a Sweeper. The fact remains
therefore that He was a contract labour for doing the house-keeping job at the banks premises and therefore He
continued to be a contract labour even after the contract between said contractor and bank was terminated somewhere
in 1999-2000.
23.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that the bank continued to engage contract labours for
doing the house-keeping jobs at the bank premises in view or order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court dated 21.3.2006
whereby the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in view of petition by the petitioners took out a motion for clarification of
order passed on 9.3.2006 by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and also protection till reference is made at the instance
of the petitioners to the tribunal for adjudication. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court observed that they do not see any
protection granted by the court which was sought to be continued but then the Hon’ble Bombay High Court observed
that the contract labours employed by the bank should be continued subject to the requirements and by following
statutory obligations including payment of wages etc. and they need not be dis-continued only because the petition has
been disposed of. That would show that in view of this order passed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court the concerned
workman was continued in services as per the requirement and after cancellation of contract with first party bank and
the contractor namely M/s. Golden Enterprises, the subsequent arrangement was made in respect of payment of wages
of the concerned employees who were engaged by the contractor and therefore the payment was made to them by
depositing the amount in their bank accounts on submission of the bills by one shri Selvam. That would again show
that the concerned workman was not considered to be the employee of the first party bank. All the while He was
continued to be contract labour even after the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court till his services automatically came
to an end.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7441
24.
Even then the Learned Counsel for the second party workman submitted that the employees were the employees
of M/s. Golden Enterprises till that contract was not abandoned or cancelled. After cancellation of the contract in 1999-
2000 M/s. Golden Enterprises ceased to be contractor and these employees were ceased to the employees of M/s.
Golden Enterprises. He submits that Hon’ble Bombay High Court has not directed to keep contract employees of M/s.
Golden Enterprises in service in orders passed on 19.1.1999 and 1.2.1999. Therefore the relation between the S.B.I.
and M/s. Golden Enterprises as principal employer and the contractor came to an end and after cancellation of the
contract in 1999-2000 the services of the employees employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises for performing the job of
cleaning, sweeping, house-keeping of S.B.I. premises automatically came to an end. These employees were ineligible
to work with S.B.I. as contract workers of M/s. Golden Enterprises. So after termination of contract of M/s. Golden
Enterprises and S.B.I., by oral orders by S.B.I. the employees were appointed to carry out the house-keeping, cleaning,
sweeping work and then since that date till the date of termination the concerned workman were employed continuously
by S.B.I. They worked for 10 – 12 years continuously on the basis of said oral order of S.B.I. and therefore there exists
employer-employee relationship in between bank and concerned employees.
25.
This submission is other way round and is not acceptable. A definite stand was taken by the concerned
employees in the WP No. 6247/1998 that they are employees employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises which has been
given a contract of house-keeping of S.B.I., Pune, Regional Office Pune has been employing several workers for
carrying out the same work. It would thus not lie in their mouth to take contradictory and inconsistent plea that they are
the workmen of the principal employer i.e. bank. To raise such a mutually destructive plea is impermissible in law.
Such mutually destructive plea should not be allowed to be raised. Common law principle of estoppel waiver and
acquaintance are applicable in the industrial adjudication. In the context the hand can be laid on decision in case of
Steel Authority of India V/S. Union of India 2006 (12 SC 243) wherein in para 28 of the judgment it has been observed
that such inconsistent plea is not permissible.
26.
On going through the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the said WP No. 6247/1998 it has been observed
as follows:
“We have gone through the orders passed by this court on 19.1.1999 and 1.2.1999 and we do not see any
protection granted by this court and as sought to be continued. Undoubtedly the contract labours employed
by Respondent bank shall be continued subject to the requirement and by following the statutory obligations
including the payment of wages etc. and they need not be dis-continued only because this petition has been
disposed of.”
27.
In view of these observations of Hon’ble Bombay High Court even after the termination of contract in between
M/s. Golden Enterprises and the bank the concerned workmen were continued and were paid wages by the bank by
depositing the wages in their respective bank accounts. That does not mean that the bank has orally appointed them as
its employees on regular basis even without following the statutory procedure.
28.
Learned Counsel for the concerned workman / union submitted that the bank was paying bonus to the concerned
employees. He refers to Ex.17 to submit that the bank was making payment through bankers’ cheque. Therefore the
submission is that as per Section 10 of Payment of Bonus Act, the employer is bound to pay the bonus. Section 2(14)
of Payment of Bonus Act defines employer and it says that in relation to any other establishment the person who or the
authority which was the ultimate control over the affairs of the establishment and the managing agent is the employer.
He submits that as per section 21(4) the principal employer is not liable to pay bonus, gratuity as wages does not
include it. He is liable to pay only wages if the contractors fails to pay wages. Since S.B.I. has paid bonus to the
concerned employees it can be said that S.B.I. has engaged concerned workman directly and the bank is the employer
of the concerned workmen who are covered under the Payment of Bonus Act.
29.
This submission is also not acceptable since in the decision in case of Indian Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. V/S. State of
West Bengal & Ors. 2011 (4 LLM 158), Calcutta, it has been observed in para 20 of the judgment that,
“There is no warrant for the proposition that in every case where the bonus is paid to an employee, the same
is an indicator of the employee being a regular employee. The company is an establishment in public sector.
The provisions of bonus act would apply to it only if it satisfies the conditions mentioned in sub section (1)
of section 20 thereof. If indeed the company was obliged to pay bonus to its regular employees and had in
the process shared its profits with the contract labours by paying the bonus in terms of bonus act, the very
action of extending benefits of the social welfare legislation to said labours would not change their status to
regular employees of the company.”
30.
Next submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman is that the contractor did not obtain necessary
licence. In this respect also it is necessary to refer the observations in para 20 of the citation cited supra. It has been
observed that if at all the contractor did not obtain the licence it would open to the authority concerned to take action
against it under section 23 of CLRA Act but for that the company cannot be penalized and the contract labours
7442
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
employed by such erring contractor be thrust upon it. Non-obtaintion of licence without anything more would not
clothe the Respondent with any legal right to claim that they are the direct employees of the company and hence
entitled to continue in service despite the contract with KNYCEE not being renewed.
In view of this legal position it can be said that even if the contract between the bank and the contractor namely
M/s. Golden Enterprises was cancelled and could not be renewed that does not give right to the concerned employee /
union to claim that they are direct employees of the bank.
31.
Next submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman is that there is no documentary evidence to
show that Shri Selvam was the contractor after the contract of M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned. He submits
that before RLC the settlement of Minimum wages was reached between the bank and workman / union and the bank
has accepted to pay the minimum wages to the concerned workman. In view of that the submission is that after the
contract with M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned, it was the bank who paid the wages to the concerned employees
by depositing the wages in their bank account and thereby the bank has accepted it to be the employer of the concerned
workman.
32.
It is no doubt true that there is no documentary evidence to prove that Selvam was submitting the bills on the
basis of which the wages were deposited in the bank account of each workman. But then Selvam was one of the worker
along with other employees. Even the workman himself has admitted in his cross-examination that due to inter-se
dispute between the workers they requested the bank to make the direct payment and arrangement was worked out. In
view of that it can be said that some arrangement was worked out in respect of payment to these workmen after the
contract between the bank and M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned.
33.
In view of this, it is the submission of Learned Counsel for the bank that the workmen concerned were continued
to be engaged by K.P. Selvam as a contract labour after original contractor ran away and no wages were directly paid to
them by the bank. In view of admission of the concerned workman that the arrangement was worked out after the inter-
se dispute between the workers it can be very well said that the concerned workmen were paid wages directly in their
bank account by way of this arrangement which was worked out. Therefore that will not give them the status of regular
employees since initially they were engaged by the contractor and then there is no documentary evidence to show that
the concerned workman was appointed by the bank.
34.
It is then submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman that the concerned workman was doing
the work of sweeping and cleaning under the direction, control and supervision of first party bank. He refers to copies
of attendance register to submit that those registers are maintained by the bank and it bears the signatures of Waze,
Kulkarni and Bhosale who are the bank officers. In view of this it is submitted that the bank officers were having
control over the work carried out by the concerned employees.
35.
In his cross examination witness Sudhir Ramchandra has denied the suggestion to the effect that the bank was
having control over the work carried out by the concerned employees and that Mr. Jatar, Sudhir Pawar, Dube,
Karkhanis were supervising the work and were allotting the work to the concerned employees. Even if some anxious
consideration is given to this submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman then also it can be said that
merely because the contract labour work is under the supervisions of officers of principal employer it cannot be taken
as evidence of direct employment under the principal employer. In the decision in case of International Airport
Authority of India V/S. International Air Cargo Union and Anr. 2009 (13 SCC 374) it has been observed in para 54 of
the judgment that,
“Exercise of some control over the activities of the contract labour while they discharge their duties as
labours is inevitable and such exercise is not sufficient to hold that the contract labour will become the direct
employee of the principal employer.”
36.
In the light of above observations I hold that there does not exist employer-employee relationship between the
first party bank and second party workman. But then it is submission of the Learned Counsel for the concerned
workman that the concerned workman had worked for 240 days and continuously in every completed year of service
and his services came to be terminated without following the procedure laid down under section 25 of I.D. Act, 1947.
In this view the submission is that the said termination is illegal and improper.
37.
This submission is also not acceptable since the fact remains that the concerned workman was engaged by the
contractor and after termination of the contract his services came to an end.
38.
For it is explicit from the evidence of Sudhir Jalanwar, the witness of the bank that on 10.11.2010 the bank
published tender notice in local newspapers for maintenance and house-keeping of bank premises. The bank also
suggested the contract labours to form a society, partnership firm or a company for participating in the tender process.
Contract labours did not pay heed to the suggestion made by the bank. The tender process was completed on
16.12.2011 and the contract for maintenance and house-keeping of the bank premises was awarded to contractor who
had quoted the lowest rates. The new contractor displayed the notice on the bank’s notice board stating that he was
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7443
given contract for maintenance and house-keeping of the banks premises and invited those who were interested to work
with him to approach him. However, the concerned workman and other workers did not avail this opportunity to work
under the new contractor. The fact remains therefore that after termination of earlier contract the services of the
concerned workman automatically came to an end.
39.
In view of this, the Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that though concerned workman had
worked for 240 days in a year, his appointment was not from the regular stream of appointment and therefore is not
entitled for regularization. He seeks to rely on the decision in case of Dena Bank V/S. Ashraf Yalu Shaikh 2009 III
CLR 426 to submit that since the appointment of the concerned workman was not from the regular stream of
appointment they are not entitled to reinstatement but only compensation, as envisaged under section 25 of I.D. Act,
1947.
40.
So far the submission of the concerned workman to the effect that first party bank has terminated his services
without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947, it can be said that there is no employer-
employee relationship between the bank and workman and that the services of the workman automatically came to an
end after the new contractor was engaged by the bank after following tender process. It is not therefore possible to
accept the submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman that the termination is illegal on account that it
was without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947.
41.
Realising this difficulty, Learned Counsel for the concerned workman submitted that by way of settlement, the
similarly situated workmen and employees in Mumbai were absorbed in services of the bank and therefore the first
party bank has violated the principles of equity before law and gave different treatment to some set of employees in
Mumbai by neglecting section 12(3) and 18(3) of I.D. Act, 1947 and therefore the termination is illegal. The
submission is again other way round. There is no evidence of such discrimination. If any such agreement has been
reached then it has no relation with the present dispute. The present dispute is squarely covered by W.P. No.
6247/1998 and the same has to be dealt with in the light of order passed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the said
writ petition. In view of that the concerned workman cannot base a claim on the basis of settlement entered into in a
different matter under different circumstances.
42.
Considering all these facts, I hold that action of management in terminating the services of concerned workman
w.e.f. 6.1.2012 is legal and justified. The above issues are therefore answered accordingly as against each of them in
terms of above observations.
Issue No. 4 & 5 :
43.
In view of my finding the above issues, the concerned workman is not entitled to be re-instated in the services of
first party bank with continuity of service and other consequential benefits. He is not entitled to relief claimed. Thus
order.
ORDER
Reference is rejected with no order as to costs.
Date: 14.07.2017
M. V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 15 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2236-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjrh;
LVsV cSad ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 4@2014) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 15-09-2017
dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12012@81@2012&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
ch- ,l- fc"V] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 15th September, 2017
S.O. 2236.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 4/2014) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of State Bank of
India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 15.09.2017.
[No. L-12012/81/2012-IR (B-I)]
B. S. BISHT, Section Officer
7444
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, MUMBAI
PRESENT : M.V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO. CGIT-2/4 of 2014
EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF
STATE BANK OF INDIA
Assistant General Manager,
State Bank of India, Zonal Office,
Admn. Office, Sharda Chamber,
7th Floor, 386/2, Shankarseth Road,
Pune – 411 037.
AND
THEIR WORKMAN
Smt. Anjani Madhukar Ghod,
413, Rasta Peth,
Cycle Society, Quarter gate,
Pune.
APPEARANCES :
FOR THE EMPLOYER
:
Shri M.G. Nadkarni, Advocate
FOR THE WORKMAN
:
Mr. Umesh Vishwad, Advocate
Mumbai, dated the 14th July, 2017
AWARD
1.
This is reference made by the Central Government in exercise of powers under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and
sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 vide Government of India, Ministry of Labour &
Employment, New Delhi vide its order No. L-12012/81/2012 – IR (B-I) dated 16.01.2014. The terms of reference
given in the schedule are as follows :
“Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Pune in terminating the services
of Smt. Anjani Madhukar Ghod w.e.f. 16.1.2012 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is
entitled to ?“
2.
After the receipt of the reference, both the parties were served with the notices. They appeared through their
respective representatives. Second party workman filed statement of claim Ex.6. According to the concerned
workman, she was working with the first party bank since 1991 as a Sweeper. She has worked continuously from 1991
to 16.1.2012 with the first party bank. She was doing the work of cleaning and sweeping the premises of Zonal Office
Pune and the officers’ quarters of the first party bank under direct control and supervision of the first party bank. Her
work is regular and perennial. The first party bank was making payment to her. As such there is direct employer-
employee relationship between first party bank and second party workman.
3.
According to the second party workman, a group of workmen raised the industrial dispute against the
management of first party bank, Mumbai for non-absorption of workmen engaged through contractors in services of the
first party bank. The agreement was arrived at and the contract workers were absorbed in the service of Central office
and Mumbai Main Branch of the first party bank. However, the first party bank has failed to absorb the contact
employees working in Pune and were discriminated in same situation. Therefore, the union namely Thekedar Kamgar
Sangh has made demand of absorption of second party workman and other workers. The said union has filed writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 before Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The said petition was disposed of in the year
2006 in view of law laid down in case of Steel Authority of India. Since 1998, the first party bank has stopped paying
wages to the second party workman through the contractor and has started direct payment to the second party workman.
There is no contractor since 1998 and the wages were directly paid by Pune Zonal office of the first party bank. Even
after disposal of the said writ petition the second party workman was in service and wages were paid to her directly by
the first party bank.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7445
4.
It is contention of the second party workman that she was in continuous service and had put continuously 240
days and more continuous service in every completed year of the service. However, the first party bank has terminated
the services of the second party workman without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947.
Therefore the said termination is illegal, improper, arbitrary and unjust. It also amounts to unfair labour practices. The
second party workman is therefore asking to declare that the termination of her services by the first party bank is illegal.
She is also asking for re-instatement with continuity of service and all other consequential benefits from the date of
termination till actual date of re-instatement along with interest and cost.
5.
First party bank has resisted the claim by filing written statement Ex.7. According to the first party bank, the
bank had engaged the contractor named M/s. Golden Enterprises since June 1981 who was entrusted with the job of
house-keeping at the Zonal office, located at East Street, Gulmohar, Pune and also at the bank’s residential quarters
namely Madhuban Bank House and Ashirwad Bldg. at Nagar Road, Pune. The bank was making payment to the
contractor for the service rendered to the bank and the contractor was in turn effect the payment to the workers engaged
by him for carrying out the job given to him by the bank. The said contractor abandoned the contract in November
1998 and ran away. The bank terminated the contract with M/s. Golden Enterprises sometimes in 1999 – 2000.
However, with reference to the letter and sprit of the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court dated 21.3.2006, the bank
continued to engage the contract labours for doing the house-keeping jobs at the bank premises. Bank used to give
money to Shri Selvam, the Supervisor against the production of the bills. Subsequently, there was inter-se dispute and
the contract labours requested bank to pay money directly to them. Accordingly, the arrangement was worked out
whereby Shri Selvam used to submit bills and bank credited the amount to the account of each contract labour.
6.
It is also contention of the first party bank that on 10.9.2010 the bank published tender notice in local newspaper
for maintenance and house-keeping of the banks premises. The bank also suggested the contract labours to form a
society, partnership firm or a company for participating in the tender process. Contract labours did not pay heed to the
suggestion made by the bank. The tender process was completed on 16.12.2011 and the contract for maintenance and
house-keeping of the bank premises was awarded to contractor who had quoted the lowest rates. The new contractor
displayed the notice on the bank’s notice board stating that he was given contract for maintenance and house-keeping of
the banks premises and invited those who were interested to work with him to approach him. However, the concerned
workman and other workers did not avail this opportunity.
7.
It is also contention of the first party bank that there is no employer-employee relationship between the bank and
concerned workman. The tribunal has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute in question. Even as per order in writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 of Hon’ble Bombay High Court, the concerned workman did not approach the
competent authority to get the matter referred to tribunal for adjudication and as such dispute referred for adjudication
in the present reference has been raised belatedly. It is quite stale. The reference is not maintainable on that ground.
8.
According to the first party bank, the concerned workman was engaged by the contractor named M/s. Golden
Enterprises. The bank was making payment to the said contractor who in turn was effecting the payment to the
workmen engaged by him and therefore the claim of concerned workman that she was engaged by the bank is not
maintainable. It is, thus, contention of the bank that it has not discriminated the contract employees working at Pune
and therefore the claim of the workman is completely untenable.
9.
It is also contention of the first party bank that provisions of section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947 are not applicable in
the factual matrix of the case since the service of the concerned workman automatically came to an end after new
contractor was engaged by the bank after duly following tender process.
10.
It is then contention of the first party bank that the settlement / agreement that might have been reached at
Mumbai has no relation whatsoever with the present dispute and the workman concerned cannot base her claim on the
basis of settlement entered into in a different case. On this premises, the first party bank has sought rejection of the
reference.
11.
Following issues are framed at Ex.8. I reproduce the issues along with my findings thereon for the reasons to
follow:
Sr. No.
Issues
Findings
1
Whether the reference is maintainable ?
Yes
2.
Whether there exists employer-employer relationship
between the first party bank & concerned workman ?
No
3.
Whether the action of the management of State Bank of
India in terminating the services of Smt. Asha Hambir
Gaikwad w.e.f. 16/01/2012 is legal and justified ?
Yes
7446
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
4.
If not, whether the concerned workman is entitled to be
reinstated in the services of first party with continuity of
service and all other consequential benefits ?
No
5.
What Order ?
As per final order
REASONS
Issue No. 1 :
12.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that admittedly the union namely Thekedar Kamgar
Sangh has made demand of absorption of second party workman and other workers. The said union has filed writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 before Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The main prayer of the petitioner was for
issuance of writ of mandamus to the bank for regularizing the services of the concerned workers in the banks service.
He submits that the said writ petition wad disposed of by the Division Bench of Hon’ble Bombay High Court vide
order dated 9.3.2006. In the said order the Hon’ble Bombay High Court made it clear that in view of law laid down by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Steel Authority of India & Ors. V/S. National Union Waterfront Workers &
Ors., the relief claimed in the petition cannot be granted and that only remedy available to the petitioner was to seek a
reference to the tribunal. Accordingly, the petitioners were given liberty to make necessary application to the
competent authority within two weeks from the date of order and the competent authority was directed to make
reference as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of two months from the receipt of application of
the petitioners. Submission is to the effect that the petitioners in the writ petition did not approach the competent
authority to get the matter referred to the tribunal for adjudication within time. The contact labours of M/s. Golden
Enterprises filed industrial dispute before the Labour Commissioner, Pune through Zilla Mazdoor Sangh vide their
letter dated 23.12.2011. As such the dispute referred for adjudication in the present reference is belated i.e. after about
7 years from the date of order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. In view of this the submission is that the reference
is not maintainable.
13.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank seeks to rely on the decision in case of Nedungadi Bank Ltd. V/S.
K.P. Madhavankutty & Ors. 2000 (II SCC 455) to submit that the power of the appropriate government to exercise its
powers under section 10 of the I.D. Act, 1947 is to be exercised reasonably and in a rational manner. There appears to
be no rational basis on which the Central Govt. has exercised the powers in this case after a lapse of about 7 years of the
order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. As such the dispute is stale and could not be the subject matter of the
reference under section 10 of the I.D. Act, 1947.
14.
He also seeks to rely on the decision in case of Reserve Bank of India V/S. Gopinath Sharma & Anr. 2006
(6 SCC 221) to submit that delay of 4 years in raising the dispute even after re-employment of the most of the workmen
was held to be fatal.
15.
He then seeks to rely on the decision in case of State of Karnataka & Anr. V/S. Ravi Kumar 2009 III LLJ
(206 SC) to submit that 14 years delay to challenge the termination was stale reference and the reference ought to have
been rejected on the ground alone.
16.
However, in view of the facts of the present case it is to be seen whether the second party workman and other
workers were diligent in raising the dispute before competent authority. We have document at Page 2 of list of
document dated 11.3.2016. It is a copy of the letter dated 31.5.2006 (Ex.15) addressed to the Dy. Commissioner of
Labour, Pune requesting him to intervene in the dispute and making reference within the time prescribed by the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court. That would show that Thekedar Kamgar Sangh has made an application for making the
reference within time prescribed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court.
17.
So far contention go, it is also a contention of the second party workman that even after the disposal of the said
writ petition second party workman was in service and the wages were paid by the first party bank to her directly. As
per her contention, the first party bank has terminated the services of the second party workman and as such the dispute
was raised by the second party workman for regularization of the services of the concerned workman. It is the
submission of the second party workman that the reference has not been arisen out of the demand of the union but the
said reference has arisen out of the demand of the individual workman. The demand is not for regularization but the
demand is for re-instatement of service. In view of these facts, it can be said that the individual workman has made the
demand for regularization of her service and the reference has arisen out of her demand. Even before that in 2006 it is
the union who has made application to the Dy. Commissioner of Labour, Pune requesting him to intervene into the
dispute and make the reference within the time prescribed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The said letter dated
31.5.2006 is at Ex.15. Therefore it can be said that the union was diligent in making the reference but then
subsequently the demand is made by the individual workman for re-instatement and not for regularization. It cannot be
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7447
said therefore that the reference is belated or otherwise it is stale and not maintainable. This point is therefore answered
accordingly in negative.
Issue No. 2 & 3 :
18.
This is the main contentions issue. At the first brush I would observe that admittedly M/s. Golden Enterprises
was engaged by the bank as a contractor since 1981, for doing house-keeping at Pune Zonal office and bank’s quarters
at Pune. In her evidence also the second party workman has stated that she has joined the services in 1991. She even
admits that Thekedar Kamgar Sangh and Pune Mazdoor Sangh are not the employees of S.B.I. She admits that due to
dispute the inter-se between workers, they requested the bank to make the payment directly to them. An arrangement
was worked out. As per her own admission in the writ petition filed by them in the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, it was
categorically and specifically shown that they were employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises and they are working on
behalf of M/s. Golden Enterprises in the bank premises at Pune. It is admitted that in para 3(a) of statement of claim it
is stated that they were on the muster roll of M/s. Golden Enterprises. It is also admitted by her that before1998
M/s. Golden Enterprises used to make payment to them. Then it is admitted that they were not under the disciplinary
control of the bank and they were not getting the facilities as available to the other bank employees. In view of above
categorical and clear admission, the second party workman involved in the present reference cannot take a
contradictory and inconsistent plea and cannot claim employer-employee relationship with the first party bank.
19.
Even then the Learned Counsel for the second party workman submitted that after termination of the contract in
between the first party bank and M/s. Golden Enterprises, second party workman was continued in service and the
workers were directly paid by the bank at the same daily wages rate which was paid by the contractor. Submission is to
the effect that the contract workers of M/s. Golden Enterprises were engaged by the State Bank of India and therefore
they cannot be treated as contract employees because the contract of the contractor M/s. Golden Enterprises with the
bank was cancelled and since cancellation of the contract they were continued to be in the service which would show
that first party bank was the principal employer.
20.
In this respect, if we see the evidence of the concerned workman, she admits that in the writ petition it was
categorically shown that the contract labours were employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises and they are working on
behalf of the M/s. Golden Enterprises in the premises of bank at Pune. Admittedly, in the statement of claim in para
3(a), she and other workers were shown on the muster of M/s. Golden Enterprises. It is admitted by her that before
1998 M/s. Golden Enterprises use to make payment to them. She even admits that she and other workers were not
under the disciplinary control of the bank. Admittedly they were not getting the facility as available to the other bank
employees. In view of this it can be said that the concerned workman being the employee of the contractor, the
ultimate supervision and control was of the contractor.
21.
In this respect the evidence has come on record that one Shri Selvam used to submit the bills in respect of work
of concerned workman and other workers and then the bank used to credit the amount in the account of each of the
contract labour. The question is whether the said arrangement which was worked out is sufficient to show and establish
the employer-employer relationship in between the concerned workman and the first party bank. When initially the
concerned workman was engaged by the contractor and after termination of the contract in between the said contractor
and the bank she has been continued with such arrangement in respect of payment of wages to her by the bank by
depositing her wages directly in her account after the production of bills by the said Shri Selvam, then that would not be
sufficient to say that first party bank being the principal employer was making payment of wages to the concerned
workman. Merely because the amount was credited to the workman/s account under circumstances narrated above does
not in any way alter the factual position that the concerned workman was a labour contractor and not an employee of
the bank.
22.
I say so because there is well defined procedure in the bank for recruitment and employment in the bank is done
by inserting advertisement, holding competitive test for the employment, selection procedure through merit etc. etc. No
such procedure was adopted at the time of engagement of the concerned workman as a Sweeper. The fact remains
therefore that she was a contract labour for doing the house-keeping job at the banks premises and therefore she
continued to be a contract labour even after the contract between said contractor and bank was terminated somewhere
in 1999-2000.
23.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that the bank continued to engage contract labours for
doing the house-keeping jobs at the bank premises in view or order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court dated 21.3.2006
whereby the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in view of petition by the petitioners took out a motion for clarification of
order passed on 9.3.2006 by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and also protection till reference is made at the instance
of the petitioners to the tribunal for adjudication. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court observed that they do not see any
protection granted by the court which was sought to be continued but then the Hon’ble Bombay High Court observed
that the contract labours employed by the bank should be continued subject to the requirements and by following
statutory obligations including payment of wages etc. and they need not be dis-continued only because the petition has
7448
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
been disposed of. That would show that in view of this order passed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court the concerned
workman was continued in services as per the requirement and after cancellation of contract with first party bank and
the contractor namely M/s. Golden Enterprises, the subsequent arrangement was made in respect of payment of wages
of the concerned employees who were engaged by the contractor and therefore the payment was made to them by
depositing the amount in their bank accounts on submission of the bills by one shri Selvam. That would again show
that the concerned workman was not considered to be the employee of the first party bank. All the while she was
continued to be contract labour even after the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court till her services automatically came
to an end.
24.
Even then the Learned Counsel for the second party workman submitted that the employees were the employees
of M/s. Golden Enterprises till that contract was not abandoned or cancelled. After cancellation of the contract in 1999-
2000 M/s. Golden Enterprises ceased to be contractor and these employees were ceased to the employees of M/s.
Golden Enterprises. He submits that Hon’ble Bombay High Court has not directed to keep contract employees of M/s.
Golden Enterprises in service in orders passed on 19.1.1999 and 1.2.1999. Therefore the relation between the S.B.I.
and M/s. Golden Enterprises as principal employer and the contractor came to an end and after cancellation of the
contract in 1999-2000 the services of the employees employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises for performing the job of
cleaning, sweeping, house-keeping of S.B.I. premises automatically came to an end. These employees were ineligible
to work with S.B.I. as contract workers of M/s. Golden Enterprises. So after termination of contract of M/s. Golden
Enterprises and S.B.I., by oral orders by S.B.I. the employees were appointed to carry out the house-keeping, cleaning,
sweeping work and then since that date till the date of termination the concerned workman were employed continuously
by S.B.I. They worked for 10 – 12 years continuously on the basis of said oral order of S.B.I. and therefore there exists
employer-employee relationship in between bank and concerned employees.
25.
This submission is other way round and is not acceptable. A definite stand was taken by the concerned
employees in the WP No. 6247/1998 that they are employees employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises which has been
given a contract of house-keeping of S.B.I., Pune, Regional Office Pune has been employing several workers for
carrying out the same work. It would thus not lie in their mouth to take contradictory and inconsistent plea that they are
the workmen of the principal employer i.e. bank. To raise such a mutually destructive plea is impermissible in law.
Such mutually destructive plea should not be allowed to be raised. Common law principle of estoppel waiver and
acquaintance are applicable in the industrial adjudication. In the context the hand can be laid on decision in case of
Steel Authority of India V/S. Union of India 2006 (12 SC 243) wherein in para 28 of the judgment it has been observed
that such inconsistent plea is not permissible.
26.
On going through the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the said WP No. 6247/1998 it has been observed
as follows:
“We have gone through the orders passed by this court on 19.1.1999 and 1.2.1999 and we do not see any
protection granted by this court and as sought to be continued. Undoubtedly the contract labours employed
by Respondent bank shall be continued subject to the requirement and by following the statutory obligations
including the payment of wages etc. and they need not be dis-continued only because this petition has been
disposed of.”
27.
In view of these observations of Hon’ble Bombay High Court even after the termination of contract in between
M/s. Golden Enterprises and the bank the concerned workmen were continued and were paid wages by the bank by
depositing the wages in their respective bank accounts. That does not mean that the bank has orally appointed them as
its employees on regular basis even without following the statutory procedure.
28.
Learned Counsel for the concerned workman / union submitted that the bank was paying bonus to the concerned
employees. He refers to Ex.17 to submit that the bank was making payment through bankers’ cheque. Therefore the
submission is that as per Section 10 of Payment of Bonus Act, the employer is bound to pay the bonus. Section 2(14)
of Payment of Bonus Act defines employer and it says that in relation to any other establishment the person who or the
authority which was the ultimate control over the affairs of the establishment and the managing agent is the employer.
He submits that as per section 21(4) the principal employer is not liable to pay bonus, gratuity as wages does not
include it. He is liable to pay only wages if the contractors fails to pay wages. Since S.B.I. has paid bonus to the
concerned employees it can be said that S.B.I. has engaged concerned workman directly and the bank is the employer
of the concerned workmen who are covered under the Payment of Bonus Act.
29.
This submission is also not acceptable since in the decision in case of Indian Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. V/S. State of
West Bengal & Ors. 2011 (4 LLM 158), Calcutta, it has been observed in para 20 of the judgment that,
“There is no warrant for the proposition that in every case where the bonus is paid to an employee, the same
is an indicator of the employee being a regular employee. The company is an establishment in public sector.
The provisions of bonus act would apply to it only if it satisfies the conditions mentioned in sub-section (1)
of section 20 thereof. If indeed the company was obliged to pay bonus to its regular employees and had in
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7449
the process shared its profits with the contract labours by paying the bonus in terms of bonus act, the very
action of extending benefits of the social welfare legislation to said labours would not change their status to
regular employees of the company.”
30.
Next submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman is that the contractor did not obtain necessary
licence. In this respect also it is necessary to refer the observations in para 20 of the citation cited supra. It has been
observed that if at all the contractor did not obtain the licence it would open to the authority concerned to take action
against it under section 23 of CLRA Act but for that the company cannot be penalized and the contract labours
employed by such erring contractor be thrust upon it. Non-obtaintion of licence without anything more would not
clothe the Respondent with any legal right to claim that they are the direct employees of the company and hence
entitled to continue in service despite the contract with KNYCEE not being renewed.
In view of this legal position it can be said that even if the contract between the bank and the contractor namely
M/s. Golden Enterprises was cancelled and could not be renewed that does not give right to the concerned employee/
union to claim that they are direct employees of the bank.
31.
Next submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman is that there is no documentary evidence to
show that Shri Selvam was the contractor after the contract of M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned. He submits
that before RLC the settlement of Minimum wages was reached between the bank and workman / union and the bank
has accepted to pay the minimum wages to the concerned workman. In view of that the submission is that after the
contract with M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned, it was the bank who paid the wages to the concerned employees
by depositing the wages in their bank account and thereby the bank has accepted it to be the employer of the concerned
workman.
32.
It is no doubt true that there is no documentary evidence to prove that Selvam was submitting the bills on the
basis of which the wages were deposited in the bank account of each workman. But then Selvam was one of the worker
along with other employees. Even the workman herself has admitted in her cross-examination that due to inter-se
dispute between the workers they requested the bank to make the direct payment and arrangement was worked out. In
view of that it can be said that some arrangement was worked out in respect of payment to these workmen after the
contract between the bank and M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned.
33.
In view of this, it is the submission of Learned Counsel for the bank that the workmen concerned were continued
to be engaged by K.P. Selvam as a contract labour after original contractor ran away and no wages were directly paid to
them by the bank. In view of admission of the concerned workman that the arrangement was worked out after the inter-
se dispute between the workers it can be very well said that the concerned workmen were paid wages directly in their
bank account by way of this arrangement which was worked out. Therefore that will not give them the status of regular
employees since initially they were engaged by the contractor and then there is no documentary evidence to show that
the concerned workman was appointed by the bank.
34.
It is then submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman that the concerned workman was doing
the work of sweeping and cleaning under the direction, control and supervision of first party bank. He refers to copies
of attendance register to submit that those registers are maintained by the bank and it bears the signatures of Waze,
Kulkarni and Bhosale who are the bank officers. In view of this it is submitted that the bank officers were having
control over the work carried out by the concerned employees.
35.
In his cross examination witness Sudhir Ramchandra has denied the suggestion to the effect that the bank was
having control over the work carried out by the concerned employees and that Mr. Jatar, Sudhir Pawar, Dube,
Karkhanis were supervising the work and were allotting the work to the concerned employees. Even if some anxious
consideration is given to this submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman then also it can be said that
merely because the contract labour work is under the supervisions of officers of principal employer it cannot be taken
as evidence of direct employment under the principal employer. In the decision in case of International Airport
Authority of India V/S. International Air Cargo Union and Anr. 2009 (13 SCC 374) it has been observed in para 54 of
the judgment that,
“Exercise of some control over the activities of the contract labour while they discharge their duties as
labours is inevitable and such exercise is not sufficient to hold that the contract labour will become the direct
employee of the principal employer.”
36.
In the light of above observations I hold that there does not exist employer-employee relationship between the
first party bank and second party workman. But then it is submission of the Learned Counsel for the concerned
workman that the concerned workman had worked for 240 days and continuously in every completed year of service
and her services came to be terminated without following the procedure laid down under section 25 of I.D. Act, 1947.
In this view the submission is that the said termination is illegal and improper.
7450
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
37.
This submission is also not acceptable since the fact remains that the concerned workman was engaged by the
contractor and after termination of the contract her services came to an end.
38.
For it is explicit from the evidence of Sudhir Jalanwar, the witness of the bank that on 10.11.2010 the bank
published tender notice in local newspapers for maintenance and house-keeping of bank premises. The bank also
suggested the contract labours to form a society, partnership firm or a company for participating in the tender process.
Contract labours did not pay heed to the suggestion made by the bank. The tender process was completed on
16.12.2011 and the contract for maintenance and house-keeping of the bank premises was awarded to contractor who
had quoted the lowest rates. The new contractor displayed the notice on the bank’s notice board stating that he was
given contract for maintenance and house-keeping of the banks premises and invited those who were interested to work
with him to approach him. However, the concerned workman and other workers did not avail this opportunity to work
under the new contractor. The fact remains therefore that after termination of earlier contract the services of the
concerned workman automatically came to an end.
39.
In view of this, the Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that though concerned workman had
worked for 240 days in a year, her appointment was not from the regular stream of appointment and therefore is not
entitled for regularization. He seeks to rely on the decision in case of Dena Bank V/S. Ashraf Yalu Shaikh 2009 III
CLR 426 to submit that since the appointment of the concerned workman was not from the regular stream of
appointment they are not entitled to reinstatement but only compensation, as envisaged under section 25 of I.D. Act,
1947.
40.
So far the submission of the concerned workman to the effect that first party bank has terminated her services
without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947, it can be said that there is no employer-
employee relationship between the bank and workman and that the services of the workman automatically came to an
end after the new contractor was engaged by the bank after following tender process. It is not therefore possible to
accept the submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman that the termination is illegal on account that it
was without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947.
41.
Realising this difficulty, Learned Counsel for the concerned workman submitted that by way of settlement, the
similarly situated workmen and employees in Mumbai were absorbed in services of the bank and therefore the first
party bank has violated the principles of equity before law and gave different treatment to some set of employees in
Mumbai by neglecting section 12(3) and 18(3) of I.D. Act, 1947 and therefore the termination is illegal. The
submission is again other way round. There is no evidence of such discrimination. If any such agreement has been
reached then it has no relation with the present dispute. The present dispute is squarely covered by W.P. No.
6247/1998 and the same has to be dealt with in the light of order passed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the said
writ petition. In view of that the concerned workman cannot base a claim on the basis of settlement entered into in a
different matter under different circumstances.
42.
Considering all these facts, I hold that action of management in terminating the services of concerned workman
w.e.f. 6.1.2012 is legal and justified. The above issues are therefore answered accordingly as against each of them in
terms of above observations.
Issue No. 4 & 5 :
43.
In view of my finding the above issues, the concerned workman is not entitled to be re-instated in the services of
first party bank with continuity of service and other consequential benefits. He is not entitled to relief claimed. Thus
order.
ORDER
Reference is rejected with no order as to costs.
Date: 14.07.2017
M. V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 15 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2237-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ
bancSad eps±V cSa¯dx l£ol fy- ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 33@2001) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 15-09-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12012@113@2001&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
ch- ,l- fc"V] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7451
New Delhi, the 15th September, 2017
S.O. 2237.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 33/2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s.
Indbank Merchant Banking Service Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 15.09.2017.
[No. L-12012/113/2001-IR (B-I)]
B. S. BISHT, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.2, MUMBAI
PRESENT : M.V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer/Judge
REFERENCE NO. CGIT-2/33 of 2001
EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF
M/S. INDBANK MERCHANT BANKING SERVICES LTD.
The President
M/s. Indbank Merchant Banking Services Ltd.
17th Floor, Maker Towers ‘F’
Cuffe Parade, Colaba
Mumbai- 400 005.
AND
THEIR WORKMEN
Shri S. Selvakumar
Johnsaon Communication
Kumbhar Wada Road, Dharavi.
Mumbai- 400 017
APPEARANCES :
FOR THE EMPLOYER
:
Mr. A.K. Jalisatgi, Advocate
FOR THE WORKMAN
:
Mr. M.B. Anchan, Advocate
Mumbai, dated the 26th Day of May, 2017
AWARD
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour& Employment by its Order No.L-12012/113/2001-IR (B-I), dated
22.03.2001 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2 (A) of Section 10 of
the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:
“Whether the action of the Management of M/s. Indbank Merchant Banking Service ltd. Mumbai in not
following section 25 –F of ID Act 194. and abruptly stopping Shri S. Selvakumar from attending his duties
w.e.f 9/2/2000 is justified? If not what relief Shri S.Selvakumar is entitled?”
2.
After receipt of the Reference notices were issued to both the parties. In response to the notice second party
workman has filed Statement of Claim Ex-9.
3.
It appears that second party workman has joined the services of the First party Bank in February, 1997 as a
Driver, on a monthly salary of Rs. 1900/- per month. He was allotted various motor cars, owned by the Bank, to drive.
Most of the time he was driving their Motor Car bearing registration No. MH-01-T-2133 (Premiere NE 118). He was
driving other motor cars namely Maruti 800 bearing registration No. MH-01-N-8896, MARUTI 800 bearing
registration No.MH-01-N-9593, Maruti 800 bearing registration No.GJ-1R-3174 etc. According to the workman the
main duty of him was to drive the car according to the instructions given to him time to time by the First Party Bank,
and he was being allotted miscellaneous office work such as attending telephone, taking xerox etc. He was being paid
salary by the bank on voucher. His last drawn salary was Rs. 2050/- plus other allowance.
7452
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
4.
According to the workman in the month of January 2000, the President of the First party Bank instructed him to
report to Shri Sanjay Lade, the Vice President sitting at Branch office at Varma Chambers 11, Hooji Street, Fort
Mumbai. Accordingly he reported to Mr. Lade and worked at the side branch office for about 15 days. Thereafter Mr.
Lade again transferred him to corporate office at Cuffe Parade and ask him to report to Mr. K. A. Suresh another Vice
president. He reported at the office to Mr. K.A. Suresh. However Mr. K.A. Suresh has not allotted the work of the
driver to him and informed him that since there is shortage of car, he had to work as office boy on the same salary. He
continued to do whatever office work was allotted to him by various officers and staff members of the First party Bank.
However on 9.2.2000 ShriK . A. Suresh and Shri K. V. Balasubramanian, Vice Presidents of First Party Bank informed
him that his services are no more required as there are excess drivers in the First party Bank. At the time of such oral
termination of services of the second party workman the first party bank has not paid any terminal benefits to him. Even
the earned salary of him for the month of January and February 2000 was not paid to him. As such according to him his
termination is illegal.
5.
It is his case that there is gross violation of principles of natural justice by orally terminating the services of the
second party workman w.e.f. 9.2.2000. He therefore lodged a complaint before ALC (Central-2). The conciliation
before ALC ended in failure and ultimately the matter was referred to this Tribunal for adjudication. He is therefore
asking to declare that his termination is illegal wef 9.2.2000 and to reinstate him with full back wages and continuity of
services, all consequential benefits from 9.2.2000.
6.
First party Bank resisted the Statement of Claim vide Ex-10. It is contention of the first party bank that the
concerned workman was never employed by the first party bank. There is/was no employer and employee relationship
between both the parties. And therefore the dispute referred by the Government for adjudication is not and cannot be an
industrial dispute within the meaning of Sec 2(K) or Section 2(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. As such the
Reference is not maintainable.
7.
According to the first party it is a subsidiary of Indian Bank which is a nationalized bank owned by the
Government of India. It is engaged in providing merchant banking services. The President and Vice-President are
entitled to car allowance. If these executives engage a personal driver, then they are entitled to get reimbursement for
the salary paid by them to such personal driver up-to the individual executive’s eligibility. Personal drivers are the
employees of such executives and salary is paid by the executives themselves. Such personal drivers are employed by
the individual executive and there is no employer employee relationship between the First party and the personal driver
of the Executive wages and other serve conditions are determined by and between the executive and his driver without
any reference to or in connection with the first party. The work of personal driver is controlled and supervised by the
individual executive who engages him as his own driver.
8.
According to the first party the workman was sometimes engaged by some executives in their personal capacity.
The second party was engaged by such executives purely as their own employee and for their own work. The first
party has never used the services of the second party for its own business. The second party has always been paid
wages by the executives who have used his services. The second party workman was initially engaged by Mr. R
Balkrishnan, the then Vice President of the first party in 1977 as his personal driver. The said Mr. Balkrishnan was Vice
president of the first party till 25.06.1998. Thereafter he was transferred from corporate office. The said Mr.
Balrkishnan did not continue the second party as his own personal driver. The first party states that when a Sr.
Executive like President, Vice President is transferred and posted in Mumbai, he being totally new to Mumbai naturally
he enquires with his predecessor or subordinates to have a driver. For a new person to get a driver in Mumbai
immediately is difficult. As the second party earlier worked with other Sr Executives as their personal driver, his name
was sometimes suggested by the outgoing executive to the new incumbent. After Mr. Balkrishan the second party was
employed by Mr. T.K.P. Naig the then president from about August, 1998 said Mr. Naig ceased to be the President
from 31.12.2012. He did not continue the services of second party as his personal driver. Thereafter Mr. Sri Ramanan
the successor of MrNaig did not engage the second party as his personal driver. All throughout whenever the services
of the Second party were utilized by any of the executives of the first party, the wages were paid by such executives
only. There was neither any control nor supervision exercised by the first party over the second party. The first party
also did not have any power to take any disciplinary action over the second party. The wages and other terms of
employment were decided by and between the second party and such executives. The first party had no connection with
any of the service conditions of the second party. It was always a subject matter of contract between such executives
and the second party.
9.
According to the first party it has not terminated the services of second party. It has thus denied that the first
party bank has allotted the miscellaneous office work to the second party workman.
10.
It is also denied of the first party bank that the first party has illegally terminated the services of the second
party. As the second party was not in the employment of the first party, the question of any charge sheet or show cause
notice did not arise and as such there is no any violation of principle of natural justice. Hence first party bank has thus
sought the rejection of the Reference.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7453
11.
Following issues are framed at Ex-12. I reproduce the issues with the findings thereon for reasons to follow:
Sr. no.
Issues
Findings
1.
Whether the reference is not maintainable as averred in
W.S. Para 1,2,3?
Yes
2.
Whether employer and employee relationship exists
between both the parties?
No
3.
Whether the action of the management of M/s. Indbank
Merchant Banking Services Ltd. Mumbai in abruptly
stopping Shri S. Selvakuamr from attending his duties
w.e.f. 9/2/2000 is justified?
Does not survive?
4.
Whether the management has not followed the
provisions of Section 25-F of the ID Act?
Does not survive?
5.
What relief Shri Selvakumar is entitled?
As per final Order.
REASONS
12.
So far contention go it is mainly contended by the second party workman that he has been employed by the first
party in 1997 as a driver on the monthly salary of Rs. 1900 /- month. As such he had joined the services of Indbank
Merchant Banking Services ltd. in February 1997 and thereafter he was allotted various motor cars to drive which were
owned by the first party bank.
13.
In order to establish employer employee relationship the control test and the organization test are not the only
factors which can be said to be decisive. With a view to elicit the answer the court is required to consider several
factors which would have a bearing on the result (a) who is appointing authority (B) who is the pay master (c) who can
dismiss (d) how long alternative service lasts (e) the extent of control and supervision (f) the nature of the job (g) nature
of establishment (h) the right to reject. It is not for the employer to prove negative fact that there was no relation of
employee and employee.
14.
In this respect to if we see the evidence of the concerned workman he claims that he has joined the services of
the bank in 19.2.1997 on monthly salary of Rs 1900 per month. However in his Cross Examination he has clearly
admitted that there is no documentary evidence to show that he was engaged by the first party bank. Admittedly there is
no any documentary evidence to show that his salary was paid by the bank. He even admits that he was driver on
vehicle of ShriBalkrishnan from beginning. Admittedly no appointment letter was given to him by the bank showing
that he was engaged by the bank as a driver to drive the cars owned by the bank.
15.
For, it is explicit from the Ex-27 voucher no 3642 dt 3.3.1997, that this voucher is in respect of the amount paid
to the personal driver towards his salary. Ex- 28 is voucher no 1308 dt 5.10.1998. This voucher is in respect of the
amount paid to the personal driver towards his salary, on such declaration made by the executive of the bank that the
amount was paid to concerned executive towards reimbursement declaration is to the effect that the said executive of
the bank has paid some of Rs 2050/- as salary to his personal driver for the month of September 1998 and requested the
bank to reimburse the same to him. Ex-28 is also in respect of the amount paid to the personal driver of the executive
namely Mr. T. K. P. Naig who made declaration that he has paid Rs. 2050/- as salary to his personal driver for the
month of September 1998 and requested the bank to reimburse the same. Ex-29 is the voucher in respect of the payment
of taxi fair to executive of the bank towards reimbursement for going to duty. Ex-30 also makes it clear that the
concerned workman was a personal driver at the corporate office. Likewise there is letter of Vice president A
Murlidhar to service manager in respect of car premier registration MH 01 2133. From the above document it can be
gathered that the executives were entitled to reimbursement of drivers salary who were engaged by them as personal
driver at corporate office. Documents which are relied upon by the concerned workman also make it clear that he was
engaged as the personal driver by executives of bank, and those executives were getting reimbursement of the amount
of his salary from the bank. As such there is no any document to show that the concerned workman was recruited by
the bank and the officer of the bank took his interview. There is no evidence to show that amount of his salary was
being paid by cash by the first party bank. On the contrary the record shows that the executives of the bank who were
entitled to reimburse were getting amount of salary of the personal driver on specific declaration to the effect that they
have paid the amount as salary a personal driver and therefore they are entitled to reimburse of the same. Precisely the
admission of the concerned workman clearly shows that he was not engaged by the first party bank and his salary was
not paid by the bank.
7454
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
16.
Ld. Counsel Shri M.B. Anchan for concerned workman submitted that the work of second party is being
supervised by the bank through their officers and therefore merely because the salary of the concerned workman was
being paid through the executives of the bank would not make the workman as a driver engaged by the executives and
not by the bank. He submits that is there is a colorable device adopted by the Bank to deprive the workman his legal
rights. He seeks to rely on the decision in case of Divisional Manager, UCO Bank Divisional Banipark, Jaipur V/s.
Ratan Singh Bhati 2006 CLR. In that case it was held that to decide whether the driver was employee of the bank, the
direction and control are the telling factors. It was finding of the fact the salary of the concerned drivers was paid by
the bank and as per conditions of the Bank. Driver was also given other facilities like uniform shoes, washing
allowance, ex-gratia payment, and bonus like other staff of the bank. The payment for all these facilities was made by
the Bank though the Divisional Manger which is clearly a colourable device adopted by the Bank.
17.
In the instant case the workman himself admitted that he was driving the vehicle the of Shri Balkrishnan. As
such there is no evidence to show that he was engaged by the first party.
18.
That apart there is no evidence to show that the second party workman was given any other work of bank
business for that he was directed to wear the uniform of the bank and was granted in-gratia payment bonus like other
staff of the bank. It can be said therefore that fact of the present case are distinguishable.
19.
Ld. counsel for the workman also seeks to rely on the decision in case of BAASF INDIA LTD AND Anr V/s.
M. Gurusamy R P F Commissioner Mah and Goa &Anr. to submit that there must be some nexus between the
establishment and work of the employee thought it may be loose connection. and the drivers of the of the company are
paid wages directly and indirectly by the establishment for the work carried out by them in or in connection with the
establishment and therefore they are nothing but employees as defined under Sec 2F of the Act.
20.
However it was expected of the second party workman to prove that his salary was being paid by the bank and
respect of the work, he was having total control and supervision by establishment of the bank. However the evidence of
the concerned workman would show that his work was being controlled by the executives of the bank. No doubt, it
appears that there are certain guidelines of the bank in respect of the working days and system of payment to be made
to the personal driver of the executives. In my considered view it cannot be a document to show the control of the bank
on the work of the concerned workman. On the contrary Ex-27 and Ex-28 would show that the concerned workman
received the wages from the executives in the capacity of the personal drivers. All the while there is mention in the
correspondence and office letter that the concerned workman was engaged as personal driver of the executives by the
executives themselves and the executives of the company were paid perks by way reimbursement in respect of wages of
concerned driver.
21.
Ld. counsel for the first party seeks to rely on the decision in case of Employers in relation to Punjab National
Bank Vs. GhulamDastagir 1978 I LL J Pg 312 SC wherein it is held that “there is nothing on record to indicate that
the control and direction of the driver vested in the Bank. After all, the evidence is clearly to contrary. In the absence of
material to make out that he driver was employed by the Bank and was under its direction and control and his salary
was paid by the Bank and otherwise was included in the army of employees in the establishment of the Bank, it cannot
be assumed that the crucial point has been proved. There is no camouflage or circumvention of any stature. There is no
nexus between the driver and the Bank. Hence the Tribunal’s award has to be set aside. Their Lordships, however,
observed that the system of allowance in a country where unemployment is rampant may lead to individual injustice
and exploitative edge. This is not a desirable tendency for a public sector undertaking like a nationalized Bank which
has an obligation to be a model employer.”
22.
He also seeks to rely on the decision in case of M/s. Singer Sewing Machine Co. Vs. P.O. Labour Court IV
Kanpur, 1998 (79) FLR Page No. 880 (Allahabad High Court) to submit that the workman was not employed by the
employer in any of the incidental operations constituting the industry since it has already been found that he was never
engaged by the employer and the employer had no control either ion the terms and conditions of service or on his
employment in any manner and only the reimbursement of the salary to the respondent no. 2 through the Regional
Manager would not be sufficient to constitute a relationship of employer and employee unless the employer has any
control over the employment of the alleged employee namely either to discharge or disengage him for any dereliction
of duty the employer had no occasion to engage him on any of the incidental operations. The engagement of the
respondent no. 2 by the Regional Manager for driving the car provided to the Regional Manager will not bring the
respondent No.2 within the definition of the workman as has been enunciated in the decision in case of M/s. J. K.
Spinning and Weaving Mills Company.
23.
In view of that oral testimony of the concerned workman that too when rebutted by the witness of the
management pertaining relationship of employer and employee is of no significance. In the absence of appointment
letter or any documentary proof, it cannot be considered as sufficient evidence to establish relationship of the employer
and the employee. The appointment of the concerned workman was not on sanctioned post obviously he was engaged
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7455
as a private driver by the executives of the bank. Having regard to the factual circumstances, I find that the workman
has not established employer and employee relationship.
24.
It is then the matter of record that initially the concerned workman was engaged as a private driver in 1997 with
Mr. Balkrishnan. Mr. Balkrishnan who was vice president of first party was transferred to Mumbai from corporate
office and did not continue second party as a personal driver. after Mr. R. Balkrishnan he was employed by Mr. T. K. P.
Naig the then president in August 1998, he was working as a personal driver with Mr. R Balkrishnan till June 1998 so
from June 1998 to August 1998. He was not engaged as a Personal driver of executives of the bank. Thereafter
Mr. Naig ceased to be the president from 31.12.2000 and he also did not continue the service of the second party
workman as his personal driver. As a result of which the service of the second party workman as a personal driver of
Mr. Naig was discontinued since Shri Ramanan the successor of Mr. Naig did not engage the services of the concerned
workman as a personal driver. From these facts it is clear that the concerned workman even did not work continuously
as a personal driver of the executives and all the while he was engaged as personal driver of executives of the bank and
the wages were paid by the executives only. It can be said that the first party bank has no control or supervision over
the work of second party as a personal driver of the executive since wages and other terms of employment of concerned
workmen were decided between the concerned workmen and such executives. In view of that question of termination of
service of the second party workman by the bank does not arise.
25.
Considering all these facts, I find that employee employer relationship does not exist between the concerned
workman and the first party bank. There is no question of termination of services of concerned workman who was
engaged as a personal driver of the executive of the bank and ultimately his service came be discontinued by the
executives of the bank on the transfer or otherwise. There is no question of abruptly stopping the services of the
concerned workman by the management of first party bank. There is no question of following the provisions of Section
25-F of the I.D. Act by the first party management when employer employee relationship does not exist. Therefore
Issues Nos. 3 and 4 do not survive and Issue No. 2 is answered in the negative.
26.
In view of findings of above issues the Reference is liable to be rejected.
27.
Thus the order:
ORDER
Reference is rejected with no order as to costs.
Date: 26.05.2017
M. V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 15 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2238-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj if'pe
jsyos ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 54@2015) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 15-09-2017
dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&41012@39@2015&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
ch- ,l- fc"V] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 15th September, 2017
S.O. 2238.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 54/2015) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Western
Railway and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 15.09.2017.
[No. L-41012/39/2015-IR (B-I)]
B. S. BISHT, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.2, MUMBAI
PRESENT : M.V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO.CGIT-2/54 of 2015
7456
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF
WESTERN RAILWAY
The General Manager
Western Railway
Churchgate
Mumbai 400 020.
AND
THEIR WORKMEN
Shri Mohd. Rafique
GLF RM, C/11. 4/4
Saibaba Nagar
90, Feet Road,
Sion (W)
Mumbai-400 017.
APPEARANCES:
FOR THE EMPLOYER
:
No appearance
FOR THE UNION
:
No appearance
Mumbai, dated the 4th May, 2017
AWARD
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment by its Order No.L-41012/39/2015-IR (B-I), dated
12.10.2015 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2 (A) of Section 10 of
the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:
“Whether the action of the management of Western Railway Headquarter Office, Mumbai in dismissing the
service of Shri Mohd. Rafique son of Mohd. Deesha Khan, Bungalow Peon, w.e.f. 19.07.2011 vide Notice of
Imposition of Penalty (NIP) order dated 19.07.2011 & subsequent removal from service vide order
no.E/DAR/308/2/06 (2010) dated 11.12.2013 by the RA & CCM (PM), Western Railway, Churchgate,
Mumbai over alleged unauthorized absenteeism from duty for the period from 31.05.2010 to 27.05.2011
and non-payment of wages for the month of June and July and legal? If not, what relief the workman
concerned is entitled to ?”
2.
After receipt of the Reference, notices were issued to both the parties. Matter was adjourned on several
occasions for filing Statement of Claim by second party/ Workman. Again notice vide Ex-4 was served on the second
party workman. Second party/Workman neither appeared before this Tribunal nor filed Statement of claim. Without
Statement of claim, the Reference cannot be decided on merits and the same deserves to be dismissed. Orders were
passed on Ex-1. Accordingly I pass the following order:
ORDER
Reference stands dismissed for want of prosecution.
Date: 04.05.2017
M. V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 15 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2239-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh /kjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj iatkc
us'kuy cSad ds izca/ra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/ esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vf/dj.k@Je U;k;ky;] t;iqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 36@2008) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 15-09-2017
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12012@2@2008&vkbZvkj (ch&II)º
jfo dqekj] MsLd vf/dkjh
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7457
New Delhi, the 15th September, 2017
S.O. 2239.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 36/2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, Jaipur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Punjab National
Bank and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 15.09.2017.
[No. L-12012/2/2008-IR (B-II)]
RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR
Presiding Officer : Bharat Pandey
I.D. 36/2008
Reference No.L-12012/2/2008-IR(B-II)) dated: 18.3.2008
Sh. Kalyan Sahai Meena
S/o Sh. Nathulal Meena
Village Post Badwa via Basko
Tehsil Bassi
Distt. Jaipur.
V/s
The Regional manager
Punjab National Bank
Zonal Office, Nehru Place,
Tonk Road, Jaipur.
Present :
For the Applicant
:
Sh. M.F. Beig, Advocate
For the Non-applicant
:
Sh. Praveen Purohit, Advocate
AWARD
Dated: 4.7.2017
1.
The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred under clause (d) of Sub Section 1 & 2(A) of
Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 has referred the following Industrial dispute to this tribunal for
adjudication:-
“Whether claimant Shri Kalyan Sahai Meena is justified in raising the dispute after a gap of more
than 14 years against the management of Punjab National Bank after merger of NBI in PNB against
the order of removal of Regional Manager of New Bank of India dated 13.7.1993 treating him
voluntarily retirement on account of absenteeism. If yes, for what relief the workman is entitled and
from which date?”
2.
According to statement of claim briefly fact of the case is that applicant Sh. Kalyan Sahai Meena was appointed
on 15.7.82 on the post of Clerk Cum Cashier in New Bank of India which was later merged in Punjab National Bank.
Applicant worked for more than 240 days every year. Due to family circumstances & personal illness he could not
attend that job w.e.f 13.11.92. He kept informing the concerned officer & Branch Manager of the bank through U.P.C.
(Under Postal Certificate) about his remaining on leave.
3.
He has further alleged in para 7 & 8 of the claim that due to illness he was on leave & kept informing the non-
applicant about his leave & sickness etc but his services were terminated vide order dated 13.7.93 by AGM, New Bank
of India, Jaipur with contention that applicant has voluntarily left the service i.e. has voluntarily retired from the
service. Applicant had completed ten years of service & at the time of removal he was a regular employee of the bank
as Clerk-Cum-Cashier. Applicant was neither given any notice before removal nor chargesheeted hence, he was not
provided any opportunity of defence. He was not paid any retrenchment compensation.
4.
In para 12 of the claim it has been alleged that as the applicant has been removed from the service on the basis of
misconduct of absence which has not been proved hence, his removal from the service is covered within the definition
of retrenchment wherein there is provision of notice to the applicant before retrenchment or one month’s pay in lieu of
7458
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
notice with retrenchment compensation hence, retrenchment of the applicant is in violation of section 25-F, 25-G 25-H
of I.D.Act, 1947 & rule 77 of The Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957.
5.
In para 13,14 & 15 applicant has alleged that before his removal from service he was absent from place of duty
due to sickness & he was regularly giving the information about his absence yet, his services were terminated which is
against the principle of natural justice & Shastri Award. Applicant requested to take him back in service but his request
was not considered by New Bank of India & later by Punjab National Bank after the merger.
6.
In para 16 applicant has alleged that before Nov, 1992 applicant was on unpaid leave on account of family
circumstances & personal reason. He has further alleged that since, Dec, 91 he was on regular work but again fell ill
after 13 Nov, 1992 & got himself treated by different system of medicines with help of the family. He has alleged that
after 13 Nov, 1992 he kept informing about his fact of illness that after securing fitness he will resume the work but
even after sending informations time to time he was voluntarily retired by AGM, New Bank of India by his letter dated
13.7.93 treating the desertions of service by applicant.
7.
He has further alleged in para 17 of statement of claim that after securing fitness applicant contacted AGM &
Branch Manager, New Bank of India & requested to take him back on the job but he was not taken on the job & only
assurance was given. Later after merger applicant contacted Punjab National Bank & from Punjab National Bank also
he was given assurance that his matter will be considered but it was not considered. It has been alleged in para 18 that
applicant again fell ill & his family circumstances also under went change & after removal from service he remained
out of the contact of any employee of the bank. He has further alleged that on solicitation he came to know that there is
no fixed limitation for initiating the action against termination of service. He was advised to read & understand the
provision of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 & thus, he came to know that there is no limitation provided in Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 thus, the applicant has explained the delay that occurred in initiating proceeding before the
Conciliation Officer hence, applicant has prayed for his reinstatement in the service with all consequential benefits &
continuity in service declaring the order of voluntarily retirement as unjust & illegal.
8.
Reply to statement of claim consists of preliminary objections & parawise reply. In reply to para 1 to 3 of
statement of claim it has been alleged that they are based on facts & require no reply. Para 4 to 20 have been
specifically denied. It has been further alleged that applicant was working in New Bank of India which was merged in
Punjab National Bank on 4.9.93. At the time of amalgamation no document relating to applicant was handed over
to Punjab National Bank. Accordingly, Punjab National Bank is not in position to make any comment about the
contention of the applicant in relation to statement of claim. It has been further alleged that if applicant submits
any document in relation to his statement of claim then bank will be in position to make reply based on those
documents.
9.
In para 5 of reply to statement of claim it has been alleged that in Bi-partite Settlement relating to service
condition of a workman there is provision that if any employee remains absent unauthorised for a period of 90 days
from the bank service then a notice may be given to absent employee to appear within 30 days from the date of receipt
of notice to explain the just reasons for his absence & after notice if such absent employee does not appear & answer
the notice then it may be deemed that such employee has voluntarily retired from the service & his name is struck off
from the roll of employee & such employee is deemed to have been voluntarily retired from the service. In above
provision of Bi-partite settlement , there is no requirement of issuing a chargeseet. It has been further alleged that there
is no irregularity & illegality in “deemed voluntary retirement” according to above provision of Bi-partite settlement.
10.
Against para 12 it has been alleged that applicant has admitted that he has remained absent from banking service
& in such event no violation of any provision has been made by treating the applicant as voluntarily retired. Against
para 13 & 14 it has been alleged that no documentary evidence has been submitted by applicant against
allegations in para 13 & 14. It has been further alleged that contention of the applicant is wrong that he
requested Punjab National Bank to take him in employment & such contention of the applicant is specifically
denied.
11.
Against para 15 it has been alleged that applicant was neither an employee of New Bank of India at the time of
merger nor he had challenged his removal from service hence, his removal from the service cannot be treated to be
illegal & now after lapse of such a long period challenging the order of removal is not just. No illegality has been
committed in treating the applicant as voluntarily retired from the service. Contention of the applicant that he required
Punjab National Bank to take him into the service is an after thought action of the applicant. It has been requested that
applicant claim is liable to be dismissed.
12.
In preliminary objection against statement of claim it has been alleged that applicant has admitted that he has
initiated the proceeding in this matter after laps of more than 14 years hence, according to judgement of Hon’ble
Supreme Court in AIR 2000, S.C.839 & 2002(10), S.C.C. 267 right of the applicant ends on the basis of delay. It has
been prayed that claim of the applicant is liable to be rejected on the ground of delay.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7459
13.
In rejoinder, allegations in the statement of claim has been reiterated & it has been said that after amalgamation
of New Bank of India into Punjab National Bank, Punjab National Bank is responsible for all the action of New Bank
of India as successor.
14.
In evidence, applicant Sh. Kalyan Sahai Meena has filed his affidavit in support of statement of claim & he has
been cross examined by non-applicant. Applicant has filed Annex-1 to Annex-42, photocopy of documents such as
U.P.Cs, Certificate of sickness/fitness, identity card & order of voluntarily retirement from service etc. With index
dated 17.3.2011 applicant has filed Ex-1 to 38 which are photocopy of U.P.C., certificate of fitness/sickness, identity
card etc.
15.
On behalf of opposite party affidavit of Sh. Brajendra Batra, Senior Manager (D.A.C.), Punjab National Bank
has been filed in evidence who have been cross examined by applicant Sh. Kalyan Sahai Meena. No documentary
evidence has been filed by opposite party.
16.
Heard the argument of learned representative of both the parties & perused the record carefully. Written
argument have been filed by both side.
17.
Following cases have been referred by applicant side :-
1.
1982 I LLJ 330 Supreme Court, L.Rober D’souza …..Appellant v/s Executive Engineer, Southern
Railway And Another..………Respondent.
2.
1999 I LLJ 1260, Ajaib singh…..Appellant v/s Sirhind Co-op. Marketing –cum- Processing Services
Society Ltd & Another………Respondent.
3.
2001 LAB IC 2814, Supreme Court, Sapan Kumar Pandit…..Appellant v/s U.P. State Electricity & other
………Respondents.
4.
2011 I LLJ SC 615, Kuldeep Singh …..Appellant v/s G.M., Instrument Design Development & Facility
Centre and Another………Respondents.
5.
1976 I LLJ Supreme Court 478, State Bank of India …..Appellant v/s N.Sundarmoney.
………Respondent.
6.
AIR 1961 Supreme Court 158, Bata Shoe Co (P) Ltd…Appellant v/s D.N.Ganguly and
others……Respondents
18.
Following cases have been referred by non-applicant side:-
1.
AIR 2000 Supreme Court 839, The Nedungadi Bank Ltd, …..Appellant v/s K.P.Madhavankutty and
others, ………Respondents.
2.
(2002) 10 Supreme Court Cases 167, Assistant Executive Engineer …..Appellant Vs Shivalinga
………Respondent.
3.
2002 II CLR 472, Syndicate Bank….Appellant v/s General Secretary, Syndicate Bank Staff Association
& another ………Respondents.
19.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the non-applicant that on the ground of delay petition of the applicant
is not maintainable. Reliance has been placed from the non-applicant side on the cases reported in AIR 2000 Supreme
Court 839, The Nedungadi Bank Ltd, …..Appellant v/s K.P.Madhavankutty and others, ………Respondent & (2002)
10 Supreme Court Cases 167, Assistant Executive Engineer …..Appellant Vs Shivalinga ………Respondent.
Countering the above argument it has been argued by learned representative of the applicant that there is no provision
provided in Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 about period of limitation for bringing a dispute before the Industrial
Tribunal. Reliance has been placed on the case reported in
1999 I LLJ 1260, Ajaib singh…..Appellant v/s Sirhind
Co-op. Marketing –cum- Processing Services Society Ltd & Another………Respondent, 2001 LAB IC 2814, Supreme
Court, Sapan Kumar Pandit…..Appellant v/s U.P. State Electricity & other ………Respondents & 2011 I LLJ SC 615,
Kuldeep
Singh
…..Appellant
v/s
G.M.,
Instrument
Design
Development
&
Facility
Centre
and
Another………Respondents.
20.
Before I proceed to discuss the cases referred from both the side on the point of limitation it is pertinent to
mention that reference sent by Central Government for adjudication to Industrial Tribunal has not been challenged
before Hon’ble High Court by non-applicant. From the perusal of case reported in Kuldeep Singh …..Appellant v/s
G.M., Instrument Design Development & Facility Centre and Another………Respondents, it appears that case law
reported in AIR 2000 Supreme Court 839, The Nedungadi Bank Ltd, …..Appellant v/s K.P.Madhavankutty and
others, ………Respondents & referred by learned representative of the non-applicant has already been dealt in Kuldeep
7460
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Singh’s case. In Kuldeep Singh’s case it has been observed by Hon’ble Supreme Court that there is no time limit
prescribed for reference u/s 10 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
21.
In (2002) 10 Supreme Court Cases 167, Assistant Executive Engineer …..Appellant Vs Shivalinga
………Respondent, the services of the respondent were terminated on 25.5.85. He approached the Labour Officer on
17.3.95. A reference was made by the government for adjudication before the labour court. The labour court noticed
that it would be impossible to maintain records for such a long period & placed them before the labour court. The
labour court held that the delay of nine years was fatal to the case & rejected the reference. The order of the Labour
Court was reversed by Hon’ble High Court & respondent was ordered to be reinstated. Appeal against the Hon’ble
High Court was allowed by Hon’ble Supreme Court. It was held by Hon’ble Supreme Court that in cases where there is
a serious dispute or doubt as to employer-employee relationship & records of the employer become relevant, the long
delay would come in the way of maintenance of the record. In such circumstances, to make them available to a labour
court or industrial tribunal to adjudicate the dispute appropriately will be impossible. It was further held that a situation
of that nature would render the claim stale which was the situation in Shivlinga’s case. Accordingly, it was held that
Hon’ble High Court erred in interfering with the award of Labour Court.
22.
In AIR 1999 SC 1351, Ajaibsingh……Appellant v/s The Sirhind Co-Operative Marketing Cum-processing
Service Society Limited and Anr…..Respondent, it has been held by Hon’ble Supreme Court that provisions of
limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to matters relating to industrial disputes hence, relief cannot be denied merely on
the ground of delay.
23.
In AIR 2001 SC 2562, Sapan Kumar Pandit…..Appellants v/s U.P. State Electricity Board and
Ors…Respondent, it has been held by Hon’ble Supreme Court that when government had chosen to refer dispute for
adjudication before the Labour Court then High Court was not justified in quashing the reference on the ground of
inordinate delay.
24.
Based on different pronouncement made by Hon’ble Supreme Court on the point of limitation for bringing the
case for conciliation & adjudication before the competent authority as indicated above, fact & circumstances of the
present case & discussion made above, I am of the view that reference sent by Hon’ble Ministry must be disposed
according to law on merit after appreciation of evidences led by both the parties instead of dismissing it on the point of
limitation. Accordingly, I am of the view that there is no substance in the argument of learned representative of non-
applicant that case is not maintainable on the point of limitation.
25.
It has been further argued & also has been mentioned in the written argument of the applicant that applicant has
submitted statement of claim against order dated 13.7.93 passed by Assistant General Manager New Bank of India &
applicant has worked for 240 days in each year. It has been further argued that due to circumstance originating out of
personal & family conditions of the applicant & his illness he could not attend his duty in the bank & he has been
sending information to Branch Manager about his leave through U.P.C. & he was also informing the employer about
his treatment but his services were ended vide order dated 13.7.93 as deemed retired. It has been further submitted that
before ending his services by employer he was neither given any notice nor charge sheet & on the basis of absence from
place of duty, his services were brought to end hence, his removal is covered within the definition of retrenchment.
Relying on the case reported in AIR 1961 Supreme Court 158, Bata Shoe Co (P) Ltd…Appellant v/s D.N.Ganguly and
others……Respondents, It has been argued that without service of notice removal from service is illegal. Countering
the above argument it has been argued & further mentioned in written argument that applicant was admittedly absent
w.e.f 13.11.92 & due to his continuous absence without information his services were brought to end as deemed retired
according to provision of Bi-partite Agreement. It has been further argued & mentioned in page 3 of the argument that
no irregularity or illegality has been committed by management according to Bi-partite settlement. Removal of the
applicant is just & reasonable. On this point reliance has been placed by non-applicant on the case reported in 2002 II
CLR 472, Syndicate Bank….Appellant v/s General Secretary, Syndicate Bank Staff Association & another
………Respondents. Referring to order of voluntary retirement dated 13.7.93. It has been further argued that it is wrong
to say that notice has not been served against the applicant.
26.
Before I proceed to discuss the arguments advanced by both the parties I consider it necessary to reproduce the
order dated 13.7.93 relating to “deemed voluntary retirement” of the applicant & provision of “deemed voluntary
retirement” as provided in Bi-partite settlement. Order dated 13.7.93 regarding voluntary retirement of the applicant
reads as under :-
Jh dY;k.k lgk; eh.kk]
fyfid@jksdfM;k]
iq= Jh ukFkwyky eh.kk]
xzke ,oa Mkd?kj & cMok]
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7461
rg0& cLlh] ftyk t;iqj-
fo"k;% lsok djkj dh lekfIr & lsok ls LoSfPNd ifjR;kx-
egksn;]
mi;qZDr fo"k;kUrxZr ge vkidk /;ku gekjs uksfVl fnukafdr 1-6-93 dh vksj vkd`"V djrs gS] tks vkidks iathd`r ,-Mh- Mkd o
;w-ih-lh- Mkd ds rgr Hkstk x;k FkkA mDr uksfVl vkidks fnukad 6-6-93 dks feyk FkkA fdarq bl lEca/k esa vkius vkt rd u
rks dksbZ Li"Vhdj.k gh Hkstk gS vkSj u gh vkius 'kk[kk dk;kZy;] tkSgjh cktkj esa viuh M~;wVh Tokbu dh gSA rnuqlkj tSlk
fd gekjs iwoksZDr uksfVl esa fn;k x;k gS] ;g eku fy;k x;k gS fd vki cSad dh lsok ls LoSfPNd :i ls fjVk;j gks x;s gS
vkSj cSad ds lkFk vkidk lsok djkj ßdkWaUVªsDVj vkWQ lfoZlÞ lekIr gks x;k gSA vr% vki cSad ds lHkh cdk;ksa dk rqjUr
fuiVkjk djsa rFkk fdlh Hkh dk;Z fnol dks 'kk[kk izoU/kd] tkSgjh cktkj] t;iqj ls lEidZ dj vius nkos] ;fn dksbZ gks] rks
izkIr djsaA
Hkonh;]
gLrk{kj viBuh;
lgk;d egkizcU/kd
27.
Non-applicant has filed copy of Bi-partite Settlement of Punjab National Bank dated 27 May, 1989 providing
provision for “voluntary cessation of employment by the employer”. The provision reads as under :-
“………………..When an employee absents himself from work for a period of 90 or more consecutive days,
without submitting any application for leave or for its extension or without any leave to his credit or beyond
the period of leave sanctioned originally/subsequently or when there is a satisfactory evidence that he has
taken up employment in India or when the management is reasonably satisfied that he has no intention of
joining duties, the management may at any time thereafter give a notice to the employee at his last known
address calling upon him to report for duty within 30 days of the date of the notice, stating interalia the
ground for no intention of joining duties and furnishing necessary evidence, where available. Unless the
employee reports for duty within 30 days of the notice or gives an explanation for his absence within the said
period of 30 days satisfying the management that he has not taken up another employment or a vocation and
that he has no intention of not joining duties, the employee will be deemed to have voluntarily retired from
the bank’s service on the expiry of the said notice. In the event of the employee submitting a satisfactory
reply, he shall be allowed to report for duty thereafter within 30 days from the date of the expiry of the
aforesaid notice without prejudice to the bank’s right to take any action under the law or rules of service.”
28.
As far as the question of service of notice against the applicant before the passing of order dated 13.7.93 is
concerned it is evident from the perusal of order dated 13.7.93 itself that a notice dated 1.6.93 was sent to applicant by
registered post with acknowledgement beside another mode under U.P.C. which was received by applicant on 6.6.93.
As the notice was received by applicant on 6.6.93 hence objection must have been raised by applicant no sooner the
notice was received by him. After receipt of order dated 13.7.93 also there was opportunity to submit protest before
authorities of New Bank of India which has not been done by applicant at that point of time. Management of Punjab
National Bank is not in position to place the proof of receipt of notice by applicant on 6.6.93 because proof was in the
possession of New Bank of India. Applicant cannot be permitted to demand the proof after raising the issue after lapse
of nearly 14 years & it cannot be expected from Punjab National Bank to furnish such proof which was not handed over
to Punjab National Bank by New Bank of India. Here, it is pertinent to note that merger of the bank has taken place on
4.9.93 the date on which neither any dispute was pending regarding applicant with New Bank of India nor applicant had
raised any dispute before a court or tribunal. In such circumstance, it cannot be expected that New Bank of India must
have transferred the documents relating to applicant who was not an existing employee on the date of merger on 4.9.93.
It is further important to mention that it has been specifically mentioned in order dated 13.7.93 that registered notice
was received by the applicant on 6.6.93 but contention of the applicant is that he was not served with notice. Such
contention clearly appears to be wrong and in the fact & circumstances burden of proof is with the applicant to show
that he was not served with notice which he has failed to discharge hence, I am of the view that plea of the applicant is
not sustainable that he was not served with notice of New Bank of India.
29.
In AIR 1961 Supreme Court 158, Bata Shoe Co (P) Ltd…Appellant v/s D.N.Ganguly and
others……Respondents, referred by learned representative of the applicant in para 13 of the judgement it was observed
by Hon’ble Supreme Court as under :-
“(13). ……………………….All that the Standing Orders provide is that the workmen charged with an
offence shall receive a copy of such charge. It is also provided that a workman who refuses to accept the
chargesheet shall be deemed to have admitted the charge made against him. There is no provision in the
7462
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Standing Orders for affixing such charge-sheets on the notice board of the company. The charge sheets in
this case were sent to the eleven workmen by registered post and returned unserved, because they were not
found in their villages. On the same day on which the chargesheets were sent by registered post it appears
that notices were issued in certain newspapers to the effect that a group of workmen under a common
understanding had engaged in an illegal strike from February 23, 1954, and that all such workmen were
liable to strong disciplinary action and that in consequence they had been charged under the Standing Orders
and Rules of the company and such charge sheets had been sent to them individually by registered post
acknowledgment due and had also been displayed on the notice boards inside and outside the factory gate
and they were required to submit the explanations by March 9, 1954. These notices did not contain the names
of the workmen to whom charge-sheets were sent and in whose case charge-sheets were displayed on the
notice-boards. In the circumstances it can hardly be said that these eleven workmen would have notice that
they were among those to whom charge-sheets had been sent or about whom charge-sheets had been
displayed on the notice-boards. The proper course in our view was when the registered notices came back
unserved in the case of these eleven workmen to publish notices in their names in some newspaper in the
regional language with a wide circulation in Bihar along with the charges framed against them. It would have
been a different matter if the Standing Orders had provided for service of charge-sheets through their display
on the notice-boards of the appellant. In the absence of such provision, the proper course to take was what
we have mentioned above. If that course had been taken, the appellant would have been justified in saying
that it did all that it could to serve the workmen; but as that was not done, we agree with the tribunal that
these eleven workmen had no notice of the charges against them and the date by which they had to submit
their explanation as well as the date of inquiry. In these circumstances the order of the tribunal with respect
to these eleven workmen must also be upheld.”
30.
It is evident from the case of Bata Shoe Co that there was no provision for serving of notice of chargesheet by
affixing it on the notice board & registered notices were returned unserved as workmen were not found in their village.
Publication in the newspaper did not carry the name & charge against them. In that circumstance, it was held by
tribunal that workmen were not served with notice of chargesheet which was upheld by Hon’ble Supreme Court. In the
present case of Sh. Kalyan Sahai Meena he has been served with registered notice with acknowledgement which was
sent on 1.6.93 & received on 6.6.93. The receipt was available with New Bank of India on the basis of which New
Bank of India has mentioned in the order dated 13.7.93 that notice was received by applicant on 6.6.93 hence, applicant
after lapse of nearly 14 years cannot be allowed to say that he was not served with notice. The fact & circumstance of
Bata Shoe Company is not attracted in the fact of the present case & no benefit can be given to the applicant on the
basis of case of Bata Shoe Company. Had the applicant raised the issue at proper time with New Bank of India it
would have been possible for New Bank of India to produce the receipt of notice to the applicant or before the court or
tribunal as the case may be but applicant chose to raise the issue at belated stage due to which the basic evidence of
service of notice has remained with New Bank of India & Punjab National Bank is no way in position to produce the
receipt of the registered notice dated 1.6.93 sent to applicant by New Bank of India. There is also no legal & valid
reason to draw any adverse inference against the Punjab National Bank in absence of the receipt not filed on record by
non-applicant because the receipt is not expected to be in possession of Punjab National Bank.
31.
In 2002 II CLR 472, Syndicate Bank….Appellant v/s General Secretary, Syndicate Bank Staff Association &
another ………Respondents, respondent Dayanand was Clerk Cum Typist in the bank of the appellant Syndicate Bank
who was transferred from his place of posting to another branch of the bank where he was required to report on 3.4.84
but he did not join. From 1.4.84 to December, 1985, out of 628 days he worked only for 46 days . The period of his
absence was unauthorised. He tendered resignation which was accepted but subsequently he was allowed to withdraw
his resignation on humanitarian ground. On 19.11.85 clause 16 of IV Bi-Partite Settlement was invoked by the bank &
respondent Dayanand was called upon to show cause for his continuous absence & report back by 15.12.85 failing
which he would be deemed to have voluntarily retired from the service. Show cause notice sent to Sh. Dayanand was
returned by postal department with endorsement of refusal. The bank vide order dated 19.12.85 treated the respondent
Sh. Dayanand as voluntarily retired as per clause 16 of IV Bi-Partite Settlement as indicated above in this paragraph.
Sh. Dayanand raised industrial dispute in September, 1988 & reference on the basis of industrial dispute raised by Sh.
Dayanand was decided by Industrial Tribunal in his favour. Writ petition by the bank against the order of tribunal failed
& further writ appeal against the order passed in writ petition also terminated in favour of respondent Sh. Dayanand.
The appeal was allowed by Hon’ble Supreme Court against the award of the tribunal as well as judgements of Hon’ble
High Court & it was held that undue reliance on the principle of natural justice by the tribunal & even by the High
Court has led to miscarriage of justice. It was further held by Hon’ble Supreme Court that bank had followed the
requirements of clause 16 of Bi-Partite Settlement wherein the principle of natural justice was in-built & the bank had
rightly held that respondent Sh. Dayanand voluntarily retired from the service of the bank.
32.
Reliance has been placed by non-applicant on the case reported in 1976 I LLJ Supreme Court 478, State Bank of
India …..Appellant v/s N.Sundarmoney. ………Respondent. I have very carefully gone through the above cited case.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7463
33.
In this case respondent N. Sundarmoney had completed 240 days of service before his termination although he
was initially appointed only for a period of 9 days. It shall appear from para 6 of the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court that both the party to the appeal had admitted continuous service of the applicant within the meaning of section
25-B(2) of I.D.Act, 1947 which reads as under :
“6. ……………. This respondent was appointed as cashier, off and on, by the State Bank of India between
July 4, 1970 and November 18, 1972. The intermittent breaks notwithstanding, his total number of days of
employment answered the test of “deemed” continuous service within S. 25B (2) and both sides accept that
fact situation. ………………..”. On consideration & appreciation of above fact & circumstance appeal of
the employer was dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court. From the case of Sundarmoney applicant Sh.
Kalyan Sahai Meena cannot be benefited because his case does not attract the provision of section 25-F of
I.D.Act, 1947. The case of the applicant is the case of a deemed voluntary retirement on the ground of his
unexplained continuance absence from place of duty.
34.
It has been further argued & has been mentioned on page 6 of written argument that absence of a workman is a
misconduct & to prove the misconduct against the applicant it is necessary to conduct departmental enquiry but no
departmental enquiry has been conducted hence, termination of the services of the applicant becomes unjust & illegal.
Relying on the case reported in 1982 I LLJ 330 Supreme Court, L.Rober D’souza …..Appellant v/s Executive
Engineer, Southern Railway And Another..………Respondent, it has been alleged that in the above cited case it has
been held by Hon’ble Supreme Court that on the basis of absence if termination of service takes place without enquiry
then such termination is covered within the definition of retrenchment. Countering the above argument by learned
representative of Punjab National Bank it has been argued that law laid down in L.Rober D’souza v/s Executive
Engineer, Southern Railway And Another, does not apply in the facts of Sh. Kalyan Sahai Meena because applicant has
been treated as deemed retired according to Bi-partite Settlement. To support his contention non-applicant has relied on
the case reported in 2002 II CLR 472, Syndicate Bank….Appellant v/s General Secretary, Syndicate Bank Staff
Association & another ………Respondents.
35.
In L.Rober D’souza …..Appellant v/s Executive Engineer, Southern Railway And Another..………Respondent,
it was admitted case of the respondent railway that services of appellant L.Rober D’souza were terminated on account
of his absence during the period when appellant was on fast against the alleged behaviour of railway authority towards
appellant. It was held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in para 21 of the judgement, “…………. On the admission of the
Railway Administration, service was terminated on account of absence during the period applicant was on fast.
Absence without leave constitute misconduct and it is not open to the employer to terminate services without notice and
enquiry or at any rate without complying with the minimum principle of natural justice. Further, Rule 2302 clearly
prescribed the mode, manner and methodology of terminating service of a temporary railway servant and admittedly the
procedure therein prescribed having not been carried out, the termination is void & invalid. Accordingly, the same
conclusion would be reached even while accepting for the purpose of the facts of this case, simultaneously rejecting it
in law that the termination does not constitute retrenchment yet, none the less it would be void & inoperative”. From
the case of L.Rober D’souza it is clearly evident that he was treated to be a temporary employee who was removed
from service for absence without leave. Beside the question of following the principle of natural justice, the question
before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was also whether termination of services of temporary railway servant on account of
absence without leave, without notice & enquiry & in violation of Rule 2302 of Railway Establishment Manual was
valid? It was held by Hon’ble Supreme Court that the procedure prescribed in Rule 2302 not having been followed the
termination is void & invalid. In above fact & circumstances, I am of the view that no benefit can be derived by the
applicant from the case of L.Rober D’souza & the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in 2002 II CLR 472,
Syndicate Bank….Appellant v/s General Secretary, Syndicate Bank Staff Association & another ………Respondents
is attracted in the case of Sh. Kalyan Sahai Meena.
36.
As far as the question of continuous absence of the applicant Sh. Kalyan Sahai Meena is concerned it shall
appear from perusal of his statement of claim that applicant has admitted in para 6 of claim that he was absent from 13
Nov, 1992 due to illness & family circumstances. In para 7 he has alleged that due to illness he was on leave & he was
continuously intimating the employer about his illness & treatment & his services were ended vide order dated 13.7.93.
From perusal of entire statement of claim it shall appear that nothing has been mentioned about the nature of illness or
the name of disease from which the applicant was suffering. In his affidavit also which has been filed in evidence
nothing has been mentioned about the nature of his illness. He has also not mentioned anything about the alleged family
circumstances. Nothing has been mentioned in affidavit or in the statement of claim that when he was fully relieved of
his illness to join duty. In para 17 of affidavit he has alleged that after becoming fit he contacted AGM & Branch
Manager of New Bank of India, Johri Bazar, Jaipur & asked them to take him on duty & he was assured to be taken
back on duty. Later New Bank of India was merged with Punjab National Bank. All these contentions in the affidavit
are mere allegations because he has not mentioned any date that when he was declared fit & when he reported with
fitness certificate for joining duty & what was the immediate response of New Bank of India. Opposite party Punjab
7464
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
National Bank has alleged that no document relating to applicant was received by Punjab National Bank from New
Bank of India hence, Punjab National Bank is unable to make any comment in the matter. It has also been alleged by
PNB that applicant never made any representation to PNB or contacted with any officer of the PNB.
37.
Annex-1 to 42 are documents on record in form of photocopy out of which Annex-1 to 7 are certificates of
posting & all of them related to New Bank of India & Regional Manager, New Bank of India. Annex-25 to 28 are also
certificates of posting relating to Regional Manager, Punjab National Bank dated 12.6.94, 11.9.95, 28.3.98 & 15.9.2000
respectively. There is no record of response for & on behalf of New Bank of India whether letters, if any, send through
above certificate of posting were received by New Bank of India or not. Here, it is important to note that what was the
content of letters sent through UPC to New Bank of India or Punjab National Bank has not been filed by applicant on
record. Learned representative of non-applicant during course of argument has submitted that Punjab National Bank has
not received any correspondence from applicant relating to certificates of posting shown as Annex-25 to 28. It has been
further submitted that allegation of the applicant is wrong that he had contacted the management of Punjab National
Bank to take him on duty.
38.
As far as the question of nature of sickness of the applicant & medical certificate, fitness certificate & his
reporting to the management of New Bank of India for joining the duty is concerned, Annex-8 to 24 are medical
certificates of sickness & Annex-29 to 38 are also medical certificate of sickness. It will not be out of place to mention
that when an employee become sick, he is expected to send information with medical certificate to his department
informing about his illness & when he becomes fit he is expected to report for duty with fitness certificate. Applicant
has also alleged that he was also on earned leave for certain period during his absence. Nowhere it has been mentioned
in statement of claim that when he was on leave & reported back on duty & for which specific period he fell ill & when
he secured the certificate of fitness. Perusal of Annexure 8 to 19 indicates that applicant contacted seven doctors
namely Dr. P.M.Gupta, Dr.S.P.Mathur, Dr. Rajendra Singh, Dr. R.C.Sharma, Dr. N.L.Sharma, Dr. Ranjeet Chaturvedi
& Dr. Surajprakash on 13 different occasions & secured medical certificate for the period between 13.11.92 to 5.9.93.
Some of the abovementioned seven doctors were contacted more than once but not consecutively. There is no
prescription relating to these doctors on record to show the medicines advised by them & nature of sickness reported by
applicant. Annexure-21 is a composite certificate for sickness & fitness issued on 26.3.99 indicating that applicant
needs 24 days rest from 3.3.99 & he is fit to resume duty on 27.3.99. This certificate has been issued by Dr. Anil Kumar
Tambi. Annexure 22 is prescription dated 3.3.99 & Annex-23 is prescription dated 26.3.99 both issued by Dr. Anil
Tambi. Thus, it is evident from annex-21 to 23 that Dr. Anil Kumar Tambi has attended the applicant for the period
3.3.99 to 26.3.99 with a fitness issued on 26.3.99 that applicant is fit to resume duty on 27.3.99 vide annex-21 which is
a composite certificate of medical & fitness. No such composite certificate can be issued in general practice. On 27.9.99
applicant has not joined the duty & he has secured another medical certificate annex-24 for the period 27.3.99 to
10.4.99 from one Dr. D.N.Sharma. It is important to note that after getting fitness certificate from Dr. Anil Kumar
Tambi if applicant fell ill on 27.3.99 it was necessary for him to report to Dr. Anil Kumar Tambi who had issued fitness
certificate on 26.3.99. Failing to do that applicant has secured another medical certificate from Dr. D.N.Sharma for the
period 27.3.99 to 10.4.99. There is no medical record on the file for the period 11.4.99 to 15.1.2003. Applicant has not
mentioned anything in the statement of claim or affidavit in evidence that what was the state of his health between
11.4.99 to 15.1.2003. Annex-29 is a medical certificate for the period 16.1.2003 to 14.2.2003. Annex-30 is medical
certificate for the period 10.3.2004 to 8.4.2004. There is no record for 13.2.2003 to 9.3.2004. Similarly, applicant has
filed medical certificate for various periods for the year 2005, 2006 & 2007. All these certificates lack continuity &
consistency. Annex-38 is medical certificate for 1.9.2007 to 30.9.2007 wherein it has been mentioned that he is fit to
join duty on 1.10.2007. Annex-38 is a composite certificate of sickness & fitness both which is generally not
practicable to be issued as common document for sickness as well as fitness. None of the doctor has been produced in
evidence to support the case of absence of applicant on medical ground. The nature of illness does not find mention in
statement of claim or affidavit in evidence. From above fact & circumstances regarding absence of the applicant on
medical ground I am of the view that absence of the applicant on medical ground is not reliable, consistent &
continuous & accordingly unsustainable to accept as legal reason of absence. Thus, his absence on account of sickness
is unacceptable in law.
39.
As far as the question of responsibility of the Punjab National Bank to reinstate the applicant in the service as
claimed by the applicant is concerned it is clearly evident from the oral & documentary evidence on record that
applicant has failed to prove that any of the correspondence sent by applicant has been received by Punjab National
Bank. Applicant has also failed to prove that Punjab National Bank was in knowledge of the removal of the applicant
from service by New Bank of India at the time of merger. From the perusal of the cross-examination of Sh. Brajendra
Batra, Senior Manager, PNB it is evident that there is nothing convincing in his cross examination which is capable of
helping to support the case of the applicant. Sh. Batra Has alleged in his cross examination that no record relating to
applicant Sh. Kalyan Sahai Meena is in custody of the Punjab National Bank. He has alleged that notice was given to
the applicant, this fact has already been mentioned in the order dated 17.3.93 & on that basis he is alleging that
applicant was served with notice. About receipt of the notice by the applicant he has alleged that receipt has not been
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7465
filed by PNB because such record is not available with PNB because record pertaining to that period is not in the
possession of Punjab National Bank. It is pertinent to note that during that period applicant was the employee of New
Bank of India. Witness of the non-applicant has further alleged that record relating to applicant could not be made
available because of delay of nearly 14 years made by applicant in raising the dispute. He has further alleged that he is
not aware about any information about his illness sent by the applicant through UPC for the period 13.11.92 to 27.7.93.
In view of the fact that Punjab National Bank has denied the receipt of any correspondence or representation from the
applicant it is necessary for the applicant, before placing a claim against Punjab National Bank, to prove that he was an
employee of New Bank of India. He has admitted in cross examination that he has not filed appointment letter on
record because appointment letter has been lost & the fact of the loss of appointment letter was narrated by him before
the Conciliation Officer. He has further admitted that he has not filed those documents on record which were submitted
by him before the Conciliation Officer. Applicant has filed the photocopy of the identity card on record relating to New
Bank of India & has alleged that he was appointed but he has not filed the concerned document for appointment. He has
also admitted that he has not filed copy of any letter sent to the bank relating to the fact that he was sick from 13 Nov,
1992 but he has filed photocopy of UPC regarding applications sent by him which are EX-w-1 to w-7. He has also
admitted that photocopy of the UPC filed by him does not bear the name of sender. He has also admitted that he has not
made any reply against the order of voluntary retirement dated 13.7.93. He has also admitted that he has not filed any
document or certificate that he had sent the medical certificates to the bank & he has not filed copy of any of the
application which are alleged to have been sent by him to the bank. He has also admitted that after merger of New Bank
of India with Punjab National Bank on 4.9.93 he did not write any letter to Punjab National Bank & he had written to
Punjab National Bank at later stage but he has not filed copy of those letters on record. In order to explain the delay &
absence applicant has alleged that he was on unpaid leave before Nov, 1992 but nowhere precisely he has alleged that
for what period he was on unpaid leave & for what period he was on sick leave & when precisely he become fit to join
the service. From the perusal of oral evidence of both the parties it is evident that applicant has failed to prove that
order of New Bank of India in voluntarily retiring the applicant on the basis of his continuous absence is unjust &
illegal. Applicant has also failed to give proper & reasonable explanation that why he has not filed copy of any of the
application or representation sent by him to New Bank of India or Punjab National Bank.
40.
Based on above discussion, I am of the view that contention of the applicant as mentioned in the statement of
claim about his absence in reporting for duty on medical ground has not been proved. There is no reliable & legally
acceptable evidence on record to support his contention on the absence for not reporting on duty. Although the ground
of delay raised by non-applicant for rejecting the case of the applicant for adjudication has not been upheld by this
tribunal yet, it is important to mention that applicant has failed in giving reliable legal evidence to support his case.
41.
For the reasons as discussed above, I am of the view that applicant has failed to prove that order of removal by
Regional Manager, New Bank of India dated 13.7.1993 treating him voluntarily retired on account of absenteeism is
unjust or illegal. Accordingly, applicant Sh. Kalyan Sahai Meena is not entitled to any relief claimed by him. His
statement of claim is dismissed.
42.
Award as above.
BHARAT PANDEY, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 15 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2240-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh /kjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj lSUVªy cSad
vkWiQ bafM;k ds izca/ra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/ esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vf/dj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 80@1994) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 15-09-
2017 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12011@30@1993&vkbZvkj (ch&II)º
jfo dqekj] MsLd vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 15th September, 2017
S.O. 2240.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 80/1994) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court No. 1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Central
Bank of India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 15.09.2017.
[No. L-12011/30/1993-IR (B-II)]
RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer
7466
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
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. 80/1994
Employer in relation to the management of Central Bank of India, Patna
AND
Their workman
Present : Shri R. K. Saran, Presiding Officer
Appearances :
For the Employers
:
Shri B.N. Singh, Branch Manager
For the workman
:
None
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Banking
Dated- 16/08/2017
AWARD
By order No. L-12011/30/1993-IR(B-II) dated 4/04/1994, the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour
has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub–section (1) and sub-section (2A) of section 10 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the management of Central Bank of India, Patna in deducting the wages for
12th , 14th and 16th December, 1992 in respect of 57 clerical staff and 8 sub-staff (Total:65 workmen) is
justified? If not, what relief are the workmen concerned entitled to?
Note :- List of workmen is not enclosed alongwith order of reference
2.
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] 15 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2241-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh /kjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj bafM;u
vksojlht cSad ds izca/ra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/ esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vf/dj.k@Je U;k;ky;] vgenkckn (xqtjkr) ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 164@2006) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks
15-09-2017 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12012@62@2006&vkbZvkj (ch&II)º
jfo dqekj] MsLd vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 15th September, 2017
S.O. 2241.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 164/2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of
Indian Overseas Bank and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 15.09.2017.
[No. L-12012/62/2006-IR (B-II)]
RAVI KUMAR, Desk Officer
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7467
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
AHMEDABAD
Present :
Pramod Kumar Chaturvedi,
Presiding Officer, CGIT-cum-Labour Court,
Ahmedabad,
Dated 10th July, 2017
Reference: (CGITA) No. 164/2006
The Chief Regional Manager,
Indian Overseas Bank,
Regional Office at Chinubhai Towers,
Opp. Handloom House, Ashram Road,
Ahmedabad (Gujarat) – 380009
…First Party
V/s
Shri AmrutbhaiThakore,
Rambari, Shantaben Ni Chali,
B/h Swimming Pool,
Bhandra, Lal Darwaja,
Ahmedabad (Gujarat)
…Second Party
For the First Party
:
Shri B. K. Oza
For the Second Party
:
Shri K.V. Vyas
AWARD
The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-12012/62/
2006-IR(B-II) dated 29.08.2006 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) in
respect of the matter specified in the Schedule:
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the management of Indian Overseas Bank in imposing the punishment of Compulsory
Retirement on Shri A. D. Thakore is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is
entitled?”
1.
The reference dates back to 29.08.2006. The second party workman submitted the statement of claim Ex. 4 on
17.04.2007 and the first party submitted the written statement Ex. 8 on 29.08.2008. The second party also submitted no.
of documents vide list Ex. 9. The legal heirs of the second party Sandeep submitted the application for substitution of
legal heirs which was allowed on 26.04.2011. Since then the second party has not been appearing for leading evidence.
2.
Thus the reference in the absence of the evidence of the second party is disposed of with the observation as
under: “the action of the management of Indian Overseas Bank in imposing the punishment of Compulsory Retirement
on Shri A.D. Thakore is legal and justified.”
P. K. CHATURVEDI, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2242-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj LVsV cSad
vkWiQ chdkusj ,.M t;iqj ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;
ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] t;iqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 16@2007) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks
18-09-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12012@57@2006&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
ch- ,l- fc"V] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
7468
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2017
S.O. 2242.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 16/2007) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, Jaipur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of State Bank of
Bikaner and Jaipur and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 18.09.2017.
[No. L-12012/57/2006-IR (B-I)]
B. S. BISHT, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR, COURT, JAIPUR
BHARAT PANDEY, Presiding Officer
I.D. 16/2007
Reference No. L- 12012/57/2006-IR (B-I) Dated: 5.2.2007
Shri Vinod Kumar
S/o Shri Shankarlal Sargara
R/o Railway Colony, Savrupganj,
Distt: Sirohi (Rajasthan)
Sirohi (Raj.)
V/S
1.
The General Manager
State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur
Tilak Marg, C-Scheme,
Jaipur.
2.
The Branch Manager
State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur,
Branch Savrupganj, Distt: Sirohi (Rajasthan)
Sirohi (Raj.)
Present :
For the applicant
:
Sh. C.D.Chaturvedi, Representative
For the non-applicant
:
Sh. R.K.Jain, Advocate.
AWARD
14.6.2017
1.
The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred under clause (d) of Sub Section 1 & 2 (A) of
Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 has referred the following Industrial dispute to this tribunal for
adjudication:-
¶D;k egkizca/d] LVsV cSad chdkusj ,.M t;iqj] fryd ekxZ lh Ldhe t;iqj }kjk vius deZdkj Jh fouksn dqekj iq=k Jh
'kadj yky dks fnukad 14-02-2001 ls 29-11-2004 rd fofHkUu vof/;ksa esa dk;Z djus ds ckn lsok ls gVk;k tkuk
U;k;ksfpr ,oa fof/ lEer gS\ ;fn ugha rks deZdkj vius fu;kstd ls fdl jkgr dks ikus dk vf/dkjh gS\
2.
Briefly fact of the case is that applicant Sh. Vinod Kumar was engaged as temporary full time peon by Branch
Manager, SBBJ, Sarupganj, Distt. Sirohi & has worked in the branch for the periods as mentioned below:-
S.No.
Year
From
To
1.
2001
14.2.2001
29.12.2001
2.
2002
1.3.2002
19.4.2002
3.
2003
9.5.2003
30.12.2003
4.
2004
1.1.2004
29.11.2004
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7469
3.
Further, it has been alleged that during year 2001 he was receiving a monthly wage of Rs. 500/-, however, the
amount was increased while making payments as per number of days worked in a particular month. It has been further
mentioned in para 3 of statement of claim that the Branch Manager was adopting unfair labour practice at the time of
payment of wage. He was insisting to write name of Laxman in place of Vinod Kumar on payment voucher relating to
salary with a purpose to defeat the record of regular working of the applicant. During conciliation proceeding also
applicant insisted the management to produce the record of Laxman in case there was any person other than the
applicant named as such.
4.
Applicant has alleged that he was performing all the duties of a peon like delivery of local mail which was
entered in the peon book & applicant has worked as full time peon from 14.2.2001 to 29.11.2004 to the satisfaction of
the management of the branch. Applicant has worked for 714 days between 14.2.2001 to 29.11.2004 & has worked for
more than 240 days between 9.5.2003 to 29.11.2004. In spite of above factual position services of the applicant was
discontinued by the Branch Manager w.e.f. 29.11.2004 without any prior notice required under section 25-F of I.D.Act,
1947 & section 522(4) of Shastri Award.
5.
It has been alleged in para 8 of the statement of claim that according to item no.10 of fifth Schedule of I.D.Act,
1947 employing workmen as casual or temporary & continuing them for years with object of depriving them of the
status & privileges of permanent workmen is to be treated as unfair labour practice & unfair labour practice is
prohibited in terms of section 25-T of I.D.Act, 1947. The bank management has violated provision of section 25-F, 25-
G, 25-H, 25-T of I.D.Act, 1947, Rule 76 & 77 of The Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957, para 522 (4) of Shastri
Award & Clause 20(8) & 20(12) of Banking Industry’s first Bi-partite Settlement.
6.
It has been prayed that direction may kindly be issued to the management of the bank to reinstate the applicant
in service of the bank as sub-staff from date of termination with back wages & other consequential benefits.
7.
In reply to statement of claim against para 1 it has been alleged that applicant was not issued with any
appointment letter which is indicator of the fact that he was not taken on job by following established procedure of
recruitment & his work was casual. Against para 2 it has been alleged that contention of para 2 is wrong & baseless that
he was paid Rs.500/- monthly & increased payment was also made at the time of payment depending upon his work.
8.
Statement in para 3 & 4 has been alleged to be wrong with contention that applicant was not issued with any
appointment letter & he was paid on the basis of bill submitted by him against temporary work done by him. Against
para 5 & 6 it has been alleged that based upon need applicant has worked time to time & payment has been made
against such working on the basis of bill submitted by him & such payments have been accepted by the applicant
without objection. The engagement of the applicant was casual & he was not recruited in the bank following the
procedure of the selection.
9.
It has been specifically denied that applicant has worked for 240 days in the concerned period & has been
alleged that work done by applicant was purely casual in nature & there has been no violation of section 25-F of
I.D.Act, 1947. Applicant has never worked continuously. He was fully aware about the nature of work & accordingly
work was taken from him. No unfair labour practice has taken place in relation to work of the applicant. Non-applicant
has not violated any of the provision of I.D.Act, 1947 or rules of Rule 76 & 77 of The Industrial Disputes (Central)
Rules, 1957 or provision of para 522 (4) of Shastri Award & Clause 20(8) & 20(12) of Banking Industry’s First Bi-
partite Settlement. It has been alleged that applicant is not entitled to any relief & his statement of claim is liable to be
dismissed.
10.
Beside above reply to statement of claim preliminary objection has been mentioned as part of reply to statement
of claim wherein it has been alleged that entire record was placed before the Assistant Labour Commissioner/
Conciliation Officer wherein it was specifically & clearly mentioned that no appointment was given to the applicant &
only need based work was taken from him casually. It has also been alleged that applicant has never worked for 240
days in any year & there is no employer- employee relationship between management & applicant & the dispute is not
covered within the meaning of section 2(k) of I.D.Act, 1947 & reference has been made without application of mind.
11.
The case was fixed for evidence of the applicant on 30.1.17. Neither anyone appeared on behalf of applicant nor
affidavit in evidence on behalf of applicant was filed. Learned representative of non-applicant was present. In the
interest of justice case was suo-moto adjourned by the tribunal fixing 15.3.17 for evidence of applicant.
12.
On 15.3.17 presiding officer was on leave. None appeared on behalf of applicant & affidavit in evidence on
behalf of applicant was also not filed. None appeared on behalf of opposite party. Sh. Rajendra Gupta, advocate
appeared for applicant with contention that learned representative of applicant will not come today. Next date 8.5.17
was fixed for evidence of the applicant. On 8.5.17 none appeared on behalf of applicant & opposite party. Case was
adjourned by the tribunal suo-moto giving last opportunity to the applicant for filing affidavit in evidence on 12.6.17. It
was further mentioned in the order-sheet that if evidence is not filed by applicant side on 12.6.17 further proceeding
7470
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
shall be closed. On 8.5.17 after order learned representative for the applicant appeared & became aware with order
dated 8.5.17.
13.
On 12.6.17 again none appeared on behalf of applicant & opposite party. No evidence was filed from applicant
side. Looking into lack of interest on the part of applicant in further proceeding of the case evidence of the applicant
was closed & case was reserved for award.
14.
From perusal of the file, it appears that no document relating to the case has been filed either by applicant or by
non-applicant. Thus, there is absence of documentary evidence on record. Applicant has not filed any affidavit in
evidence & he has also not appeared for his cross examination on any such affidavit. From perusal of order-sheet it
further appears that applicant Sh. Vinod Kumar has been personally absent since 4.3.2010. It appears from the fact &
circumstances discussed above that applicant did not take interest in proceeding of the case & leading evidence in
support of the claim. His opportunity to lead evidence was accordingly closed by the tribunal. From the above
discussion it is evident that applicant has failed to prove that he has worked for different periods between 14.2.2001 to
29.11.2004 as mentioned in the reference. Accordingly, I am of the view that applicant has failed to prove that action of
the General Manager, SBBJ, Jaipur in removing Sh. Vinod Kumar from service is unjust & illegal & applicant is not
entitled to any relief. Statement of claim of the applicant is dismissed accordingly.
15.
Award as above.
BHARAT PANDEY, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2243-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj naqxkiqj
calokjk {ks=kh; xzkeh.k cSad ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;
ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] t;iqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 117@2005) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj
dks 18-09-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12012@49@2005&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
ch- ,l- fc"V] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2017
S.O. 2243.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 117/2005) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, Jaipur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Dungarpur
Banswara Kshetriya Gramin Bank and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 18.09.2017.
[No. L-12012/49/2005-IR (B-I)]
B. S. BISHT, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR, COURT, JAIPUR
BHARAT PANDEY, Presiding Officer
I.D. 117/2005
Reference No. L-12012/49/2005-IR (B-I) Dated: 13.9.2005
Shri Naresh Joshi
Sagwara, Distt. Dungarpur
Rajasthan.
V/s
The President,
Dungarpur Banswara Kshetriya Gramin Bank
Dungarpur (Raj.)
Present :
For the Applicant
:
Sh. Rajendra Vaish, Advocate.
For the Non-applicant
:
Sh. Praveen Purohit, Advocate.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7471
AWARD
Dated: 29.6.2017
1.
The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred under clause (d) of Sub Section 1 & 2(A) of
Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 has referred the following Industrial dispute to this tribunal for
adjudication:-
“Whether the action of the management of Dungarpur Banswara Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Dungarpur in
terminating the services of Sh. Naresh Joshi, S/o Sh. Nathuram Joshi on 16.10.2002 is justified? If not, to
what relief the workman is entitled to?”
2.
According to statement of claim briefly fact of the case is that applicant was appointed on 14.9.98 in Sagwara
Branch of the bank as IVth class employee on permanent vacant post. Applicant worked from Sep, 1998 to 16.10.2002
uninterrupted & has worked for more than 240 days in a year. He was paid on monthly basis through payment voucher
which has been attached as Ex-1 & Ex-32 along with statement of claim. Since appointment of applicant in Sagwara
Branch there was no IV class employee & hence, applicant was working as full time class IV employee. Applicant has
alleged that he passed the B.A. Examination in the year 1998 & record of passing the B.A. Examination is available in
the bank.
3.
The work of the applicant was filling of drinking water, cleanliness, collection of stationary, preparation of
Photocopy, letter dispatch, visit to SBBJ & Co-operative Bank of Rajasthan for clearance of bank drafts & cheques,
Deposit of electricity & telephone bills, filling of peon book, counting & packing of notes & depositing them to other
bank with cashier, recovery of loan amount from the parties, preparation of pass-book, assistance at the time of audit by
gathering documents, work related to stationary at head office Dungarpur, remaining present & working during officers
meeting, opening & closing of bank & such other works which a class IV employee performs in course of working. It
has been alleged that Ex-33 to 54 are documents connected with performance of above mentioned work & attached
with statement of claim.
4.
There was no complain against the applicant. He was neither charge sheeted nor punished. Applicant was
entitled to be made permanent but non-applicant removed the applicant from service on 16.10.2002 without assigning
any reason & employing unfair labour practice. Removal of the applicant is in violation of section 25-F,G & H of
I.D.Act, 1947 & rule 77 & 78 of the Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957. It has been further alleged that applicant
was seeking regularisation in the service which annoyed the non-applicant & he was removed from the service. It has
been prayed that order of dismissal dated 16.10.2002 be declared void & illegal & applicant be reinstated in service
with back wages, continuity of service & consequential benefits.
5.
In reply to statement of claim, statements in para 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 &10 have not been admitted. In addition to
denial it has been alleged that applicant was not appointed in the bank. There is a settled procedure for appointment in
the bank. Applicant is neither eligible nor he participated in recruitment process of the bank hence, question of his
appointment by a competent authority of the bank does not arise.
6.
It has been further alleged that a candidate cannot be appointed as IVth class employee of the bank if his
educational qualification if more than 8th pass. As applicant has alleged that in the year 1998 he had qualified the
examination of B.A. hence, he could not be appointed as class IV employee. In this connection, contention of the
applicant is wrong that bank is having record of graduation of the applicant. It has further alleged that applicant has not
filed document in this connection on the record of the file.
7.
It has been specifically alleged that applicant has not filed any record of working 240 days in every year. It has
been further alleged that no work is carried out in the bank on holidays but applicant has alleged that he was working
on holidays also which is false & baseless. It has been further alleged that document Ex-1 to 32 are illegible &
uncertified & from these documents the only thing that can be derived is that applicant was a part time daily wager who
has worked in absence of a regular employee & he was paid for the work he has done.
8.
It has been further alleged against para 5 of statement of claim that due to absence of a person on the post of
messenger in Sagwara Branch work has been taken from the applicant casually as part time daily wager & he has been
paid for the same. The documents Ex-33 to Ex-54 are illegible, uncertified & not admitted & it has been prayed that
such document could not be taken on record by the tribunal. Non-applicant has alleged that applicant was not a regular
employee of the bank, hence, there was no question of serving him with a charge sheet or carrying out annual
assessment of his work, hence, claim of the applicant that his work was satisfactory is baseless & not admitted.
9.
Applicant is neither eligible to be appointed on the post of messenger nor he was selected on the basis of
established rule & procedure of recruitment & he was also not entitled to be appointed on permanent post. No unfair
7472
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
labour practice was adopted with applicant. It has been alleged in para 9 of reply that when applicant was not appointed
the question of dismissing him from service does not arise & consequently there is no reason of serving any notice or
pay in lieu of notice or payment of retrenchment compensation. It has been specifically denied that provisions of
section 25-F, G & H of I.D.Act, 1947 & rule 77 & 78 of The Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957 has not been
violated. Further, it has been specifically denied that no work of class III employee has taken from the applicant &
contention of the applicant in this regard is baseless & untrue. At last it has been prayed that statement of claim of the
applicant may be dismissed with cost.
10.
Applicant Sh. Naresh Joshi has filed affidavit in evidence in support of statement of claim on 24.12.2014 & copy
of the affidavit has been given to non-applicant on the same date i.e. 24.12.2014 & case has been fixed for cross
examination by non-applicant on 12.3.2015. Between 12.3.2015 to 7.6.2017 cross examination of the applicant could
not take place because of continuous absence of the applicant since 13.12.2016. Applicant has been continuously
remaining absent from 13.12.2016 till 7.6.2017.
11.
On 7.6.2017 also applicant was absent & learned representative of non-applicant was present but cross
examination could not be done because of continuous absence of the applicant since 13.12.2016. However, the case was
adjourned in the interest of justice suo-moto by the tribunal by providing further last opportunity to the applicant to
participate in the case & appear for cross-examination on 27.6.2017. On 27.6.2017 also applicant did not appear hence,
he could not be cross examined & further opportunity of applicant’s evidence was closed due to lack of interest of the
applicant & case was reserved for award.
12.
Since filing of affidavit in evidence by applicant on 24.12.2014 it shall appear from perusal of order-sheet that
next date 12.3.15 was fixed for cross examination of the applicant but none appeared from both side & learned
representative were on strike hence, next date 8.4.15 was fixed for cross-examination. On 8.4.2015 applicant was
personally present & learned representative of non-applicant was present. Applicant alleged that he cannot appear for
cross examination in absence of his counsel. As his counsel was absent on 8.4.2015 hence, 25.6.2015 was next date
fixed for cross examination of the applicant. On 25.6.2015 neither applicant nor his learned counsel came in
appearance. Learned counsel for non-applicant was present. In the interest of justice case was again suo-moto
adjourned by tribunal fixing 8.9.2015 for cross examination of applicant. On 8.9.2015 situation was same as on
25.6.2015. Again case was adjourned by tribunal suo-moto in the interest of justice fixing 30.11.2015 for cross
examination of applicant. On 30.9.2015 also applicant did not appear who was to be cross examined. Learned
representative of applicant appeared & alleged that Learned representative of non-applicant will not come. Case was
again adjourned fixing 13.1.2016 for cross examination of applicant.
13.
On 13.1.2016 applicant appeared in person. Learned representative of non-applicant also appeared. Learned
representative of applicant did not appear. Applicant asked for adjournment which was allowed fixing 21.3.2016 for
cross-examination of applicant. From 31.3.2016 till date applicant has not appeared for cross examination as indicated
above. All these circumstances are indicative of the fact that applicant is not interested in having himself in cross
examined & give passage for further proceeding in the case. In above circumstance, further opportunity for cross
examination was closed. It was alleged by leaned counsel for non-applicant that in absence of evidence on behalf of
applicant opposite party will not lead evidence. Accordingly, case was reserved for award.
14.
Heard the argument of learned counsel for opposite party. None appeared for applicant.
15.
It has been argued by learned counsel for non-applicant that applicant is not interested in having this case
decided for the reason best known to him. It has also been pointed out that earlier case was decided on 17.2.2006 as
“No Claim Award’ because he did not file the claim.
16.
In absence of evidence it is not practicable to adjudicate the reference dated 13.9.2005 as mentioned above.
Resultantly, I am of the view that applicant has failed to prove that action of the management of Dungarpur-Banswara
Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Dungarpur in terminating the services of Sh. Naresh Joshi, S/o Sh. Nathuram Joshi on
16.10.2002 is not justified. The applicant is not entitled to any relief. Statement of claim of the applicant is dismissed
accordingly.
17.
Award as above.
BHARAT PANDEY, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2244-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjrh;
LVsV cSad ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7473
vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 5@2014) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 18-09-2017
dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12012@82@2012&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
ch- ,l- fc"V] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2017
S.O. 2244.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 5/2014) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of State Bank of
India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 18.09.2017.
[No. L-12012/82/2012-IR (B-I)]
B. S. BISHT, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.2, MUMBAI
PRESENT : M.V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO.CGIT-2/5 of 2014
EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF
STATE BANK OF INDIA
Assistant General Manager,
State Bank of India, Zonal Office,
Admn Office, Sharda Chamber,
7th Floor, 386/2, Shankarseth Road,
Pune – 411 037.
AND
THEIR WORKMAN
Smt. Kalpana Baban Shivarkar,
S.No. 14, Hole Vasti,
Omkar Shri Apartment Wanawari,
Pune.
APPEARANCES :
FOR THE EMPLOYER :
Shri M.G. Nadkarni, Advocate
FOR THE WORKMAN :
Mr. Umesh Vishwad, Advocate
Mumbai, dated the 20th July, 2017
AWARD
1.
This is reference made by the Central Government in exercise of powers under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and
sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 vide Government of India, Ministry of Labour &
Employment, New Delhi vide its order No. L-12012/82/2012 – IR (B-I) dated 16.01.2014. The terms of reference
given in the schedule are as follows :
“Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Pune in terminating the services
of Smt. Kalpana Baban Shivarkar w.e.f. 16.1.2012 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is
entitled to ?“
2.
After the receipt of the reference, both the parties were served with the notices. They appeared through their
respective representatives. Second party workman filed statement of claim Ex.6. According to the concerned
workman, she was working with the first party bank since 2004 as a Sweeper. She has worked continuously from 2004
to 16.1.2012 with the first party bank. She was doing the work of cleaning and sweeping the premises of Zonal Office
Pune and the officers’ quarters of the first party bank under direct control and supervision of the first party bank. Her
work is regular and perennial. The first party bank was making payment to her. As such there is direct employer-
employee relationship between first party bank and second party workman.
7474
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
3.
According to the second party workman, a group of workmen raised the industrial dispute against the
management of first party bank, Mumbai for non-absorption of workmen engaged through contractors in services of the
first party bank. The agreement was arrived at and the contract workers were absorbed in the service of Central office
and Mumbai Main Branch of the first party bank. However, the first party bank has failed to absorb the contact
employees working in Pune and were discriminated in same situation. Therefore, the union namely Thekedar Kamgar
Sangh has made demand of absorption of second party workman and other workers. The said union has filed writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 before Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The said petition was disposed of in the year
2006 in view of law laid down in case of Steel Authority of India. Since 1998, the first party bank has stopped paying
wages to the second party workman through the contractor and has started direct payment to the second party workman.
There is no contractor since 1998 and the wages were directly paid by Pune Zonal office of the first party bank. Even
after disposal of the said writ petition the second party workman was in service and wages were paid to her directly by
the first party bank.
4.
It is contention of the second party workman that she was in continuous service and had put continuously 240
days and more continuous service in every completed year of the service. However, the first party bank has terminated
the services of the second party workman without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947.
Therefore the said termination is illegal, improper, arbitrary and unjust. It also amounts to unfair labour practices. The
second party workman is therefore asking to declare that the termination of her services by the first party bank is illegal.
She is also asking for re-instatement with continuity of service and all other consequential benefits from the date of
termination till actual date of re-instatement along with interest and cost.
5.
First party bank has resisted the claim by filing written statement Ex.7. According to the first party bank, the
bank had engaged the contractor named M/s. Golden Enterprises since June 1981 who was entrusted with the job of
house-keeping at the Zonal office, located at East Street, Gulmohar, Pune and also at the bank’s residential quarters
namely Madhuban Bank House and Ashirwad Bldg. at Nagar Road, Pune. The bank was making payment to the
contractor for the service rendered to the bank and the contractor was in turn effect the payment to the workers engaged
by him for carrying out the job given to him by the bank. The said contractor abandoned the contract in November
1998 and ran away. The bank terminated the contract with M/s. Golden Enterprises sometimes in 1999 – 2000.
However, with reference to the letter and sprit of the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court dated 21.3.2006, the bank
continued to engage the contract labours for doing the house-keeping jobs at the bank premises. Bank used to give
money to Shri Selvam, the Supervisor against the production of the bills. Subsequently, there was inter-se dispute and
the contract labours requested bank to pay money directly to them. Accordingly, the arrangement was worked out
whereby Shri Selvam used to submit bills and bank credited the amount to the account of each contract labour.
6.
It is also contention of the first party bank that on 10.9.2010 the bank published tender notice in local newspaper
for maintenance and house-keeping of the banks premises. The bank also suggested the contract labours to form a
society, partnership firm or a company for participating in the tender process. Contract labours did not pay heed to the
suggestion made by the bank. The tender process was completed on 16.12.2011 and the contract for maintenance and
house-keeping of the bank premises was awarded to contractor who had quoted the lowest rates. The new contractor
displayed the notice on the bank’s notice board stating that he was given contract for maintenance and house-keeping of
the banks premises and invited those who were interested to work with him to approach him. However, the concerned
workman and other workers did not avail this opportunity.
7.
It is also contention of the first party bank that there is no employer-employee relationship between the bank and
concerned workman. The tribunal has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute in question. Even as per order in writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 of Hon’ble Bombay High Court, the concerned workman did not approach the
competent authority to get the matter referred to tribunal for adjudication and as such dispute referred for adjudication
in the present reference has been raised belatedly. It is quite stale. The reference is not maintainable on that ground.
8.
According to the first party bank, the concerned workman was engaged by the contractor named M/s. Golden
Enterprises. The bank was making payment to the said contractor who in turn was effecting the payment to the
workmen engaged by him and therefore the claim of concerned workman that she was engaged by the bank is not
maintainable. It is, thus, contention of the bank that it has not discriminated the contract employees working at Pune
and therefore the claim of the workman is completely untenable.
9.
It is also contention of the first party bank that provisions of section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947 are not applicable in
the factual matrix of the case since the service of the concerned workman automatically came to an end after new
contractor was engaged by the bank after duly following tender process.
10.
It is then contention of the first party bank that the settlement / agreement that might have been reached at
Mumbai has no relation whatsoever with the present dispute and the workman concerned cannot base her claim on the
basis of settlement entered into in a different case. On this premises, the first party bank has sought rejection of the
reference.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7475
11.
Following issues are framed at Ex.8. I reproduce the issues along with my findings thereon for the reasons to
follow:
Sr.
No.
Issues
Findings
1
Whether the reference is maintainable ?
Yes
2.
Whether there exists employer-employer relationship between the
first party bank & concerned workman?
No
3.
Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India in
terminating the services of Smt. Kalpana Baban Shivarkar w.e.f.
16/01/2012 is legal and justified ?
Yes
4.
If not, whether the concerned workman is entitled to be reinstated in
the services of first party with continuity of service and all other
consequential benefits ?
No
5.
What Order ?
As per final
order
REASONS
Issue No.1 :
12.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that admittedly the union namely Thekedar Kamgar
Sangh has made demand of absorption of second party workman and other workers. The said union has filed writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 before Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The main prayer of the petitioner was for
issuance of writ of mandamus to the bank for regularizing the services of the concerned workers in the banks service.
He submits that the said writ petition wad disposed of by the Division Bench of Hon’ble Bombay High Court vide
order dated 9.3.2006. In the said order the Hon’ble Bombay High Court made it clear that in view of law laid down by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Steel Authority of India & Ors. V/s. National Union Waterfront Workers &
Ors., the relief claimed in the petition cannot be granted and that only remedy available to the petitioner was to seek a
reference to the tribunal. Accordingly, the petitioners were given liberty to make necessary application to the
competent authority within two weeks from the date of order and the competent authority was directed to make
reference as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of two months from the receipt of application of
the petitioners. Submission is to the effect that the petitioners in the writ petition did not approach the competent
authority to get the matter referred to the tribunal for adjudication within time. The contact labours of M/s. Golden
Enterprises filed industrial dispute before the Labour Commissioner, Pune through Zilla Mazdoor Sangh vide their
letter dated 23.12.2011. As such the dispute referred for adjudication in the present reference is belated i.e. after about
7 years from the date of order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. In view of this the submission is that the reference
is not maintainable.
13.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank seeks to rely on the decision in case of Nedungadi Bank Ltd. V/S.
K.P. Madhavankutty & Ors. 2000 (II SCC 455) to submit that the power of the appropriate government to exercise its
powers under section 10 of the I.D. Act, 1947 is to be exercised reasonably and in a rational manner. There appears to
be no rational basis on which the Central Govt. has exercised the powers in this case after a lapse of about 7 years of the
order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. As such the dispute is stale and could not be the subject matter of the
reference under section 10 of the I.D. Act, 1947.
14.
He also seeks to rely on the decision in case of Reserve Bank of India V/s. Gopinath Sharma & Anr. 2006 (6
SCC 221) to submit that delay of 4 years in raising the dispute even after re-employment of the most of the workmen
was held to be fatal.
15.
He then seeks to rely on the decision in case of State of Karnataka & Anr. V/s. Ravi Kumar 2009 III LLJ (206
SC) to submit that 14 years delay to challenge the termination was stale reference and the reference ought to have been
rejected on the ground alone.
16.
However, in view of the facts of the present case it is to be seen whether the second party workman and other
workers were diligent in raising the dispute before competent authority. We have document at Page 2 of list of
document dated 11.3.2016. It is a copy of the letter dated 31.5.2006 (Ex.15) addressed to the Dy. Commissioner of
Labour, Pune requesting him to intervene in the dispute and making reference within the time prescribed by the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court. That would show that Thekedar Kamgar Sangh has made an application for making the
reference within time prescribed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court.
7476
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
17.
So far contention go, it is also a contention of the second party workman that even after the disposal of the said
writ petition second party workman was in service and the wages were paid by the first party bank to her directly. As
per her contention, the first party bank has terminated the services of the second party workman and as such the dispute
was raised by the second party workman for regularization of the services of the concerned workman. It is the
submission of the second party workman that the reference has not been arisen out of the demand of the union but the
said reference has arisen out of the demand of the individual workman. The demand is not for regularization but the
demand is for re-instatement of service. In view of these facts, it can be said that the individual workman has made the
demand for regularization of her service and the reference has arisen out of her demand. Even before that in 2006 it is
the union who has made application to the Dy. Commissioner of Labour, Pune requesting him to intervene into the
dispute and make the reference within the time prescribed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The said letter dated
31.5.2006 is at Ex.15. Therefore it can be said that the union was diligent in making the reference but then
subsequently the demand is made by the individual workman for re-instatement and not for regularization. It cannot be
said therefore that the reference is belated or otherwise it is stale and not maintainable. This point is therefore answered
accordingly in negative.
Issue No. 2 & 3 :
18.
This is the main contentions issue. At the first brush I would observe that admittedly M/s. Golden Enterprises
was engaged by the bank as a contractor since 1981 for doing house-keeping at Pune Zonal office and bank’s quarters
at Pune. In her evidence also the second party workman has stated that she has joined the services in 1998. She then
admits that M/s. Golden Enterprises has abandoned the contract in November 1998 and the trade union namely
Thekedar Kamgar Sangh has filed writ petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 on behalf of the contract workers in the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court. Admittedly, in the writ petition they have made averments categorically that they have
been employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises. In para 3(a) of statement of claim it is stated that they were on the muster
of M/s. Golden Enterprises. It is admitted that they were not under the disciplinary control of the bank. Even it is
admitted that they were not getting the facilities as available to the other bank employees. In view of above categorical
and clear admission, the second party workman involved in the present reference cannot take a contradictory and
inconsistent plea and cannot claim employer-employee relationship with the first party bank.
19.
Even then the Learned Counsel for the second party workman submitted that after termination of the contract in
between the first party bank and M/s. Golden Enterprises, second party workman was continued in service and the
workers were directly paid by the bank at the same daily wages rate which was paid by the contractor. Submission is to
the effect that the contract workers of M/s. Golden Enterprises were engaged by the State Bank of India and therefore
they cannot be treated as contract employees because the contract of the contractor M/s. Golden Enterprises with the
bank was cancelled and since cancellation of the contract they were continued to be in the service which would show
that first party bank was the principal employer.
20.
In this respect, if we see the evidence of the concerned workman, she admits that in the writ petition it was
categorically shown that the contract labours were employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises and they are working on
behalf of the M/s. Golden Enterprises in the premises of bank at Pune. Admittedly, in the statement of claim in para
3(a), she and other workers were shown on the muster of M/s. Golden Enterprises. It is admitted by her that before
1998 M/s. Golden Enterprises use to make payment to them. She even admits that she and other workers were not
under the disciplinary control of the bank. Admittedly they were not getting the facility as available to the other bank
employees. In view of this it can be said that the concerned workman being the employee of the contractor, the
ultimate supervision and control was of the contractor.
21.
In this respect the evidence has come on record that one Shri Selvam used to submit the bills in respect of work
of concerned workman and other workers and then the bank used to credit the amount in the account of each of the
contract labour. The question is whether the said arrangement which was worked out is sufficient to show and establish
the employer-employer relationship in between the concerned workman and the first party bank. When initially the
concerned workman was engaged by the contractor and after termination of the contract in between the said contractor
and the bank she has been continued with such arrangement in respect of payment of wages to her by the bank by
depositing her wages directly in her account after the production of bills by the said Shri Selvam, then that would not be
sufficient to say that first party bank being the principal employer was making payment of wages to the concerned
workman. Merely because the amount was credited to the workman/s account under circumstances narrated above does
not in any way alter the factual position that the concerned workman was a labour contractor and not an employee of
the bank.
22.
I say so because there is well defined procedure in the bank for recruitment and employment in the bank is done
by inserting advertisement, holding competitive test for the employment, selection procedure through merit etc. etc. No
such procedure was adopted at the time of engagement of the concerned workman as a Sweeper. The fact remains
therefore that she was a contract labour for doing the house-keeping job at the banks premises and therefore she
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7477
continued to be a contract labour even after the contract between said contractor and bank was terminated somewhere
in 1999-2000.
23.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that the bank continued to engage contract labours for
doing the house-keeping jobs at the bank premises in view or order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court dated 21.3.2006
whereby the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in view of petition by the petitioners took out a motion for clarification of
order passed on 9.3.2006 by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and also protection till reference is made at the instance
of the petitioners to the tribunal for adjudication. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court observed that they do not see any
protection granted by the court which was sought to be continued but then the Hon’ble Bombay High Court observed
that the contract labours employed by the bank should be continued subject to the requirements and by following
statutory obligations including payment of wages etc. and they need not be dis-continued only because the petition has
been disposed of. That would show that in view of this order passed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court the concerned
workman was continued in services as per the requirement and after cancellation of contract with first party bank and
the contractor namely M/s. Golden Enterprises, the subsequent arrangement was made in respect of payment of wages
of the concerned employees who were engaged by the contractor and therefore the payment was made to them by
depositing the amount in their bank accounts on submission of the bills by one shri Selvam. That would again show
that the concerned workman was not considered to be the employee of the first party bank. All the while she was
continued to be contract labour even after the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court till her services automatically came
to an end.
24.
Even then the Learned Counsel for the second party workman submitted that the employees were the employees
of M/s. Golden Enterprises till that contract was not abandoned or cancelled. After cancellation of the contract in 1999-
2000 M/s. Golden Enterprises ceased to be contractor and these employees were ceased to the employees of M/s.
Golden Enterprises. He submits that Hon’ble Bombay High Court has not directed to keep contract employees of M/s.
Golden Enterprises in service in orders passed on 19.1.1999 and 1.2.1999. Therefore the relation between the S.B.I.
and M/s. Golden Enterprises as principal employer and the contractor came to an end and after cancellation of the
contract in 1999-2000 the services of the employees employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises for performing the job of
cleaning, sweeping, house-keeping of S.B.I. premises automatically came to an end. These employees were ineligible
to work with S.B.I. as contract workers of M/s. Golden Enterprises. So after termination of contract of M/s. Golden
Enterprises and S.B.I., by oral orders by S.B.I. the employees were appointed to carry out the house-keeping, cleaning,
sweeping work and then since that date till the date of termination the concerned workman were employed continuously
by S.B.I. They worked for 10 – 12 years continuously on the basis of said oral order of S.B.I. and therefore there exists
employer-employee relationship in between bank and concerned employees.
25.
This submission is other way round and is not acceptable. A definite stand was taken by the concerned
employees in the WP No. 6247/1998 that they are employees employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises which has been
given a contract of house-keeping of S.B.I., Pune, Regional Office Pune has been employing several workers for
carrying out the same work. It would thus not lie in their mouth to take contradictory and inconsistent plea that they are
the workmen of the principal employer i.e. bank. To raise such a mutually destructive plea is impermissible in law.
Such mutually destructive plea should not be allowed to be raised. Common law principle of estoppel waiver and
acquaintance are applicable in the industrial adjudication. In the context the hand can be laid on decision in case of
Steel Authority of India V/S. Union of India 2006 (12 SC 243) wherein in para 28 of the judgment it has been observed
that such inconsistent plea is not permissible.
26.
On going through the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the said WP No. 6247/1998 it has been observed
as follows:
“We have gone through the orders passed by this court on 19.1.1999 and 1.2.1999 and we do not see any
protection granted by this court and as sought to be continued. Undoubtedly the contract labours employed
by Respondent bank shall be continued subject to the requirement and by following the statutory obligations
including the payment of wages etc. and they need not be dis-continued only because this petition has been
disposed of.”
27.
In view of these observations of Hon’ble Bombay High Court even after the termination of contract in between
M/s. Golden Enterprises and the bank the concerned workmen were continued and were paid wages by the bank by
depositing the wages in their respective bank accounts. That does not mean that the bank has orally appointed them as
its employees on regular basis even without following the statutory procedure.
28.
Learned Counsel for the concerned workman / union submitted that the bank was paying bonus to the concerned
employees. He refers to Ex.17 to submit that the bank was making payment through bankers’ cheque. Therefore the
submission is that as per Section 10 of Payment of Bonus Act, the employer is bound to pay the bonus. Section 2(14)
of Payment of Bonus Act defines employer and it says that in relation to any other establishment the person who or the
authority which was the ultimate control over the affairs of the establishment and the managing agent is the employer.
He submits that as per section 21(4) the principal employer is not liable to pay bonus, gratuity as wages does not
7478
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
include it. He is liable to pay only wages if the contractors fails to pay wages. Since S.B.I. has paid bonus to the
concerned employees it can be said that S.B.I. has engaged concerned workman directly and the bank is the employer
of the concerned workmen who are covered under the Payment of Bonus Act.
29.
This submission is also not acceptable since in the decision in case of Indian Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. V/s. State of
West Bengal & Ors. 2011 (4 LLM 158), Calcutta, it has been observed in para 20 of the judgment that,
“There is no warrant for the proposition that in every case where the bonus is paid to an employee, the same
is an indicator of the employee being a regular employee. The company is an establishment in public sector.
The provisions of bonus act would apply to it only if it satisfies the conditions mentioned in sub section (1)
of section 20 thereof. If indeed the company was obliged to pay bonus to its regular employees and had in
the process shared its profits with the contract labours by paying the bonus in terms of bonus act, the very
action of extending benefits of the social welfare legislation to said labours would not change their status to
regular employees of the company.”
30.
Next submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman is that the contractor did not obtain necessary
licence. In this respect also it is necessary to refer the observations in para 20 of the citation cited supra. It has been
observed that if at all the contractor did not obtain the licence it would open to the authority concerned to take action
against it under section 23 of CLRA Act but for that the company cannot be penalized and the contract labours
employed by such erring contractor be thrust upon it. Non-obtaintion of licence without anything more would not
clothe the Respondent with any legal right to claim that they are the direct employees of the company and hence
entitled to continue in service despite the contract with KNYCEE not being renewed.
In view of this legal position it can be said that even if the contract between the bank and the contractor namely
M/s. Golden Enterprises was cancelled and could not be renewed that does not give right to the concerned employee /
union to claim that they are direct employees of the bank.
31.
Next submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman is that there is no documentary evidence to
show that Shri Selvam was the contractor after the contract of M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned. He submits
that before RLC the settlement of Minimum wages was reached between the bank and workman / union and the bank
has accepted to pay the minimum wages to the concerned workman. In view of that the submission is that after the
contract with M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned, it was the bank who paid the wages to the concerned employees
by depositing the wages in their bank account and thereby the bank has accepted it to be the employer of the concerned
workman.
32.
It is no doubt true that there is no documentary evidence to prove that Selvam was submitting the bills on the
basis of which the wages were deposited in the bank account of each workman. But then Selvam was one of the worker
along with other employees. Even the workman herself has admitted in her cross-examination that due to inter-se
dispute between the workers they requested the bank to make the direct payment and arrangement was worked out. In
view of that it can be said that some arrangement was worked out in respect of payment to these workmen after the
contract between the bank and M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned.
33.
In view of this, it is the submission of Learned Counsel for the bank that the workmen concerned were continued
to be engaged by K.P. Selvam as a contract labour after original contractor ran away and no wages were directly paid to
them by the bank. In view of admission of the concerned workman that the arrangement was worked out after the inter-
se dispute between the workers it can be very well said that the concerned workmen were paid wages directly in their
bank account by way of this arrangement which was worked out. Therefore that will not give them the status of regular
employees since initially they were engaged by the contractor and then there is no documentary evidence to show that
the concerned workman was appointed by the bank.
34.
It is then submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman that the concerned workman was doing
the work of sweeping and cleaning under the direction, control and supervision of first party bank. He refers to copies
of attendance register to submit that those registers are maintained by the bank and it bears the signatures of Waze,
Kulkarni and Bhosale who are the bank officers. In view of this it is submitted that the bank officers were having
control over the work carried out by the concerned employees.
35.
In his cross examination witness Sudhir Ramchandra has denied the suggestion to the effect that the bank was
having control over the work carried out by the concerned employees and that Mr. Jatar, Sudhir Pawar, Dube,
Karkhanis were supervising the work and were allotting the work to the concerned employees. Even if some anxious
consideration is given to this submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman then also it can be said that
merely because the contract labour work is under the supervisions of officers of principal employer it cannot be taken
as evidence of direct employment under the principal employer. In the decision in case of International Airport
Authority of India V/s. International Air Cargo Union and Anr. 2009 (13 SCC 374) it has been observed in para 54 of
the judgment that,
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7479
“Exercise of some control over the activities of the contract labour while they discharge their duties as
labours is inevitable and such exercise is not sufficient to hold that the contract labour will become the direct
employee of the principal employer.”
36.
In the light of above observations I hold that there does not exist employer-employee relationship between the
first party bank and second party workman. But then it is submission of the Learned Counsel for the concerned
workman that the concerned workman had worked for 240 days and continuously in every completed year of service
and her services came to be terminated without following the procedure laid down under section 25 of I.D. Act, 1947.
In this view the submission is that the said termination is illegal and improper.
37.
This submission is also not acceptable since the fact remains that the concerned workman was engaged by the
contractor and after termination of the contract her services came to an end.
38.
For it is explicit from the evidence of Sudhir Jalanwar, the witness of the bank that on 10.11.2010 the bank
published tender notice in local newspapers for maintenance and house-keeping of bank premises. The bank also
suggested the contract labours to form a society, partnership firm or a company for participating in the tender process.
Contract labours did not pay heed to the suggestion made by the bank. The tender process was completed on
16.12.2011 and the contract for maintenance and house-keeping of the bank premises was awarded to contractor who
had quoted the lowest rates. The new contractor displayed the notice on the bank’s notice board stating that he was
given contract for maintenance and house-keeping of the banks premises and invited those who were interested to work
with him to approach him. However, the concerned workman and other workers did not avail this opportunity to work
under the new contractor. The fact remains therefore that after termination of earlier contract the services of the
concerned workman automatically came to an end.
39.
In view of this, the Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that though concerned workman had
worked for 240 days in a year, her appointment was not from the regular stream of appointment and therefore is not
entitled for regularization. He seeks to rely on the decision in case of Dena Bank V/s. Ashraf Yalu Shaikh 2009 III
CLR 426 to submit that since the appointment of the concerned workman was not from the regular stream of
appointment they are not entitled to reinstatement but only compensation, as envisaged under section 25 of I.D. Act,
1947.
40.
So far the submission of the concerned workman to the effect that first party bank has terminated her services
without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947, it can be said that there is no employer-
employee relationship between the bank and workman and that the services of the workman automatically came to an
end after the new contractor was engaged by the bank after following tender process. It is not therefore possible to
accept the submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman that the termination is illegal on account that it
was without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947.
41.
Realising this difficulty, Learned Counsel for the concerned workman submitted that by way of settlement, the
similarly situated workmen and employees in Mumbai were absorbed in services of the bank and therefore the first
party bank has violated the principles of equity before law and gave different treatment to some set of employees in
Mumbai by neglecting section 12(3) and 18(3) of I.D. Act, 1947 and therefore the termination is illegal. The
submission is again other way round. There is no evidence of such discrimination. If any such agreement has been
reached then it has no relation with the present dispute. The present dispute is squarely covered by W.P. No.
6247/1998 and the same has to be dealt with in the light of order passed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the said
writ petition. In view of that the concerned workman cannot base a claim on the basis of settlement entered into in a
different matter under different circumstances.
42.
Considering all these facts, I hold that action of management in terminating the services of concerned workman
w.e.f. 6.1.2012 is legal and justified. The above issues are therefore answered accordingly as against each of them in
terms of above observations.
Issue No. 4 & 5 :
43.
In view of my finding the above issues, the concerned workman is not entitled to be re-instated in the services of
first party bank with continuity of service and other consequential benefits. He is not entitled to relief claimed. Thus
order.
ORDER
Reference is rejected with no order as to costs.
Date: 20.07.2017
M. V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
7480
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2245-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjrh;
LVsV cSad ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 21@2013) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 18-09-2017
dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12012@75@2012&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
ch- ,l- fc"V] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2017
S.O. 2245.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 21/2013) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of State
Bank of India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 18.09.2017.
[No. L-12012/75/2012-IR (B-I)]
B. S. BISHT, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.2, MUMBAI
PRESENT : M.V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO.CGIT-2/21 of 2013
EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF
STATE BANK OF INDIA
Assistant General Manager,
State Bank of India, Zonal Office,
Admn Office, Sharda Chamber,
7th Floor, 386/2, Shankarseth Road,
Pune – 411 037.
AND
THEIR WORKMAN
Smt. Tulsa Sitaram Shivarkar,
S. No. 1-A, 36-B,
Wanawari Gaon,
Pune-411 040.
APPEARANCES :
FOR THE EMPLOYER :
Shri M.G. Nadkarni, Advocate
FOR THE WORKMAN :
Mr. Umesh Vishwad, Advocate
Mumbai, dated the 20th July, 2017
AWARD
1.
This is reference made by the Central Government in exercise of powers under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and
sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 vide Government of India, Ministry of Labour &
Employment, New Delhi vide its order No. L-12012/75/2012 – IR (B-I) dated 25.03.2013. The terms of reference
given in the schedule are as follows :
“Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Pune in terminating the services
of Smt. Tulsa Sitaram Shivarkar w.e.f. 16.1.2012 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is
entitled to ?”
2.
After the receipt of the reference, both the parties were served with the notices. They appeared through their
respective representatives. Second party workman filed statement of claim Ex.6. According to the concerned
workman, she was working with the first party bank since 1986 as a Sweeper. She has worked continuously from 1986
to 16.1.2012 with the first party bank. She was doing the work of cleaning and sweeping the premises of Zonal Office
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7481
Pune and the officers’ quarters of the first party bank under direct control and supervision of the first party bank. Her
work is regular and perennial. The first party bank was making payment to her. As such there is direct employer-
employee relationship between first party bank and second party workman.
3.
According to the second party workman, a group of workmen raised the industrial dispute against the
management of first party bank, Mumbai for non-absorption of workmen engaged through contractors in services of the
first party bank. The agreement was arrived at and the contract workers were absorbed in the service of Central office
and Mumbai Main Branch of the first party bank. However, the first party bank has failed to absorb the contact
employees working in Pune and were discriminated in same situation. Therefore, the union namely Thekedar Kamgar
Sangh has made demand of absorption of second party workman and other workers. The said union has filed writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 before Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The said petition was disposed of in the year
2006 in view of law laid down in case of Steel Authority of India. Since 1998, the first party bank has stopped paying
wages to the second party workman through the contractor and has started direct payment to the second party workman.
There is no contractor since 1998 and the wages were directly paid by Pune Zonal office of the first party bank. Even
after disposal of the said writ petition the second party workman was in service and wages were paid to her directly by
the first party bank.
4.
It is contention of the second party workman that she was in continuous service and had put continuously 240
days and more continuous service in every completed year of the service. However, the first party bank has terminated
the services of the second party workman without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947.
Therefore the said termination is illegal, improper, arbitrary and unjust. It also amounts to unfair labour practices. The
second party workman is therefore asking to declare that the termination of her services by the first party bank is illegal.
She is also asking for re-instatement with continuity of service and all other consequential benefits from the date of
termination till actual date of re-instatement along with interest and cost.
5.
First party bank has resisted the claim by filing written statement Ex.7. According to the first party bank, the
bank had engaged the contractor named M/s. Golden Enterprises since June 1981 who was entrusted with the job of
house-keeping at the Zonal office, located at East Street, Gulmohar, Pune and also at the bank’s residential quarters
namely Madhuban Bank House and Ashirwad Bldg. at Nagar Road, Pune. The bank was making payment to the
contractor for the service rendered to the bank and the contractor was in turn effect the payment to the workers engaged
by him for carrying out the job given to him by the bank. The said contractor abandoned the contract in November
1998 and ran away. The bank terminated the contract with M/s. Golden Enterprises sometimes in 1999 – 2000.
However, with reference to the letter and sprit of the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court dated 21.3.2006, the bank
continued to engage the contract labours for doing the house-keeping jobs at the bank premises. Bank used to give
money to Shri Selvam, the Supervisor against the production of the bills. Subsequently, there was inter-se dispute and
the contract labours requested bank to pay money directly to them. Accordingly, the arrangement was worked out
whereby Shri Selvam used to submit bills and bank credited the amount to the account of each contract labour.
6.
It is also contention of the first party bank that on 10.9.2010 the bank published tender notice in local newspaper
for maintenance and house-keeping of the banks premises. The bank also suggested the contract labours to form a
society, partnership firm or a company for participating in the tender process. Contract labours did not pay heed to the
suggestion made by the bank. The tender process was completed on 16.12.2011 and the contract for maintenance and
house-keeping of the bank premises was awarded to contractor who had quoted the lowest rates. The new contractor
displayed the notice on the bank’s notice board stating that he was given contract for maintenance and house-keeping of
the banks premises and invited those who were interested to work with him to approach him. However, the concerned
workman and other workers did not avail this opportunity.
7.
It is also contention of the first party bank that there is no employer-employee relationship between the bank and
concerned workman. The tribunal has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute in question. Even as per order in writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 of Hon’ble Bombay High Court, the concerned workman did not approach the
competent authority to get the matter referred to tribunal for adjudication and as such dispute referred for adjudication
in the present reference has been raised belatedly. It is quite stale. The reference is not maintainable on that ground.
8.
According to the first party bank, the concerned workman was engaged by the contractor named M/s. Golden
Enterprises. The bank was making payment to the said contractor who in turn was effecting the payment to the
workmen engaged by him and therefore the claim of concerned workman that she was engaged by the bank is not
maintainable. It is, thus, contention of the bank that it has not discriminated the contract employees working at Pune
and therefore the claim of the workman is completely untenable.
9.
It is also contention of the first party bank that provisions of section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947 are not applicable in
the factual matrix of the case since the service of the concerned workman automatically came to an end after new
contractor was engaged by the bank after duly following tender process.
7482
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
10.
It is then contention of the first party bank that the settlement / agreement that might have been reached at
Mumbai has no relation whatsoever with the present dispute and the workman concerned cannot base her claim on the
basis of settlement entered into in a different case. On this premises, the first party bank has sought rejection of the
reference.
11.
Following issues are framed at Ex.8. I reproduce the issues along with my findings thereon for the reasons to
follow:
Sr.
No.
Issues
Findings
1
Whether the reference is maintainable ?
Yes
2.
Whether there exists employer-employer relationship between the
first party bank & concerned workman?
No
3.
Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India in
terminating the services of Smt. Tulsa Sitaram Shivarkar w.e.f.
16/01/2012 is legal and justified ?
Yes
4.
If not, whether the concerned workman is entitled to be reinstated in
the services of first party with continuity of service and all other
consequential benefits ?
No
5.
What Order ?
As per final
order
REASONS
Issue No. 1 :
12.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that admittedly the union namely Thekedar Kamgar
Sangh has made demand of absorption of second party workman and other workers. The said union has filed writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 before Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The main prayer of the petitioner was for
issuance of writ of mandamus to the bank for regularizing the services of the concerned workers in the banks service.
He submits that the said writ petition wad disposed of by the Division Bench of Hon’ble Bombay High Court vide
order dated 9.3.2006. In the said order the Hon’ble Bombay High Court made it clear that in view of law laid down by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Steel Authority of India & Ors. V/s. National Union Waterfront Workers &
Ors., the relief claimed in the petition cannot be granted and that only remedy available to the petitioner was to seek a
reference to the tribunal. Accordingly, the petitioners were given liberty to make necessary application to the
competent authority within two weeks from the date of order and the competent authority was directed to make
reference as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of two months from the receipt of application of
the petitioners. Submission is to the effect that the petitioners in the writ petition did not approach the competent
authority to get the matter referred to the tribunal for adjudication within time. The contact labours of M/s. Golden
Enterprises filed industrial dispute before the Labour Commissioner, Pune through Zilla Mazdoor Sangh vide their
letter dated 23.12.2011. As such the dispute referred for adjudication in the present reference is belated i.e. after about
7 years from the date of order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. In view of this the submission is that the reference
is not maintainable.
13.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank seeks to rely on the decision in case of Nedungadi Bank Ltd. V/S.
K.P. Madhavankutty & Ors. 2000 (II SCC 455) to submit that the power of the appropriate government to exercise its
powers under section 10 of the I.D. Act, 1947 is to be exercised reasonably and in a rational manner. There appears to
be no rational basis on which the Central Govt. has exercised the powers in this case after a lapse of about 7 years of the
order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. As such the dispute is stale and could not be the subject matter of the
reference under section 10 of the I.D. Act, 1947.
14.
He also seeks to rely on the decision in case of Reserve Bank of India V/s. Gopinath Sharma & Anr. 2006 (6
SCC 221) to submit that delay of 4 years in raising the dispute even after re-employment of the most of the workmen
was held to be fatal.
15.
He then seeks to rely on the decision in case of State of Karnataka & Anr. V/s. Ravi Kumar 2009 III LLJ (206
SC) to submit that 14 years delay to challenge the termination was stale reference and the reference ought to have been
rejected on the ground alone.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7483
16.
However, in view of the facts of the present case it is to be seen whether the second party workman and other
workers were diligent in raising the dispute before competent authority. We have document at Page 2 of list of
document dated 11.3.2016. It is a copy of the letter dated 31.5.2006 (Ex.15) addressed to the Dy. Commissioner of
Labour, Pune requesting him to intervene in the dispute and making reference within the time prescribed by the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court. That would show that Thekedar Kamgar Sangh has made an application for making the
reference within time prescribed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court.
17.
So far contention go, it is also a contention of the second party workman that even after the disposal of the said
writ petition second party workman was in service and the wages were paid by the first party bank to her directly. As
per her contention, the first party bank has terminated the services of the second party workman and as such the dispute
was raised by the second party workman for regularization of the services of the concerned workman. It is the
submission of the second party workman that the reference has not been arisen out of the demand of the union but the
said reference has arisen out of the demand of the individual workman. The demand is not for regularization but the
demand is for re-instatement of service. In view of these facts, it can be said that the individual workman has made the
demand for regularization of her service and the reference has arisen out of her demand. Even before that in 2006 it is
the union who has made application to the Dy. Commissioner of Labour, Pune requesting him to intervene into the
dispute and make the reference within the time prescribed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The said letter dated
31.5.2006 is at Ex.15. Therefore it can be said that the union was diligent in making the reference but then
subsequently the demand is made by the individual workman for re-instatement and not for regularization. It cannot be
said therefore that the reference is belated or otherwise it is stale and not maintainable. This point is therefore answered
accordingly in negative.
Issue No. 2 & 3 :
18.
This is the main contentions issue. At the first brush I would observe that admittedly M/s. Golden Enterprises
was engaged by the bank as a contractor since 1981 for doing house-keeping at Pune Zonal office and bank’s quarters
at Pune. In her evidence also the second party workman has stated that she has joined the services in 1998. She then
admits that M/s. Golden Enterprises has abandoned the contract in November 1998 and the trade union namely
Thekedar Kamgar Sangh has filed writ petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 on behalf of the contract workers in the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court. Admittedly, in the writ petition they have made averments categorically that they have
been employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises. In para 3(a) of statement of claim it is stated that they were on the muster
of M/s. Golden Enterprises. It is admitted that they were not under the disciplinary control of the bank. Even it is
admitted that they were not getting the facilities as available to the other bank employees. In view of above categorical
and clear admission, the second party workman involved in the present reference cannot take a contradictory and
inconsistent plea and cannot claim employer-employee relationship with the first party bank.
19.
Even then the Learned Counsel for the second party workman submitted that after termination of the contract in
between the first party bank and M/s. Golden Enterprises, second party workman was continued in service and the
workers were directly paid by the bank at the same daily wages rate which was paid by the contractor. Submission is to
the effect that the contract workers of M/s. Golden Enterprises were engaged by the State Bank of India and therefore
they cannot be treated as contract employees because the contract of the contractor M/s. Golden Enterprises with the
bank was cancelled and since cancellation of the contract they were continued to be in the service which would show
that first party bank was the principal employer.
20.
In this respect, if we see the evidence of the concerned workman, she admits that in the writ petition it was
categorically shown that the contract labours were employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises and they are working on
behalf of the M/s. Golden Enterprises in the premises of bank at Pune. Admittedly, in the statement of claim in para
3(a), she and other workers were shown on the muster of M/s. Golden Enterprises. It is admitted by her that before
1998 M/s. Golden Enterprises use to make payment to them. She even admits that she and other workers were not
under the disciplinary control of the bank. Admittedly they were not getting the facility as available to the other bank
employees. In view of this it can be said that the concerned workman being the employee of the contractor, the
ultimate supervision and control was of the contractor.
21.
In this respect the evidence has come on record that one Shri Selvam used to submit the bills in respect of work
of concerned workman and other workers and then the bank used to credit the amount in the account of each of the
contract labour. The question is whether the said arrangement which was worked out is sufficient to show and establish
the employer-employer relationship in between the concerned workman and the first party bank. When initially the
concerned workman was engaged by the contractor and after termination of the contract in between the said contractor
and the bank she has been continued with such arrangement in respect of payment of wages to her by the bank by
depositing her wages directly in her account after the production of bills by the said Shri Selvam, then that would not be
sufficient to say that first party bank being the principal employer was making payment of wages to the concerned
workman. Merely because the amount was credited to the workman/s account under circumstances narrated above does
7484
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
not in any way alter the factual position that the concerned workman was a labour contractor and not an employee of
the bank.
22.
I say so because there is well defined procedure in the bank for recruitment and employment in the bank is done
by inserting advertisement, holding competitive test for the employment, selection procedure through merit etc. etc. No
such procedure was adopted at the time of engagement of the concerned workman as a Sweeper. The fact remains
therefore that she was a contract labour for doing the house-keeping job at the banks premises and therefore she
continued to be a contract labour even after the contract between said contractor and bank was terminated somewhere
in 1999-2000.
23.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that the bank continued to engage contract labours for
doing the house-keeping jobs at the bank premises in view or order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court dated 21.3.2006
whereby the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in view of petition by the petitioners took out a motion for clarification of
order passed on 9.3.2006 by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and also protection till reference is made at the instance
of the petitioners to the tribunal for adjudication. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court observed that they do not see any
protection granted by the court which was sought to be continued but then the Hon’ble Bombay High Court observed
that the contract labours employed by the bank should be continued subject to the requirements and by following
statutory obligations including payment of wages etc. and they need not be dis-continued only because the petition has
been disposed of. That would show that in view of this order passed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court the concerned
workman was continued in services as per the requirement and after cancellation of contract with first party bank and
the contractor namely M/s. Golden Enterprises, the subsequent arrangement was made in respect of payment of wages
of the concerned employees who were engaged by the contractor and therefore the payment was made to them by
depositing the amount in their bank accounts on submission of the bills by one shri Selvam. That would again show
that the concerned workman was not considered to be the employee of the first party bank. All the while she was
continued to be contract labour even after the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court till her services automatically came
to an end.
24.
Even then the Learned Counsel for the second party workman submitted that the employees were the employees
of M/s. Golden Enterprises till that contract was not abandoned or cancelled. After cancellation of the contract in 1999-
2000 M/s. Golden Enterprises ceased to be contractor and these employees were ceased to the employees of M/s.
Golden Enterprises. He submits that Hon’ble Bombay High Court has not directed to keep contract employees of M/s.
Golden Enterprises in service in orders passed on 19.1.1999 and 1.2.1999. Therefore the relation between the S.B.I.
and M/s. Golden Enterprises as principal employer and the contractor came to an end and after cancellation of the
contract in 1999-2000 the services of the employees employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises for performing the job of
cleaning, sweeping, house-keeping of S.B.I. premises automatically came to an end. These employees were ineligible
to work with S.B.I. as contract workers of M/s. Golden Enterprises. So after termination of contract of M/s. Golden
Enterprises and S.B.I., by oral orders by S.B.I. the employees were appointed to carry out the house-keeping, cleaning,
sweeping work and then since that date till the date of termination the concerned workman were employed continuously
by S.B.I. They worked for 10 – 12 years continuously on the basis of said oral order of S.B.I. and therefore there exists
employer-employee relationship in between bank and concerned employees.
25.
This submission is other way round and is not acceptable. A definite stand was taken by the concerned
employees in the WP No. 6247/1998 that they are employees employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises which has been
given a contract of house-keeping of S.B.I., Pune, Regional Office Pune has been employing several workers for
carrying out the same work. It would thus not lie in their mouth to take contradictory and inconsistent plea that they are
the workmen of the principal employer i.e. bank. To raise such a mutually destructive plea is impermissible in law.
Such mutually destructive plea should not be allowed to be raised. Common law principle of estoppel waiver and
acquaintance are applicable in the industrial adjudication. In the context the hand can be laid on decision in case of
Steel Authority of India V/S. Union of India 2006 (12 SC 243) wherein in para 28 of the judgment it has been observed
that such inconsistent plea is not permissible.
26.
On going through the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the said WP No. 6247/1998 it has been observed
as follows:
“We have gone through the orders passed by this court on 19.1.1999 and 1.2.1999 and we do not see any
protection granted by this court and as sought to be continued. Undoubtedly the contract labours employed
by Respondent bank shall be continued subject to the requirement and by following the statutory obligations
including the payment of wages etc. and they need not be dis-continued only because this petition has been
disposed of.”
27.
In view of these observations of Hon’ble Bombay High Court even after the termination of contract in between
M/s. Golden Enterprises and the bank the concerned workmen were continued and were paid wages by the bank by
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7485
depositing the wages in their respective bank accounts. That does not mean that the bank has orally appointed them as
its employees on regular basis even without following the statutory procedure.
28.
Learned Counsel for the concerned workman / union submitted that the bank was paying bonus to the concerned
employees. He refers to Ex.17 to submit that the bank was making payment through bankers’ cheque. Therefore the
submission is that as per Section 10 of Payment of Bonus Act, the employer is bound to pay the bonus. Section 2(14)
of Payment of Bonus Act defines employer and it says that in relation to any other establishment the person who or the
authority which was the ultimate control over the affairs of the establishment and the managing agent is the employer.
He submits that as per section 21(4) the principal employer is not liable to pay bonus, gratuity as wages does not
include it. He is liable to pay only wages if the contractors fails to pay wages. Since S.B.I. has paid bonus to the
concerned employees it can be said that S.B.I. has engaged concerned workman directly and the bank is the employer
of the concerned workmen who are covered under the Payment of Bonus Act.
29.
This submission is also not acceptable since in the decision in case of Indian Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. V/S. State of
West Bengal & Ors. 2011 (4 LLM 158), Calcutta, it has been observed in para 20 of the judgment that,
“There is no warrant for the proposition that in every case where the bonus is paid to an employee, the same
is an indicator of the employee being a regular employee. The company is an establishment in public sector.
The provisions of bonus act would apply to it only if it satisfies the conditions mentioned in sub section (1)
of section 20 thereof. If indeed the company was obliged to pay bonus to its regular employees and had in
the process shared its profits with the contract labours by paying the bonus in terms of bonus act, the very
action of extending benefits of the social welfare legislation to said labours would not change their status to
regular employees of the company.”
30.
Next submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman is that the contractor did not obtain necessary
licence. In this respect also it is necessary to refer the observations in para 20 of the citation cited supra. It has been
observed that if at all the contractor did not obtain the licence it would open to the authority concerned to take action
against it under section 23 of CLRA Act but for that the company cannot be penalized and the contract labours
employed by such erring contractor be thrust upon it. Non-obtaintion of licence without anything more would not
clothe the Respondent with any legal right to claim that they are the direct employees of the company and hence
entitled to continue in service despite the contract with KNYCEE not being renewed.
In view of this legal position it can be said that even if the contract between the bank and the contractor namely
M/s. Golden Enterprises was cancelled and could not be renewed that does not give right to the concerned employee /
union to claim that they are direct employees of the bank.
31.
Next submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman is that there is no documentary evidence to
show that Shri Selvam was the contractor after the contract of M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned. He submits
that before RLC the settlement of Minimum wages was reached between the bank and workman / union and the bank
has accepted to pay the minimum wages to the concerned workman. In view of that the submission is that after the
contract with M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned, it was the bank who paid the wages to the concerned employees
by depositing the wages in their bank account and thereby the bank has accepted it to be the employer of the concerned
workman.
32.
It is no doubt true that there is no documentary evidence to prove that Selvam was submitting the bills on the
basis of which the wages were deposited in the bank account of each workman. But then Selvam was one of the worker
along with other employees. Even the workman herself has admitted in her cross-examination that due to inter-se
dispute between the workers they requested the bank to make the direct payment and arrangement was worked out. In
view of that it can be said that some arrangement was worked out in respect of payment to these workmen after the
contract between the bank and M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned.
33.
In view of this, it is the submission of Learned Counsel for the bank that the workmen concerned were continued
to be engaged by K.P. Selvam as a contract labour after original contractor ran away and no wages were directly paid to
them by the bank. In view of admission of the concerned workman that the arrangement was worked out after the inter-
se dispute between the workers it can be very well said that the concerned workmen were paid wages directly in their
bank account by way of this arrangement which was worked out. Therefore that will not give them the status of regular
employees since initially they were engaged by the contractor and then there is no documentary evidence to show that
the concerned workman was appointed by the bank.
34.
It is then submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman that the concerned workman was doing
the work of sweeping and cleaning under the direction, control and supervision of first party bank. He refers to copies
of attendance register to submit that those registers are maintained by the bank and it bears the signatures of Waze,
7486
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Kulkarni and Bhosale who are the bank officers. In view of this it is submitted that the bank officers were having
control over the work carried out by the concerned employees.
35.
In his cross examination witness Sudhir Ramchandra has denied the suggestion to the effect that the bank was
having control over the work carried out by the concerned employees and that Mr. Jatar, Sudhir Pawar, Dube,
Karkhanis were supervising the work and were allotting the work to the concerned employees. Even if some anxious
consideration is given to this submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman then also it can be said that
merely because the contract labour work is under the supervisions of officers of principal employer it cannot be taken
as evidence of direct employment under the principal employer. In the decision in case of International Airport
Authority of India V/S. International Air Cargo Union and Anr. 2009 (13 SCC 374) it has been observed in para 54 of
the judgment that,
“Exercise of some control over the activities of the contract labour while they discharge their duties as
labours is inevitable and such exercise is not sufficient to hold that the contract labour will become the direct
employee of the principal employer.”
36.
In the light of above observations I hold that there does not exist employer-employee relationship between the
first party bank and second party workman. But then it is submission of the Learned Counsel for the concerned
workman that the concerned workman had worked for 240 days and continuously in every completed year of service
and her services came to be terminated without following the procedure laid down under section 25 of I.D. Act, 1947.
In this view the submission is that the said termination is illegal and improper.
37.
This submission is also not acceptable since the fact remains that the concerned workman was engaged by the
contractor and after termination of the contract her services came to an end.
38.
For it is explicit from the evidence of Sudhir Jalanwar, the witness of the bank that on 10.11.2010 the bank
published tender notice in local newspapers for maintenance and house-keeping of bank premises. The bank also
suggested the contract labours to form a society, partnership firm or a company for participating in the tender process.
Contract labours did not pay heed to the suggestion made by the bank. The tender process was completed on
16.12.2011 and the contract for maintenance and house-keeping of the bank premises was awarded to contractor who
had quoted the lowest rates. The new contractor displayed the notice on the bank’s notice board stating that he was
given contract for maintenance and house-keeping of the banks premises and invited those who were interested to work
with him to approach him. However, the concerned workman and other workers did not avail this opportunity to work
under the new contractor. The fact remains therefore that after termination of earlier contract the services of the
concerned workman automatically came to an end.
39.
In view of this, the Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that though concerned workman had
worked for 240 days in a year, her appointment was not from the regular stream of appointment and therefore is not
entitled for regularization. He seeks to rely on the decision in case of Dena Bank V/S. Ashraf Yalu Shaikh 2009 III
CLR 426 to submit that since the appointment of the concerned workman was not from the regular stream of
appointment they are not entitled to reinstatement but only compensation, as envisaged under section 25 of I.D. Act,
1947.
40.
So far the submission of the concerned workman to the effect that first party bank has terminated her services
without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947, it can be said that there is no employer-
employee relationship between the bank and workman and that the services of the workman automatically came to an
end after the new contractor was engaged by the bank after following tender process. It is not therefore possible to
accept the submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman that the termination is illegal on account that it
was without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947.
41.
Realising this difficulty, Learned Counsel for the concerned workman submitted that by way of settlement, the
similarly situated workmen and employees in Mumbai were absorbed in services of the bank and therefore the first
party bank has violated the principles of equity before law and gave different treatment to some set of employees in
Mumbai by neglecting section 12(3) and 18(3) of I.D. Act, 1947 and therefore the termination is illegal. The
submission is again other way round. There is no evidence of such discrimination. If any such agreement has been
reached then it has no relation with the present dispute. The present dispute is squarely covered by W.P. No.
6247/1998 and the same has to be dealt with in the light of order passed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the said
writ petition. In view of that the concerned workman cannot base a claim on the basis of settlement entered into in a
different matter under different circumstances.
42.
Considering all these facts, I hold that action of management in terminating the services of concerned workman
w.e.f. 6.1.2012 is legal and justified. The above issues are therefore answered accordingly as against each of them in
terms of above observations.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7487
Issue No. 4 & 5 :
43.
In view of my finding the above issues, the concerned workman is not entitled to be re-instated in the services of
first party bank with continuity of service and other consequential benefits. He is not entitled to relief claimed. Thus
order.
ORDER
Reference is rejected with no order as to costs.
Date: 20.07.2017
M. V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2246-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjrh;
LVsV cSad ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 32@2013) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 18-09-2017
dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12012@83@2012&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
ch- ,l- fc"V] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2017
S.O. 2246.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 32/2013) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of State
Bank of India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 18.09.2017.
[No. L-12012/83/2012-IR (B-I)]
B. S. BISHT, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.2, MUMBAI
PRESENT : M.V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO.CGIT-2/32 of 2013
EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF
STATE BANK OF INDIA
Assistant General Manager,
State Bank of India, Zonal Office,
Admn Office, Sharda Chamber,
7th Floor, 386/2, Shankarseth Road,
Pune – 411 037.
AND
THEIR WORKMAN
Smt. Anjali Kashinath Mahadik,
114/211, Saptashrungi Apartment,
Premlok Colony, Nave Nagar,
Kalewadi, Pimpri,
Pune-411 017.
APPEARANCES :
FOR THE EMPLOYER :
Shri M.G. Nadkarni, Advocate
FOR THE WORKMAN :
Mr. Umesh Vishwad, Advocate
7488
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Mumbai, dated the 20th July, 2017
AWARD
1.
This is reference made by the Central Government in exercise of powers under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and
sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 vide Government of India, Ministry of Labour &
Employment, New Delhi vide its order No. L-12012/83/2012 – IR (B-I) dated 17.05.2013. The terms of reference
given in the schedule are as follows :
“Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Pune in terminating the services
of Smt. Anjali Kashinath Mahadik w.e.f. 16.1.2012 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is
entitled to ?“
2.
After the receipt of the reference, both the parties were served with the notices. They appeared through their
respective representatives. Second party workman filed statement of claim Ex.6. According to the concerned workman,
she was working with the first party bank since 1998 as a Sweeper. She has worked continuously from 1998 to
16.1.2012 with the first party bank. She was doing the work of cleaning and sweeping the premises of Zonal Office
Pune and the officers’ quarters of the first party bank under direct control and supervision of the first party bank. Her
work is regular and perennial. The first party bank was making payment to her. As such there is direct employer-
employee relationship between first party bank and second party workman.
3.
According to the second party workman, a group of workmen raised the industrial dispute against the
management of first party bank, Mumbai for non-absorption of workmen engaged through contractors in services of the
first party bank. The agreement was arrived at and the contract workers were absorbed in the service of Central office
and Mumbai Main Branch of the first party bank. However, the first party bank has failed to absorb the contact
employees working in Pune and were discriminated in same situation. Therefore, the union namely Thekedar Kamgar
Sangh has made demand of absorption of second party workman and other workers. The said union has filed writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 before Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The said petition was disposed of in the year
2006 in view of law laid down in case of Steel Authority of India. Since 1998, the first party bank has stopped paying
wages to the second party workman through the contractor and has started direct payment to the second party workman.
There is no contractor since 1998 and the wages were directly paid by Pune Zonal office of the first party bank. Even
after disposal of the said writ petition the second party workman was in service and wages were paid to her directly by
the first party bank.
4.
It is contention of the second party workman that she was in continuous service and had put continuously 240
days and more continuous service in every completed year of the service. However, the first party bank has terminated
the services of the second party workman without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947.
Therefore the said termination is illegal, improper, arbitrary and unjust. It also amounts to unfair labour practices. The
second party workman is therefore asking to declare that the termination of her services by the first party bank is illegal.
She is also asking for re-instatement with continuity of service and all other consequential benefits from the date of
termination till actual date of re-instatement along with interest and cost.
5.
First party bank has resisted the claim by filing written statement Ex.7. According to the first party bank, the
bank had engaged the contractor named M/s. Golden Enterprises since June 1981 who was entrusted with the job of
house-keeping at the Zonal office, located at East Street, Gulmohar, Pune and also at the bank’s residential quarters
namely Madhuban Bank House and Ashirwad Bldg. at Nagar Road, Pune. The bank was making payment to the
contractor for the service rendered to the bank and the contractor was in turn effect the payment to the workers engaged
by him for carrying out the job given to him by the bank. The said contractor abandoned the contract in November
1998 and ran away. The bank terminated the contract with M/s. Golden Enterprises sometimes in 1999 – 2000.
However, with reference to the letter and sprit of the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court dated 21.3.2006, the bank
continued to engage the contract labours for doing the house-keeping jobs at the bank premises. Bank used to give
money to Shri Selvam, the Supervisor against the production of the bills. Subsequently, there was inter-se dispute and
the contract labours requested bank to pay money directly to them. Accordingly, the arrangement was worked out
whereby Shri Selvam used to submit bills and bank credited the amount to the account of each contract labour.
6.
It is also contention of the first party bank that on 10.9.2010 the bank published tender notice in local newspaper
for maintenance and house-keeping of the banks premises. The bank also suggested the contract labours to form a
society, partnership firm or a company for participating in the tender process. Contract labours did not pay heed to the
suggestion made by the bank. The tender process was completed on 16.12.2011 and the contract for maintenance and
house-keeping of the bank premises was awarded to contractor who had quoted the lowest rates. The new contractor
displayed the notice on the bank’s notice board stating that he was given contract for maintenance and house-keeping of
the banks premises and invited those who were interested to work with him to approach him. However, the concerned
workman and other workers did not avail this opportunity.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7489
7.
It is also contention of the first party bank that there is no employer-employee relationship between the bank and
concerned workman. The tribunal has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute in question. Even as per order in writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 of Hon’ble Bombay High Court, the concerned workman did not approach the
competent authority to get the matter referred to tribunal for adjudication and as such dispute referred for adjudication
in the present reference has been raised belatedly. It is quite stale. The reference is not maintainable on that ground.
8.
According to the first party bank, the concerned workman was engaged by the contractor named M/s. Golden
Enterprises. The bank was making payment to the said contractor who in turn was effecting the payment to the
workmen engaged by him and therefore the claim of concerned workman that she was engaged by the bank is not
maintainable. It is, thus, contention of the bank that it has not discriminated the contract employees working at Pune
and therefore the claim of the workman is completely untenable.
9.
It is also contention of the first party bank that provisions of section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947 are not applicable in
the factual matrix of the case since the service of the concerned workman automatically came to an end after new
contractor was engaged by the bank after duly following tender process.
10.
It is then contention of the first party bank that the settlement / agreement that might have been reached at
Mumbai has no relation whatsoever with the present dispute and the workman concerned cannot base her claim on the
basis of settlement entered into in a different case. On this premises, the first party bank has sought rejection of the
reference.
11.
Following issues are framed at Ex.8. I reproduce the issues along with my findings thereon for the reasons to
follow:
Sr.
No.
Issues
Findings
1
Whether the reference is maintainable ?
Yes
2.
Whether there exists employer-employer relationship between the
first party bank & concerned workman?
No
3.
Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India in
terminating the services of Smt. Anjali Kashinath Mahadik w.e.f.
16/01/2012 is legal and justified ?
Yes
4.
If not, whether the concerned workman is entitled to be reinstated in
the services of first party with continuity of service and all other
consequential benefits ?
No
5.
What Order ?
As per final
order
REASONS
Issue No. 1 :
12.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that admittedly the union namely Thekedar Kamgar
Sangh has made demand of absorption of second party workman and other workers. The said union has filed writ
petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 before Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The main prayer of the petitioner was for
issuance of writ of mandamus to the bank for regularizing the services of the concerned workers in the banks service.
He submits that the said writ petition wad disposed of by the Division Bench of Hon’ble Bombay High Court vide
order dated 9.3.2006. In the said order the Hon’ble Bombay High Court made it clear that in view of law laid down by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Steel Authority of India & Ors. V/S. National Union Waterfront Workers &
Ors., the relief claimed in the petition cannot be granted and that only remedy available to the petitioner was to seek a
reference to the tribunal. Accordingly, the petitioners were given liberty to make necessary application to the
competent authority within two weeks from the date of order and the competent authority was directed to make
reference as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of two months from the receipt of application of
the petitioners. Submission is to the effect that the petitioners in the writ petition did not approach the competent
authority to get the matter referred to the tribunal for adjudication within time. The contact labours of M/s. Golden
Enterprises filed industrial dispute before the Labour Commissioner, Pune through Zilla Mazdoor Sangh vide their
letter dated 23.12.2011. As such the dispute referred for adjudication in the present reference is belated i.e. after about
7 years from the date of order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. In view of this the submission is that the reference
is not maintainable.
7490
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
13.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank seeks to rely on the decision in case of Nedungadi Bank Ltd. V/S.
K.P. Madhavankutty & Ors. 2000 (II SCC 455) to submit that the power of the appropriate government to exercise its
powers under section 10 of the I.D. Act, 1947 is to be exercised reasonably and in a rational manner. There appears to
be no rational basis on which the Central Govt. has exercised the powers in this case after a lapse of about 7 years of the
order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. As such the dispute is stale and could not be the subject matter of the
reference under section 10 of the I.D. Act, 1947.
14.
He also seeks to rely on the decision in case of Reserve Bank of India V/S. Gopinath Sharma & Anr. 2006 (6
SCC 221) to submit that delay of 4 years in raising the dispute even after re-employment of the most of the workmen
was held to be fatal.
15.
He then seeks to rely on the decision in case of State of Karnataka & Anr. V/S. Ravi Kumar 2009 III LLJ (206
SC) to submit that 14 years delay to challenge the termination was stale reference and the reference ought to have been
rejected on the ground alone.
16.
However, in view of the facts of the present case it is to be seen whether the second party workman and other
workers were diligent in raising the dispute before competent authority. We have document at Page 2 of list of
document dated 11.3.2016. It is a copy of the letter dated 31.5.2006 (Ex.15) addressed to the Dy. Commissioner of
Labour, Pune requesting him to intervene in the dispute and making reference within the time prescribed by the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court. That would show that Thekedar Kamgar Sangh has made an application for making the
reference within time prescribed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court.
17.
So far contention go, it is also a contention of the second party workman that even after the disposal of the said
writ petition second party workman was in service and the wages were paid by the first party bank to her directly. As
per her contention, the first party bank has terminated the services of the second party workman and as such the dispute
was raised by the second party workman for regularization of the services of the concerned workman. It is the
submission of the second party workman that the reference has not been arisen out of the demand of the union but the
said reference has arisen out of the demand of the individual workman. The demand is not for regularization but the
demand is for re-instatement of service. In view of these facts, it can be said that the individual workman has made the
demand for regularization of her service and the reference has arisen out of her demand. Even before that in 2006 it is
the union who has made application to the Dy. Commissioner of Labour, Pune requesting him to intervene into the
dispute and make the reference within the time prescribed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The said letter dated
31.5.2006 is at Ex.15. Therefore it can be said that the union was diligent in making the reference but then
subsequently the demand is made by the individual workman for re-instatement and not for regularization. It cannot be
said therefore that the reference is belated or otherwise it is stale and not maintainable. This point is therefore answered
accordingly in negative.
Issue No. 2 & 3 :
18.
This is the main contentions issue. At the first brush I would observe that admittedly M/s. Golden Enterprises
was engaged by the bank as a contractor since 1981 for doing house-keeping at Pune Zonal office and bank’s quarters
at Pune. In her evidence also the second party workman has stated that she has joined the services in 1998. She then
admits that M/s. Golden Enterprises has abandoned the contract in November 1998 and the trade union namely
Thekedar Kamgar Sangh has filed writ petition bearing No. 6247 of 1998 on behalf of the contract workers in the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court. Admittedly, in the writ petition they have made averments categorically that they have
been employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises. In para 3(a) of statement of claim it is stated that they were on the muster
of M/s. Golden Enterprises. It is admitted that they were not under the disciplinary control of the bank. Even it is
admitted that they were not getting the facilities as available to the other bank employees. In view of above categorical
and clear admission, the second party workman involved in the present reference cannot take a contradictory and
inconsistent plea and cannot claim employer-employee relationship with the first party bank.
19.
Even then the Learned Counsel for the second party workman submitted that after termination of the contract in
between the first party bank and M/s. Golden Enterprises, second party workman was continued in service and the
workers were directly paid by the bank at the same daily wages rate which was paid by the contractor. Submission is to
the effect that the contract workers of M/s. Golden Enterprises were engaged by the State Bank of India and therefore
they cannot be treated as contract employees because the contract of the contractor M/s. Golden Enterprises with the
bank was cancelled and since cancellation of the contract they were continued to be in the service which would show
that first party bank was the principal employer.
20.
In this respect, if we see the evidence of the concerned workman, she admits that in the writ petition it was
categorically shown that the contract labours were employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises and they are working on
behalf of the M/s. Golden Enterprises in the premises of bank at Pune. Admittedly, in the statement of claim in para
3(a), she and other workers were shown on the muster of M/s. Golden Enterprises. It is admitted by her that before
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7491
1998 M/s. Golden Enterprises use to make payment to them. She even admits that she and other workers were not
under the disciplinary control of the bank. Admittedly they were not getting the facility as available to the other bank
employees. In view of this it can be said that the concerned workman being the employee of the contractor, the
ultimate supervision and control was of the contractor.
21.
In this respect the evidence has come on record that one Shri Selvam used to submit the bills in respect of work
of concerned workman and other workers and then the bank used to credit the amount in the account of each of the
contract labour. The question is whether the said arrangement which was worked out is sufficient to show and establish
the employer-employer relationship in between the concerned workman and the first party bank. When initially the
concerned workman was engaged by the contractor and after termination of the contract in between the said contractor
and the bank she has been continued with such arrangement in respect of payment of wages to her by the bank by
depositing her wages directly in her account after the production of bills by the said Shri Selvam, then that would not be
sufficient to say that first party bank being the principal employer was making payment of wages to the concerned
workman. Merely because the amount was credited to the workman/s account under circumstances narrated above does
not in any way alter the factual position that the concerned workman was a labour contractor and not an employee of
the bank.
22.
I say so because there is well defined procedure in the bank for recruitment and employment in the bank is done
by inserting advertisement, holding competitive test for the employment, selection procedure through merit etc. etc. No
such procedure was adopted at the time of engagement of the concerned workman as a Sweeper. The fact remains
therefore that she was a contract labour for doing the house-keeping job at the banks premises and therefore she
continued to be a contract labour even after the contract between said contractor and bank was terminated somewhere
in 1999-2000.
23.
The Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that the bank continued to engage contract labours for
doing the house-keeping jobs at the bank premises in view or order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court dated 21.3.2006
whereby the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in view of petition by the petitioners took out a motion for clarification of
order passed on 9.3.2006 by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and also protection till reference is made at the instance
of the petitioners to the tribunal for adjudication. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court observed that they do not see any
protection granted by the court which was sought to be continued but then the Hon’ble Bombay High Court observed
that the contract labours employed by the bank should be continued subject to the requirements and by following
statutory obligations including payment of wages etc. and they need not be dis-continued only because the petition has
been disposed of. That would show that in view of this order passed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court the concerned
workman was continued in services as per the requirement and after cancellation of contract with first party bank and
the contractor namely M/s. Golden Enterprises, the subsequent arrangement was made in respect of payment of wages
of the concerned employees who were engaged by the contractor and therefore the payment was made to them by
depositing the amount in their bank accounts on submission of the bills by one shri Selvam. That would again show
that the concerned workman was not considered to be the employee of the first party bank. All the while she was
continued to be contract labour even after the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court till her services automatically came
to an end.
24.
Even then the Learned Counsel for the second party workman submitted that the employees were the employees
of M/s. Golden Enterprises till that contract was not abandoned or cancelled. After cancellation of the contract in 1999-
2000 M/s. Golden Enterprises ceased to be contractor and these employees were ceased to the employees of M/s.
Golden Enterprises. He submits that Hon’ble Bombay High Court has not directed to keep contract employees of M/s.
Golden Enterprises in service in orders passed on 19.1.1999 and 1.2.1999. Therefore the relation between the S.B.I.
and M/s. Golden Enterprises as principal employer and the contractor came to an end and after cancellation of the
contract in 1999-2000 the services of the employees employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises for performing the job of
cleaning, sweeping, house-keeping of S.B.I. premises automatically came to an end. These employees were ineligible
to work with S.B.I. as contract workers of M/s. Golden Enterprises. So after termination of contract of M/s. Golden
Enterprises and S.B.I., by oral orders by S.B.I. the employees were appointed to carry out the house-keeping, cleaning,
sweeping work and then since that date till the date of termination the concerned workman were employed continuously
by S.B.I. They worked for 10 – 12 years continuously on the basis of said oral order of S.B.I. and therefore there exists
employer-employee relationship in between bank and concerned employees.
25.
This submission is other way round and is not acceptable. A definite stand was taken by the concerned
employees in the WP No. 6247/1998 that they are employees employed by M/s. Golden Enterprises which has been
given a contract of house-keeping of S.B.I., Pune, Regional Office Pune has been employing several workers for
carrying out the same work. It would thus not lie in their mouth to take contradictory and inconsistent plea that they are
the workmen of the principal employer i.e. bank. To raise such a mutually destructive plea is impermissible in law.
Such mutually destructive plea should not be allowed to be raised. Common law principle of estoppel waiver and
acquaintance are applicable in the industrial adjudication. In the context the hand can be laid on decision in case of
7492
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Steel Authority of India V/S. Union of India 2006 (12 SC 243) wherein in para 28 of the judgment it has been observed
that such inconsistent plea is not permissible.
26.
On going through the order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the said WP No. 6247/1998 it has been observed
as follows:
“We have gone through the orders passed by this court on 19.1.1999 and 1.2.1999 and we do not see any
protection granted by this court and as sought to be continued. Undoubtedly the contract labours employed
by Respondent bank shall be continued subject to the requirement and by following the statutory obligations
including the payment of wages etc. and they need not be dis-continued only because this petition has been
disposed of.”
27.
In view of these observations of Hon’ble Bombay High Court even after the termination of contract in between
M/s. Golden Enterprises and the bank the concerned workmen were continued and were paid wages by the bank by
depositing the wages in their respective bank accounts. That does not mean that the bank has orally appointed them as
its employees on regular basis even without following the statutory procedure.
28.
Learned Counsel for the concerned workman / union submitted that the bank was paying bonus to the concerned
employees. He refers to Ex.17 to submit that the bank was making payment through bankers’ cheque. Therefore the
submission is that as per Section 10 of Payment of Bonus Act, the employer is bound to pay the bonus. Section 2(14)
of Payment of Bonus Act defines employer and it says that in relation to any other establishment the person who or the
authority which was the ultimate control over the affairs of the establishment and the managing agent is the employer.
He submits that as per section 21(4) the principal employer is not liable to pay bonus, gratuity as wages does not
include it. He is liable to pay only wages if the contractors fails to pay wages. Since S.B.I. has paid bonus to the
concerned employees it can be said that S.B.I. has engaged concerned workman directly and the bank is the employer
of the concerned workmen who are covered under the Payment of Bonus Act.
29.
This submission is also not acceptable since in the decision in case of Indian Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. V/S. State of
West Bengal & Ors. 2011 (4 LLM 158), Calcutta, it has been observed in para 20 of the judgment that,
“There is no warrant for the proposition that in every case where the bonus is paid to an employee, the same
is an indicator of the employee being a regular employee. The company is an establishment in public sector.
The provisions of bonus act would apply to it only if it satisfies the conditions mentioned in sub section (1)
of section 20 thereof. If indeed the company was obliged to pay bonus to its regular employees and had in
the process shared its profits with the contract labours by paying the bonus in terms of bonus act, the very
action of extending benefits of the social welfare legislation to said labours would not change their status to
regular employees of the company.”
30.
Next submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman is that the contractor did not obtain necessary
licence. In this respect also it is necessary to refer the observations in para 20 of the citation cited supra. It has been
observed that if at all the contractor did not obtain the licence it would open to the authority concerned to take action
against it under section 23 of CLRA Act but for that the company cannot be penalized and the contract labours
employed by such erring contractor be thrust upon it. Non-obtaintion of licence without anything more would not
clothe the Respondent with any legal right to claim that they are the direct employees of the company and hence
entitled to continue in service despite the contract with KNYCEE not being renewed.
In view of this legal position it can be said that even if the contract between the bank and the contractor namely
M/s. Golden Enterprises was cancelled and could not be renewed that does not give right to the concerned employee /
union to claim that they are direct employees of the bank.
31.
Next submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman is that there is no documentary evidence to
show that Shri Selvam was the contractor after the contract of M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned. He submits
that before RLC the settlement of Minimum wages was reached between the bank and workman / union and the bank
has accepted to pay the minimum wages to the concerned workman. In view of that the submission is that after the
contract with M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned, it was the bank who paid the wages to the concerned employees
by depositing the wages in their bank account and thereby the bank has accepted it to be the employer of the concerned
workman.
32.
It is no doubt true that there is no documentary evidence to prove that Selvam was submitting the bills on the
basis of which the wages were deposited in the bank account of each workman. But then Selvam was one of the worker
along with other employees. Even the workman herself has admitted in her cross-examination that due to inter-se
dispute between the workers they requested the bank to make the direct payment and arrangement was worked out. In
view of that it can be said that some arrangement was worked out in respect of payment to these workmen after the
contract between the bank and M/s. Golden Enterprises was abandoned.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7493
33.
In view of this, it is the submission of Learned Counsel for the bank that the workmen concerned were continued
to be engaged by K.P. Selvam as a contract labour after original contractor ran away and no wages were directly paid to
them by the bank. In view of admission of the concerned workman that the arrangement was worked out after the inter-
se dispute between the workers it can be very well said that the concerned workmen were paid wages directly in their
bank account by way of this arrangement which was worked out. Therefore that will not give them the status of regular
employees since initially they were engaged by the contractor and then there is no documentary evidence to show that
the concerned workman was appointed by the bank.
34.
It is then submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman that the concerned workman was doing
the work of sweeping and cleaning under the direction, control and supervision of first party bank. He refers to copies
of attendance register to submit that those registers are maintained by the bank and it bears the signatures of Waze,
Kulkarni and Bhosale who are the bank officers. In view of this it is submitted that the bank officers were having
control over the work carried out by the concerned employees.
35.
In his cross examination witness Sudhir Ramchandra has denied the suggestion to the effect that the bank was
having control over the work carried out by the concerned employees and that Mr. Jatar, Sudhir Pawar, Dube,
Karkhanis were supervising the work and were allotting the work to the concerned employees. Even if some anxious
consideration is given to this submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman then also it can be said that
merely because the contract labour work is under the supervisions of officers of principal employer it cannot be taken
as evidence of direct employment under the principal employer. In the decision in case of International Airport
Authority of India V/S. International Air Cargo Union and Anr. 2009 (13 SCC 374) it has been observed in para 54 of
the judgment that,
“Exercise of some control over the activities of the contract labour while they discharge their duties as
labours is inevitable and such exercise is not sufficient to hold that the contract labour will become the direct
employee of the principal employer.”
36.
In the light of above observations I hold that there does not exist employer-employee relationship between the
first party bank and second party workman. But then it is submission of the Learned Counsel for the concerned
workman that the concerned workman had worked for 240 days and continuously in every completed year of service
and her services came to be terminated without following the procedure laid down under section 25 of I.D. Act, 1947.
In this view the submission is that the said termination is illegal and improper.
37.
This submission is also not acceptable since the fact remains that the concerned workman was engaged by the
contractor and after termination of the contract her services came to an end.
38.
For it is explicit from the evidence of Sudhir Jalanwar, the witness of the bank that on 10.11.2010 the bank
published tender notice in local newspapers for maintenance and house-keeping of bank premises. The bank also
suggested the contract labours to form a society, partnership firm or a company for participating in the tender process.
Contract labours did not pay heed to the suggestion made by the bank. The tender process was completed on
16.12.2011 and the contract for maintenance and house-keeping of the bank premises was awarded to contractor who
had quoted the lowest rates. The new contractor displayed the notice on the bank’s notice board stating that he was
given contract for maintenance and house-keeping of the banks premises and invited those who were interested to work
with him to approach him. However, the concerned workman and other workers did not avail this opportunity to work
under the new contractor. The fact remains therefore that after termination of earlier contract the services of the
concerned workman automatically came to an end.
39.
In view of this, the Learned Counsel for the first party bank submitted that though concerned workman had
worked for 240 days in a year, her appointment was not from the regular stream of appointment and therefore is not
entitled for regularization. He seeks to rely on the decision in case of Dena Bank V/S. Ashraf Yalu Shaikh 2009 III
CLR 426 to submit that since the appointment of the concerned workman was not from the regular stream of
appointment they are not entitled to reinstatement but only compensation, as envisaged under section 25 of I.D. Act,
1947.
40.
So far the submission of the concerned workman to the effect that first party bank has terminated her services
without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947, it can be said that there is no employer-
employee relationship between the bank and workman and that the services of the workman automatically came to an
end after the new contractor was engaged by the bank after following tender process. It is not therefore possible to
accept the submission of Learned Counsel for the concerned workman that the termination is illegal on account that it
was without following the procedure laid down in section 25-F of I.D. Act, 1947.
41.
Realising this difficulty, Learned Counsel for the concerned workman submitted that by way of settlement, the
similarly situated workmen and employees in Mumbai were absorbed in services of the bank and therefore the first
7494
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
party bank has violated the principles of equity before law and gave different treatment to some set of employees in
Mumbai by neglecting section 12(3) and 18(3) of I.D. Act, 1947 and therefore the termination is illegal. The
submission is again other way round. There is no evidence of such discrimination. If any such agreement has been
reached then it has no relation with the present dispute. The present dispute is squarely covered by W.P. No.
6247/1998 and the same has to be dealt with in the light of order passed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the said
writ petition. In view of that the concerned workman cannot base a claim on the basis of settlement entered into in a
different matter under different circumstances.
42.
Considering all these facts, I hold that action of management in terminating the services of concerned workman
w.e.f. 6.1.2012 is legal and justified. The above issues are therefore answered accordingly as against each of them in
terms of above observations.
Issue No. 4 & 5 :
43.
In view of my finding the above issues, the concerned workman is not entitled to be re-instated in the services of
first party bank with continuity of service and other consequential benefits. He is not entitled to relief claimed. Thus
order.
ORDER
Reference is rejected with no order as to costs.
Date: 20.07.2017
M. V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2247-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj iQwM
dkjiksjs'ku vkWiQ bafM;k ,aM vnlZ ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k&lg&Je U;k;ky;] vgenkckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 391@2004) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 04-09-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&22012@246@2000&vkbZvkj (lh&II)º
jktsUæ flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2017
S.O. 2247.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 391/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, Ahmedabad as shown in Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. Food
Corporation of India and others and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 04.09.2017.
[No. L-22012/246/2000-IR (C-II)]
RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
AHMEDABAD
Present :
Pramod Kumar Chaturvedi,
Presiding Officer, CGIT-cum-Labour Court,
Ahmedabad,
Dated 06th July, 2017
Reference: (CGITA) No. 391/2004
1.
The District Manager,
Food Corporation of India,
Amruta Estate, Rajkot (Gujarat)
2.
The Asset. Manager,
Food Corporation of India,
At. Than, Surendranagar (Gujarat)
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7495
3.
Mr. A.M. Kathi,
H & T Contractor, Thangadh,
Surendranagar (Gujarat)
4.
The Manager,
M/s San Roadlines, H & T Contractor,
Thangadh, Surendranagar (Gujarat)
5.
The Manager,
M/s Vaishali Corporaton,
8-D Swetal Apartments Shahpur Bahai Centre,
Ahmedabad
…First Party
V/s
The Org. Secretary,
Gujarat Rajya Ardhasarkari Audhyogik Karamachari Sangh,
4, Alap Fats, Damubhai Colony, Opp. Anjali Cinema,
Vasna Road,
Ahmedabad (Gujarat)
…Second Party
For the First Party
:
Shri Ashim A. Saiyad
For the Second Party
:
Shri R.C. Pathak
AWARD
The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-
22012/246/2000-IR(C-II) dated 25.04.2001 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad
(Gujarat) in respect of the matter specified in the Schedule:
SCHEDULE
“Whether the demand of Gujarat Rajya Ardhasarkari Audhyogik Karamachari Sangh in demanding
regularisation of 153 employees as per list enclosed as regular employee of Food Corporation of India from the
date of their initial appointment along with all other benefits with 18% interest and cost of litigation is justified?
If so, what relief the workmen are entitled?”
1.
The reference dates back to 25.04.2001. The second party submitted the statement of claim Ex. 9 on 27.05.2001
along with application of interim relief Ex. 10. The first party submitted the written statement Ex. 16 along with the
vakalatpatra Ex. 15 on 09.10.2001. Since then the second party has not been leading evidence. Today on 06.07.2017,
the advocate for the second party workman Shri Chintan Goyal and Shri R.C. Pathak are present. Shri Chintan Goyal
orally informed that the workman has not been in his contact, Tribunal may pass appropriate order.
2.
Thus, in the light of the submission of the advocate of the second party workman, the reference in the absence of
the second party workman, is disposed of with the observation as under: “the demand of Gujarat Rajya Ardhasarkari
Audhyogik Karamachari Sangh in demanding regularisation of 153 employees as per list enclosed as regular employee
of Food Corporation of India from the date of their initial appointment along with all other benefits with 18% interest
and cost of litigation is unjustified.”
P. K. CHATURVEDI, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2248-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj bZ-lh-,y-
ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k&lg&Je U;k;ky;] vklulksy ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 45@2007) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 29-08-2017
dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&22012@305@2006&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º
jktsUæ flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
7496
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2017
S.O. 2248.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 45/2007) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, Asansol as shown in Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. E.C.L. and
others and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 29.08.2017.
[No. L-22012/305/2006-IR (CM-II)]
RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL.
PRESENT : Shri Pramod Kumar Mishra, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO. 45 OF 2007
PARTIES :
The management of Narsamuda Project of M/s. E.C.L.
v/s
Shri Bijoy Bhattacharjee
REPRESENTATIVES :
For the Management
:
Shri P. K. Goswami, Learned Advocate
For the Union (Workman)
:
Shri R. K. Tripathi, Learned Union Representative
Industry: Coal
State : West Bengal
Dated : 16.08.2017
AWARD
In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub-section (1) and Sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter NO. L-
22012/305/2006–IR(CM-II) dated 05.07.2007 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this
Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of management of Narsamuda Project in not regularizing Shri Bijoy Bhattacharjee as
Clerk is legal and justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?”
1.
Having received the Order NO. L-22012/305/2006–IR(CM-II) dated 05.07.2007 of the above said reference
from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a Reference Case No. 45 of
2007 was registered on 18.07.2007. Accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the
registered post to the parties concerned, directing them to appear in the court, on the date fixed and to file their written
statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said
order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned. Both the parties appeared in the Tribunal,
through their representative.
2.
The workman Shri Bijoy Bhattacharjee has filed written statement through Union Representative. He has stated
in his written statement that he is a permanent employee of the company having designation as Security Guard, U.M.
No. 615498 and posted at Narsamuda Colliery under Sodepur Area of M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited. Shri Bijoy
Bhattacharjee was engaged to work in different clerical jobs like Bill section, Cash Section off and on as required by
the management of Narsamuda Colliery under Sodepur Area of M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited as there is shortage of
clerk. The colliery management, due to shortage of clerical staff at Narsamuda colliery under Sodepur Area of M/s.
Eastern Coalfields Limited, engaged workman to work of making Daily Manpower Report, Statistical Report and
Salary Bill of worker of the colliery when required by management of Narsamuda colliery under Sodepur Area of M/s.
Eastern Coalfields Limited. The Manager of Narsamuda Colliery under Sodepur Area of M/s. Eastern Coalfields
Limited sent letter to Dy.CPM of Sodepur Area vide Letter No. NSP/C-6/1084 dated 22.03.2004 to regularize the
workman as Clerk. The Senior P.O./Manager of Narsamuda Colliery under Sodepur Area of M/s. Eastern Coalfields
Limited initiated Note sheet No.NSP/C-6/05/90 dated 09.05.2005 for regularization of the workman concerned from
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7497
Security Guard to Clerk Grade - II keeping in view that he is working as Bill Clerk since long and considering his
outstanding athletic performance in different meets like ECL, CIL, etc. The workman as well as Union Representative
represented before the management for regularization of workman, but the management did not pay any heed. Since
the workman has been working to the satisfaction of the superiors as Clerk, therefore he deserves regularization as
Clerk Grade - II. The workman has prayed that management of Narsamuda Colliery under Sodepur Area of M/s.
Eastern Coalfields Limited be directed to regularize Shri Bijoy Bhattacharjee as Clerk.
3.
The reference belongs to the year 2007. The Tribunal afforded many opportunities to Narsamuda Colliery under
Sodepur Area of M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited to file written statement but in spite of that the management did not
care to file written statement. The Tribunal with no option left closed the opportunity of submitting written statement on
10.9.2015. The management of Narsamuda Colliery under Sodepur Area of M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited even did
not file ‘Vakalatnama’ or Authorization of their Advocate.
4.
The workman has filed the following documents:-
(i) Photocopy of the Office Order dated 25/26.02.2003, (ii) Photocopy of the Office Order having Ref. No.
Pd/C-6/11/73-G/2255 dated 01.02.2011, (iii) Photocopy of the Gist of discussion between Chairman, C.I.L. and
Trade Union dated 15.09.2014, (iv) Photocopy of the Cadre Scheme for Ministerial staff, (v) Photocopy of the
Educational Qualification of the workman, (vi) Photocopy of the Letter No. NSP/C-6/1084 dated 20/22.03.2004,
(vii) Photocopy of the Letter No. NSP/C-6-05/90 dated 09.05.2005, (viii) Photocopy of the Attendance Register
of the concerned workman Shri Bijoy Bhattacharjee from 16.04.2003 to 30.06.2006 and November-2006 to
October-2010.
The workman Shri Bijoy Bhattacharjee has filed affidavit in his oral evidence. Since management of concerned
colliery has not authorized their Advocate or any Officer, therefore, none appeared to cross-examine the workman Shri
Bijoy Bhattacharjee.
5.
I have heard the argument of Shri R. K. Tripathi, the learned Union Representative on behalf of the workman
Shri Bijoy Bhattacharjee.
The learned Union Representative Shri R. K. Tripathi, the learned Union Representative has argued that Shri
Bijoy Bhattacharjee was deployed to work as Clerk on an authorization issued by Sr. P.O dated 26.2.2003. Since Shri
Bijoy Bhattacharjee has not been regularized as clerk, therefore he preferred Industrial Dispute. During pendency of
reference, the management regularized the workman as Bill Clerk, Grade - III by Office order No. Pd/C-6/11//73-
G/2255 dated 01.02.2011 subject to condition that it will be effective when Shri Bijoy Bhattacharjee will withdraw his
reference. He has also argued that by same Office Order other thirteen persons have been regularized in Grade-III.
Since the workman has been working before 2003 in Grade -III, therefore he ought to be regularized in Grade - II.
6.
The workman Shri Bijoy Bhattacharjee is a permanent employee of the company. His initial appointment is as
Security Guard, U.M. No. 615498. He is posted at Narsamuda Colliery under Sodepur Area of M/s. Eastern Coalfields
Limited. The Sr. Personnel Officer by Office Order dated 25/26.02.2003 has directed the concerned workman to work
as Clerk with immediate effect. As per evidence of workman he has been working as Clerk since then. The workman
has filed the copy of Educational Certificate from which it reveals that he has passed ‘Madhyamik Pariksha’
(Secondary Examination) in the year 1981 and has passed Higher Secondary Examination in the year 1983. Therefore,
he possesses the necessary qualification to work as a Clerk. The copy of Cadre Scheme for Ministerial Staff of M/s.
Eastern Coalfields Limited has been filed by the workman. For selection in Clerical Grade - III, the necessary
qualification is Matriculation (Madhyamik) or equivalent examination from any recognized Board of examination.
The workman should possess 3 (Three) years experience in company service for promotion in Clerical Grade - II.
Same educational qualification is essential condition but he must have experience of three years in Clerical Grade - III.
As per letter dated 25/26.02.2003 of Sr. Personnel Officer of Narsamuda Colliery under Sodepur Area of M/s. Eastern
Coalfields Limited he has been working in Clerical Cadre from 2003. As per Cadre Scheme he will be eligible for
appointment in Clerical Grade - II after 26.02.2006. But the Manager of Sodepur Area of M/s. Eastern Coalfields
Limited by his Office Order regularized Shri Bijoy Bhattacharjee as Bill Clerk in Grade- III with effect from
07.01.2011. Even the Manager of Sodepur Area has not implemented his own order. The concerned workman has been
directed to be regularized after withdrawal of reference pending in this Tribunal. This condition is contrary to law.
Since the workman has been working from February, 2003 in clerical Grade - III cadre, then from March, 2006 he will
be eligible for promotion in Clerical Grade - II as per Cadre Scheme of Ministerial Staff of M/s. Eastern Coalfields
Limited.
7.
The action of management of Narsamuda Colliery under Sodepur Area of M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited in not
regularizing Shri Bijoy Bhattacharjee as Clerk is illegal and unjustified. The workman is entitled to be regularized in
Clerk, Grade - II from March, 2006.
7498
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ORDER
Let an “Award” be and the same is passed as per above discussion. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of
India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
PRAMOD KUMAR MISHRA, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 19 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2249-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj iQwM
dkjiksjs'ku vkWiQ bafM;k ,aM vnlZ ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k&lg&Je U;k;ky;] Hkqous'oj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 19@2008) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh;
ljdkj dks 21-08-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&22012@250@2007&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º
jktsUæ flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 19th September, 2017
S.O. 2249.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 19/2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. Food
Corporation of India and others and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 21.08.2017.
[No. L-22012/250/2007-IR (CM-II)]
RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT BHUBANESWAR
Present :
Shri B.C. Rath,
Presiding Officer, C.G.I.T.-cum-Labour
Court, Bhubaneswar.
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO. 19/2008
Date of Passing Award – 11th July, 2017
Between :
1.
The General Manager,
Food Corporation of India,
Khadya Bhawan, Vani Vihar, Bhubaneswar,
Orissa.
2.
The Area Manager,
Food Corporation of India, Jeypore,
Dist. Koraput, Orissa.
…1st Party-Managements.
(And)
The Joint Secretary,
Food Corporation of India Workers Union,
58/1, Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkatta – 700 023.
…2nd Party-Union.
Appearances :
M/s. B.K. Mohanty, Advocate
…
For the 1st Party-Managements
Shri B. Mohapatra, Vice President,
…
For the 2nd Party- Union
FCI Workers Union.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7499
AWARD
The award is directed against a reference made by the Government of India, in the Ministry of Labour vide its
letter No. L-22012/250/2007 – IR(CM-II), dated 09.05.2008 in exercising its jurisdiction under section 10 of the I.D.
Act (herein-after referred to as “the Act”) for adjudication of a dispute between Food Corporation of India and its
Workers Union and the schedule of the reference is here-under:-
“Whether the action of the Management of Food Corporation of India in changing the name of shri Rama Kristo
Bhoi as Shri Ram Kristo resulting in denial of wages to him is legal and justified? To what relief is the
workman concerned entitled?”
2.
The factual matrix giving rise to the dispute is that one Rama Kristo Bhoi son of Shri Sridhar Bhoi, Village-
Fatepur, P.S. Tihidi, Dist. Bhadrak is working as a Handling labour in the Depot of the Managements at Rayagada. He
is stated to be an illiterate person and while entering into the service of the Management on 15.6.1997 he submitted a
Bio Data form mentioning his name and address. He got the Bio Data form filled up by a literate person and he affixed
his left thumb impression (L.T.I.) on the form and presented before his employer. Inadvertently his name was
described as “Rama Kristo” instead of “Rama Kristo Bhoi”. However, his service book was opened in the name of
Rama Kristo Bhoi and in all official records his name was recorded as Rama Kristo Bhoi. The above name was
communicated to other concerned authorities including the C.P.F. Board of Trust and Provident Fund Authorities. The
wage of the said workman was being paid by account payee cheques and as such he opened a Bank Account recording
his name as “Rama Kristo Bhoi”. Cheques were issued in the said name towards his wages from time to time and the
above name was accepted by the Management from the date of his entry into the service i.e. in the year 1997 till June,
2005. But, from July, 2005 onwards the Management issued the cheques in the name of Rama Kristo. The workman
refused to accept the said cheque for his wages as his S.B. Account was in the name of Rama Kristo Bhoi. It is the
assertion of the 2nd party-Union that the workman is recorded in the name of “Rama Kristo Bhoi” in all registers and
official documents and there was no occasion on the part of the Managements to modify his name in official
transaction. The decision taken by the Managements to change the recorded name of the workman was an unilateral
one as a result of which he was denied monthly wages as the cheques issued in the name of “Rama Kristo” was not en-
cashed. Hence, the workman raised a dispute through the 2nd party-Union before the Asst. Labour Commissioner
(Central) which culminates the present reference.
3.
The Managements have contested the claim taking a stand that the workman had entered into the service by
disclosing his name as Rama Kristo son of Sridhar Bhoi of Village Fatepur, P.s. Tihidi, Dist. Bhadrak in the Bio Data
Form submitted by him. The surname “Bhoi” was inadvertently added in the service record of the workman as he
submitted application in the name of “Rama Kristo Bhoi” for other purposes including for a PAN Card and for opening
of a Bank Account. When the discrepancy was detected, an enquiry was held by the Collector. It is alleged by the
Management that during the enquiry it was detected that the workman entered into the service by committing
impersonation as the enquiry revealed that Shri Sridhar Bhoi of village Fatepur has no son either in the name of “Rama
Kristo” or “Rama Kristo Bhoi”. According to the Management the workman managed to enter his name as “Rama
Kristo Bhoi” in all official records when he was transferred from F.S.D. Nawarangpur to F.S.D. Rayagada in the year
1999. After detection of the above manipulation in official records by the workman, the Management made an enquiry
and found that the workman though disclosed his name “Rama Kristo” in the Bio Data form, he managed to make
entries in other official records as Rama Kristo Bhoi. Since the workman entered into the service by committing
impersonation and fraud an FIR was lodged and investigation was taken up by the CBI. It is the claim of the
Management that the investigation is pending and it has not committed any illegality or irregularity by issuing cheques
in the name of Rama Kristo towards the wages of the workman. Thus, there being no industrial dispute the reference
needs no judicial adjudication and the claim of the disputant shall be out-rightly rejected.
4.
On the aforesaid pleadings of the parties the following issues are framed for just and proper adjudication of the
reference.
ISSUES
1.
Whether the action of the Management of Food Corporation of India in changing the name of Shri Rama
Kristo Bhoi as Rama Kristo resulting the denial of wages to him as legal and justified?
2.
To what relief is the workman concerned entitled?
5.
The oral and documentary evidence have been led by the parties to substantiate their respective stands. The
Union has examined the disputant workman and filed documents like xerox copy of filled in Bio Data Form, xerox
copy of I-Card issued by the Management, xerox copy of the PAN Card, copy of the wage book of the Management,
copy of the O.F. Account showing his name, copy of his savings Bank pass book, copy of I-Card issued by the
Management, copy of cheque dated 6.8.2005 issued to him, copy of same cheque where name is again corrected, copy
of representation dated 6.2.2007, copy of some representations given to the management on different dates, copy of
7500
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
certificate issued by village Sarpanch to him, copy of certificate issued by Tihidi Block Samiti Sabhya to him,
certificate issued by the ward member to him, copy of the certificate issued by the Revenue Inspec tor, copy of the
affidavit by his father, copy of the affidavit made by him, copy of the pay slips issued by the Management, copy of
booking-cum-out-slip issued by the Management, copy of the application made by him to R.L.C.(C) for change of
name in C.P.F. record, copy of transfer order issued by the management to him, copy of birth certificate issued to him
and copy of the residential-cum-nativity certificate issued by the Tahasildar which are marked as Ext.- 1 to Ext.- 26 in
support of its statement of claim whereas, the Management has examined its area Manager Jaypore, and Manager, FCI
Depot of F.S.D. Nawangapur and filed xerox copy of the investigation of the CBI dated 3.5.2005, xerox copy of the Bio
Data of the disputant, xerox copy of the report of the Collector, Bhadrak, xerox copy of the correspondence received
from the FCI Zonal Office Kolkatta rectifying the name in the C.P.F. Account marked as Ext.-A to Ext.-D to refute the
allegation raised by the disputant workman.
FINDINGS
6.
All the issues are taken up together for the sake of convenience.
From the pleadings of the parties it is crystal clear that the dispute relates to payment of wages to the disputant
workman through cheques drawn in favour of Rama Kristo, though the workman is known and recorded as Rama
Kristo Bhoi for all purposes in the official records. It seems that the Management is not prepared to accept the identity
of the workman as Rama Kristo Bhoi on account of he being named as Rama Kristo in his Bio Data application when
he entered into the service and an enquiry conducted through the office of the Collector, Bhadrak revealed that Sridhar
Bhoi, Village Fatepur, Ps. Tihidi, Dist. Bhadrak, who is named as father of the disputant workman in the Bio Data
form, had no son in the name of Rama Kristo. Evidence has also been led by the Management and report of the
Revenue Inspector of Kolha has been exhibited to establish that Sridhar Bhoi had four sons namely Ramakristo Bhoi,
Sarat Kumar Bhoi, Rajendra Kumar Bhoi, & Ranjan Kumar Bhoi and Rama Kristo and Bipin Kumar Bhoi are not the
same person. It is the claim of the Management that the disputant workman entered into the service by committing
impersonation and as the matter is under investigation by the CBI, the Management has not committed any wrong or
illegality in issuing cheques in favour of Rama Kristo towards his monthly wages.
7.
It is elicited from the witness of the Management that he was not aware of the result of the criminal
investigation. There is no material before the Tribunal to establish that the disputant workman is ever charge-sheeted
either by the police or by the CBI for entering into the service by an impersonation or fraud. He is not also held guilty
for such alleged impersonation or fraud while entering into the service. From the pleadings and evidence of the parties
it is crystal clear that the disputant workman was performing his work as a handling labourer and as such, he is legally
and genuinely entitled to receive wages for doing handling work irrespective of he being identified either Rama Kristo
or Rama Kristo Bhoi. Though the Managements have asserted and adduced evidence to establish their claim that the
disputant made his entry into the service by disclosing Rama Kristo in his Bio Data and he was known in the said name
for all official purposes till he was transferred from Nawarangpur to F.S.D. to Rayagada F.S.D. no documents except
Xerox copy of the Bio Data Form allegedly submitted by the disputant workman have been produced by the
Managements in support of their claim. On a close scrutiny of the said form which is marked as Ext.-1 it is found that
there are two separate heads for the purpose of the identity of the applicant. In one head the applicant is required to
disclose his first name and in the second space/head he is required to mention his surname. It is found that the surname
head remains blank whereas, Rama Kristo is mentioned against the first head/space meant for name. Further, in the Bio
Data Form the disputant disclosed his father’s name as Sridhar Bhoi of Village, Fatepur, Ps. Tihidi, Dist. Bhadrak. The
permanent address of the disputant workman and the village of Sridhar Bhoi are found to be identical. Most of the
exhibits relied upon by the disputant workman are official records/documents of the Management wherein the disputant
workman is shown as Rama Kristo Bhoi. Out of those exhibits Ext.-4, Ext.-5 Ext.-6 related to the period of his posting
at Nawarangpur/Jaypore. It is emerging from the evidence of the parties that the disputant workman is identified as
Rama Kristo Bhoi in his service book. There is also no serious dispute to the claim of the disputant workman that he
has been identified as Rama Kristo Bhoi in the C.P.F. Board of Trust and Provident Fund Accounts. In the above back-
drops it cannot be ruled out that the disputant workman had inadvertently left the surname head of the Bio Data Form
blank. When the investigation on the allegation of impersonation and fraud allegedly committed by the disputant
workman is yet to be completed and he is yet to be held guilty by a Court of law for committing such fraud or
impersonation, it is premature to say that the disputant workman entered into the service by committing any fraud or
impersonation. He is not also removed from the service having been found by any departmental enquiry that he entered
into service by manipulating official records or by impersonating his name. If any anomaly is found in the official
records with regard to the name and identity of the disputant workman he could have been asked to give an undertaking
or sworn affidavit that he is Rama Kristo Bhoi and his surname has not been mentioned inadvertently in the Bio Data
Form submitted by him. When the workman is said to have performed his job/duty, his wages is supposed to have been
paid to him. There is no dispute from the side of the Management that the disputant workman whether he is known as
Rama Kristo or Rama Kristo Bhoi had performed his duties and as such he is required to be paid wages. Making
payment of wages through a cheque drawn in a name other than the name of the disputant workman in which he is
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7501
officially recognized would amount to denial of wage/wages to him. When the disputant workman is known as Rama
Kristo Bhoi in all papers of the Management except in the Bio Data Form where the surname head remains blank, the
Management cannot be said justified in making payment of wages of the disputant workman in shape of cheque or draft
drawn in favour of Rama Kristo.
8.
Therefore, for the reasons mentioned above, the action of the Management of Food Corporation of India in
changing the name of the disputant workman Shri Rama Kristo Bhoi as Rama Kristo and making payment of his wages
through cheques drawn in favour of Rama Kristo cannot be held legal and justified.
9.
The reference is answered accordingly.
Dictated & Corrected by me.
B. C. RATH, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 19 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2250-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ ,vj
bf.M;k fyfeVsM ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 31@2000) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks
03-09-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&11012@123@1999&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º
,e- ds- flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 19th September, 2017
S.O. 2250.— In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 31/2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. Air
India Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 03.09.2017.
[No. L-11012/123/1999-IR (C-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, MUMBAI
PRESENT : M.V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO. CGIT-2/31 of 2000
EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF
AIR INDIA LIMITED
The Managing Director
Air India Ltd.
Air India Building
Nariman Point
Mumbai-400021.
AND
THEIR WORKMAN
Mr. D.N. Vinjuda
B-18, Mahalaxmi
B.N. Rathod Marg
Tulsiwadi
Mumbai 400 034.
APPEARANCES :
FOR THE EMPLOYER
:
Mr. L.L. D’Souza, Representative
FOR THE WORKMAN
:
In person
7502
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Mumbai, dated the 12th May, 2017
AWARD PART-II
1.
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment by its Order No.L-11012/123/99 -IR (C-I) dated
07/03/2000 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of
the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:
“Whether the action of the management of Air India Ltd., Mumbai in dismissing the services of Mr.
D.N.Winjuda, Sr. Handyman w.e.f. 11.12.1997 is legal and justified? If not to what relief is the workman
concerned entitled?”
2.
After receipt of the reference notices were issued to both the parties. In response to the notice the second party
workman filed his statement of claim at Ex-9.According to the workman he is permanent employee of the first party
recruited on 12/10/1982 as a Sweeper, Inflight Service Department, Mumbai.In 1990 he was promoted as Sr.
Handyman (Safai) and was confirmed in the post. On 27/10/1993 he had gone to Dubai as a passenger by purchasing
regular ticket to purchase a colour TV and clothes. After three days he returned back. He collected the amount by
encashing his savings certificate and pledging ornaments of his wife and some amount out of his savings. He returned
on 31/10/1993. He paid customs duty on the goods he had imported. Same day evening at about 6.00 p.m. some
officers from AIU came to his house and started questioning him. They became violent and started assaulting him in
presence of wife and children. They then took him to the customs office and obtained his signature on the documents.
They had also brought Mr.Solanki with them. They had taken search of his house. Nil Panchnama was prepared. They
had obtained signature of his wife without reading the contents. Nothing was recovered from his house. However they
have falsely shown that some gold bars were found in the cupboard. Three days thereafter the workman was arrested
under some false charges. The workman was put under suspension by order dt.12/11/1993 with immediate effect. A
charge sheet was issued to him dated 23/02/1994 alleging that during search in presence of Mr. L.R.Solanki, 92 gold
bars of different makings were found in the locker of steel cupboard. It was alleged that the workman had concealed
the gold bars in comode of first class and was charged for misconduct for breach of law, dishonesty with employers
business and for act of subversive of discipline. He requested the first party not to initiate inquiry until he received the
copies of the papers from Customs Department. However his request was turned down.
3.
According to him the joint inquiry was commenced against he himself, Shri Godambe, Assistant Cabin
Supervisor, and Shri L.R.Solanki, Handyman. He filed his reply. However he kept his right open to file a detailed
reply after receipt of papers from Customs Office. The committee refused to bring the panch witnesses Mr.Shrivatsan
Iyengar and Surendra Chouhan and bring as their own witnesses. E.C. under the guise of clarification helped the
management story by knocking out favourable answers from the witnesses. According to him Mr. Solanki and he told
before the Inquiry Committee that the panchnama was prepared in the office and no gold bar was recovered from his
house. He has not brought any gold from Dubai and no gold was recovered from house. There was no first class toilet
in the airbus he had travelled. There was no report of contraband rules in aircraft. The inquiry conducted was an empty
formality. It was not conducted as per the rules and regulations. The inquiry was not conducted with open mind and
EC sought clarification from the witnesses before cross examination. The panchnama is a fabricated document. There
is violation of natural justice in conducting the inquiry. The findings of the Inquiry officer are perverse. There is no
evidence that the gold bars were found in the house of the workman. The inquiry is not fair and proper and findings of
the IO are perverse. On the basis of report of IO the workman was dismissed from service. Therefore workman has
raised the industrial dispute before ALC (C). As conciliation failed, on the basis of the report of ALC(C), the Labour
Ministry has sent the reference to this Tribunal. The workman therefore prays that the inquiry be declared not fair and
proper. The findings of the IO be declared perverse. His punishment of termination be set aside and he be directed to
be reinstated in service with full back wages.
4.
The first party resisted the statement of claim of the workman vide its Written statement at Ex-11. According to
them the Customs Intelligence Officers with search warrant, took search of residence of the workman in presence of
two panchas. During search, in the cupboard locker the customs officers recovered two cloth bundles. On examination
thereof they found 92 gold bars of 10 tolas each weighing totally 10,727.2 grams valued at Rs.38,56,421/- in
international monetary value and Rs. 48,70,140/- in local monetary value. The gold was seized under panchnama. The
workman confessed to have given the gold bars by Shri L.R.Solanki and Mr. S.V. Godambe working in the
catering/cabin service of the Airline. The workman has travelled as passenger and smuggled the gold into India.
Therefore he was arrested alongwith others and apart from criminal case, departmental inquiry was initiated against
them. The workman was allowed to represent by defence counsel of his choice. He was given full and fair opportunity
to defend his case. He was also offered an opportunity to lead evidence in his defence. The committee found the
workman guilty of the all the charges leveled against him as they were based on evidence adduced by the Inquiry
Committee. The punishment is proportionate to the misconduct which is grave and sensitive in nature. According to
them the contents in the statement of claim are false. The reference is devoid of merit. They denied all the allegations
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7503
in the statement of claim and submitted that the workman is not entitled to any relief prayed for and therefore prays that
the reference be dismissed with cost.
5.
The workman filed his rejoinder at Ex-12. He denied the contents in the written statement and reiterated his
case put up in the statement of claim.
6.
This Tribunal has passed Award Part – I on 15.07.2013 and held that the domestic enquiry held against the
workman was as per principles of natural justice and the findings of the Inquiry officer are not perverse. This tribunal
therefore directed the parties to argue / lead evidence on the point of quantum of punishment.
7.
Second Party Workman did not adduce any evidence on the issues relating to quantum of punishment and
therefore his evidence was closed. First Party Company has not also adduced evidence. Second Party Workman has
not submitted any written notes of arguments. First Party Company has filed written notes of arguments Ex.41.
8.
In view of that, the following are the issues for my determination and I have recorded my findings thereon for
the reasons to follow:
Sr.
No.
Issues
Findings
1.
Whether the action of the management of Air India
Ltd., Mumbai in dismissing the services of Mr. D.N.
Winjuda w.e.f. 11.12.1997 is legal and justified ?
Yes
2.
If not, what relief the workman is entitled to ?
No
3.
What order ?
As per final order
REASONS
Issue No. 1 :
9.
It appears that the second party workman joined the services as a Sweeper in the Inflight Service Department
w.e.f. 12.10.1982. Thereafter he was employed as Senior Handyman. Enquiry was conducted on the allegations that
during the search made by the Customs Intelligence Officers at the residence of second party workman on 31.10.1993
the Customs officers recovered two cloth bundles containing 92 rectangular shaped gold bars of ten tolas each weighing
totally 10,727.2 grams valued at Rs.38.56 lakhs in the international market and Rs.43.70 lakhs in the local markets.
From the observations of this tribunal in Award Part – I, the fact is deposed before the Inquiry officer by the witnesses
examined before the Inquiry officer. The Commissioner of Customs, Sahar Airport has also confiscated 92 gold bars
worth Rs.38,56,421/- under section 3 (d) (1) of Customs Act, 1962. Commissioner of Customs also imposed penalty of
Rs.3 lakhs to each Shri L.R. Solanki, Shri S.V. Godambe and the workman under section 112A & B of the Customs
Act. Statement of the concerned workman was recorded before the Customs officials under section 108 which is
admissible even in criminal trials so also the departmental proceedings in which they admitted the charge of smuggling.
As such it is held that the findings of the Inquiry officer are based on evidence.
10.
Section 11 of the I.D. Act, 1947 has granted powers to the tribunal to interfere with the punishment imposed by
employer if the tribunal is satisfied on the point that the punishment is not justified. But then the tribunal can interfere
with the decision of the management under section 11A of the act only when it is satisfied with the punishment
imposed by the management is wholly disproportionate to the degree of guilt of the concerned workman. In the
decision in case of Life Insurance Corporation of India V/s. Dhandapani, AIR 2006 (SC 615) it is held that the said
power of the tribunal under section 11A of the act has to be exercised judiciously and mere use of the word
“disproportionate” or “grossly disproportionate” will not be sufficient. Though under Section 11 A the Tribunal has
power to reduce the quantum of punishment. It is to be done within the parameters of law. Possession of power itself
is not sufficient. It has to be exercised in accordance with law. In view of this legal position it is to be seen whether
punishment imposed by the employer is wholly disproportionate to the degree of guilt of the concerned workman or
not?
11.
Second party workman was held guilty after due enquiry of the following charges.
a)
Breach of law applicable to the establishment
b)
Dishonesty in connection with the employer’s business
and,
c)
Act subversive of discipline.
7504
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
12.
The acts of misconduct as alleged is proved against the second party workman for which he was also imposed
the penalty of Rs.3 lakhs by the competent authority under the Customs Act. It cannot be treated as misconduct of
minor or a technical nature. The said misconduct is grave and serious misconduct.
13.
I say so because the act of smuggling from the aircrafts belonging to the first party company is serious
misconduct and it is also an offence against the state. The disciplinary authority in its order of punishment dated
17.10.1997 has observed as under:
“The misconduct for which Mr. Vinjuda has been proved guilty by the enquiry committee is a extremely serious
misconduct. The workman is working in the Catering Cabin Services Section, Mumbai Station, which is a very
sensitive area having direct access to runways, tarmacs, aircrafts, etc. By indulging in the act of smuggling,
which has been proved beyond doubts, the workman has lost confidence of the Management for employment for
the said job. The workman has also not brought out any mitigating or extenuating circumstances which would
warrant a lesser punishment in his reply dated March 04, 1997.
In view of the above, I hereby award him the punishment of dismissal from services of the Company in
accordance with clause 14 (4) (c) of the Model Standing Orders (C).”
14.
In view of that it can be said that the disciplinary authority while imposing punishment of dismissal of the
concerned workman has considered the aspect as regards the grave misconduct of the concerned workman. Even it has
been considered that the workman has not brought out any mitigating or extenuating circumstances which would
warrant lesser punishment. Herein in the instant reference also the concerned workman has not adduced his evidence
point of quantum of punishment to show the mitigating circumstances.
15.
In view of that I find that the punishment imposed on the second party workman of dismissal from services is
just and proper and the same does not warrant any interference under Section 11 A of the I.D. Act. I find that the action
of the management in dismissing the services of the concerned workman is legal and justified. This issued is therefore
answered accordingly.
Issues Nos. 2 & 3 :
16.
In view of my findings to Issue No.1, the workman is not entitled to any relief. Reference is liable to be rejected.
Thus the order:
ORDER
The Reference is rejected with no order as to costs.
Date: 12.05.2017
M. V. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 19 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2251-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ
fVLdks fyfeVsM ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 81@1996) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-
09-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@312@1995&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º
,e- ds- flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 19th September, 2017
S.O. 2251.—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. 81 of 1996) as shown in Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the
management of M/s. TISCO Ltd. and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 06.09.2017.
[No. L-20012/312/1995-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. 81/1996
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7505
Employer in relation to the management of M/s. TISCO Ltd.
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- 16/08/2017
AWARD
By order No. L-20012/312/1995-IR(C-I) dated 7/14.10.1996 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 M/s. TISCO Ltd. In placing Shri Islam, Welder Helper,
6 & 7 Pits Colliery under suspension for 10 days as a penality is justified? If not, to what relief is the
said workman entitled?
2.
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] 19 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2252-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ
chlhlh,y ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 02@2016) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-
09-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@141@2015&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º
,e- ds- flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 19th September, 2017
S.O. 2252.—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. 02 of 2016) 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 06.09.2017.
[No. L-20012/141/2015-IR (CM-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, DHANBAD
In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A) of I.D. Act, 1947
Reference: No. 02 of 2016
Employer in relation to the management of E.J. Area of M/s. BCCL
AND
Their workman
7506
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Present : Shri R. K. Saran, Presiding Officer
Appearances:
For the Employers
:
Shri D.K. Verma, Advocate
For the workman
:
Shri M.N. Rewani, Advocate
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated- 17/08/2017
AWARD
By order No.-L-20012/141/2015/ IR-(CM-I), dated. 23/12/2015 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 Bhowra (North) U.G mines of M/s. BCCL in dismissing
Sri Nungin Manjhi Ex-Miner Loader, Pers. No. 03024858 from the services of the company vide
order No. PS (N) UG Mines/05/955 dated 24/26.08.2005 is fair and justified? To what relief the
concerned workman is entitled to?”
2.
The case is received from the Ministry of Labour on 04.01.2016. After receipt of reference, both parties are
noticed. The Sponsoring Union files their written statement on 31.05.2016. The management files their written
statement-cum-rejoinder on 02.03.2017. Thereafter rejoinder filed by the workman. The point involved in the
reference is that the workman has been dismissed from his services.
3.
During preliminary hearing of this case, domestic enquiry held by the management is accepted by the
Sponsoring Union/workman as Fair & Proper .
4.
The point involved in the reference is that the workman has been dismissed from his services on the ground of
long absence. But he has already out of service for 12 years. It is felt to give another chance to the workman to
serve.
5.
Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I hold that he be taken into job as a fresh employee in Cat-
1 subject to identification. But the workman be kept under probation for a period two year. Therefore the question of
back wages does not arise at all.
This is my award.
R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 19 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2253-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ
chlhlh,y ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 26@2008) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-
09-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@45@2008&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º
,e- ds- flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 19th September, 2017
S.O. 2253.—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. 26 of 2008) 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 06.09.2017.
[No. L-20012/45/2008-IR (CM-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7507
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. 26 of 2008
Employer in relation to the management of Katras Area of M/s. BCCL
AND
Their workman
Present : Shri R. K. Saran, Presiding Officer
Appearances:
For the Employers
:
Shri D.K. Verma, Advocate
For the workman
:
Shri Pintu Mondal, Rep.
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated- 16/08/2017
AWARD
By order No.-L-20012/45/2008-IR (CM-I), dated. 28/05/2008 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 East Katras Colliery of M/s. BCCL in dismissing
Sri Birju Bhuia M/Loader from the services of the company w.e.f. 10/11/1999 is justified? To what
relief is the concerned workman entitled ?”
2.
The case is received from the Ministry of Labour on 02.06.2008. After receipt of reference, both parties are
noticed. But after long delay the Sponsoring Union files their written statement on 26.11.2013. The management files
their written statement-cum-rejoinder on 04.04.2014. Thereafter documents filed by both side. The point involved in
the reference is that the workman has been dismissed from his services.
3.
During preliminary hearing of this case, domestic enquiry held by the management is accepted by the
Sponsoring Union/workman as Fair & Proper .
4.
The point involved in the reference is that the workman has been dismissed from his services on the ground of
long absence. But he has already out of service for 18 years. It is felt to give another chance to the workman to
serve.
5.
Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I hold that he be taken into job as a fresh employee in
Cat-1 subject to identification and medical fitness. But the workman be kept under probation for a period two year.
Therefore the question of back wages does not arise at all.
This is my award.
R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 19 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2254-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ
lhlh,y ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 39@1994) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-09-2017
dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@396@1993&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º
,e- ds- flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
7508
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 19th September, 2017
S.O. 2254.—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. 39 of 1994) 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 06.09.2017.
[No. L-20012/396/1993-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. 39/1994
Employer in relation to the management of Giddi Washery of M/s. CC Ltd.
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- 16/08/2017
AWARD
By order No. L-20012/396/1993-IR(C-I) dated 02/03/1994, the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour
has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub–section (1) and sub-section (2A) of section 10 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the management of M/s C.C. Ltd. in not regularizing the services of Shri Sita
Ram Mahto of Gidi Washery as per the memorandum of settlement arrived at between the
management of Central Coalfields Ltd., Gidi washery and workman presented by Rashtriya Koyala
Mazdoor Sangh in a conciliation meeting held on 09/04/1982 is justified? If not, to what relief is the
concerned workman entitled to?”
2.
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] 19 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2255-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ
chlhlh,y ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 42@2014) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-
09-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@19@2014&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º
,e- ds- flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7509
New Delhi, the 19th September, 2017
S.O. 2255.—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. 42 of 2014) as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to
the management of M/s. BCCL and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 06.09.2017.
[No. L-20012/19/2014-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. 42/2014
Employer in relation to the management of Barora Area of M/s. BCCL
AND
Their workman
Present : Shri R. K. Saran, Presiding Officer
Appearances:
For the Employers
:
Shri Ganesh Prasad, Advocate
For the workman
:
Shri Vijay Kumar, Advocate
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated- 17/08/2017
AWARD
By order no . L- 20012/19/2014-IR (C-I) dated 28/04/2014, 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 the action of the management of Madhuban Colliery of M/S BCCL in premature retiring
Sri Babua Mahato, Mason from the services of the company w.e.f. 28.02.2006 i.e. before five months
from the date of his actual retirement is fair and justified? To what relief the concerned workmen
entitled to ?”
2.
The case is received from Ministry of Labour on 12.05.2014. The workman files written statement on
08.10.2014 and the management files their written statement on 03.06.2015. One witness examined on behalf of the
management but no witness examined on behalf of the workman. Documents of the management marked as M-1 to
M-3 and documents of workman marked as W-1 to W-4.
3.
The case of the workman is that the concerned workman Babua Mahto joined his service on 11/07/1972 in
Madhuban Colliery, Under Barora Area No.1 M/S BCCL continued in his service without any break, and his date of
birth is 15/07/1946.
4.
It is further submitted by the workman that in all the statutory records of the Madhuban Colliery including form
“B” register, Identity Card, and service excerpt, the date of birth of the concerned workman is 15.07.1946 which are in
the custody of management of Madhuban Colliery and accordingly his normal date of Superannuation was on
31.07.2006 but the concerned workman was arbitrarily, unreasonably and illegally retired by the management five
months prior to his normal superannuation i.e. on 28.02.2006 .
5.
It is also submitted that Babua Mahto concerned workman that he was superannuated on 28.02.2006 from his
service by the management vide letter No. MC/PD/Superannuation/2489/05 dated 22/24.09.2005 which amounts to pre
mature retirement from his services.
6.
The concerned workman had given several representation to the management against his pre-mature
superannuation from his service but no action taken by the management.Hence Industrial dispute arose.
7510
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
7.
On the other hand the case of the management is that the concerned workman raised dispute for correction of the
date of retirement after 9 years. As per the record of the company the date of appointment of Babua Mahto is
11.07.1972 and the date of birth has been recorded as 15.02.46 in form “B” Register of Madhuban colliery.
8.
It is further submitted by the management that in NEIS record, the date of birth of the workman has been
mentioned as 15.02.1946, and in the year 1987 the concerned workman was supplied service excerpt containing their
service particulars recorded in service file including the date of birth but the concerned workman returned back the said
service excerpt acknowledging the date of birth recorded theirin by putting his signature (LTI) at the overleaf of the
service excerpt.
9.
The concerned workman has not raised any dispute about his date of birth recorded in service excerpt and put
his signature as token or acceptance in service excerpt, and he already withdrawn his retrial benefits after his
superannuation without raising any objection. Accordingly the workman concerned has retired from service on
completion of 60 years w.e.f 15.02.2006 but as per policy of company he retired on 28.02.2006.
10.
The short point to be decided that whether the workman was retired prior to 5 months prior to his actual
retirement. Though allegations and counter, allegations in shape of written statement and rejoinder are there. The
important aspect is the deposition i.e Cross examination of the management witness which is quoted below:-
“ I have no personal knowledge regarding the case and I am deposing on the basis of record. The
DOB as per record is 15.02.1946, The digit “2” has been overwritten. Service excerpt the month is 7th
July. In I.D Card the DOB 15.07.46 which has been issued by management.
It is not a fact that I am deposing falsehood . Form “B’ No. 1197 In service excerpt form B No. 1197.”
11.
From the above deposition and the form ‘B” register it appears that the workman is to retire, five months after
his actual retirement. The Form “B” register marked as W-3 is the old and official document which is filed by the
workman as original in which the digit 7 is not overwritten. But as per document of management marked as M-1 & M-2
, on close scrutiny it is found that in both document there is overwritten on digit “2”on date of birth it is seen that it is
tampered by the official of management .There is grave deviation to that due to the latches of the official of
management.
12.
On perusal of all documents it is found that I.D card marked as Ext-W-4 Service excerpt marked as W-3 and
Ext M-1 all are in Sl. No. i.e 1197 is matched, and it is also seen that in Ext M-1, Sl No. 1197 the date of birth of
Babua mahto is tempered. In cross examination MW-1 admitted that serial No. of both document is 1197. Hence it is
clear that management documents is tempered.
13.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I hold that the action of the management of Madhuban
Colliery of M/S BCCL in prematurely retiring Sri Babua Mahato, Mason from the services of the company w.e.f
28.02.2006 i.e before five months from the date of his actual retirement is not fair and justified Therefore the workman
be given his full wages for 5 months and other retirement benefits at once and the amount be recovered from the
officials involved in the mischief and other officers who acted upon the tempered documents.
This is my award.
R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 19 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2256-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ
chlhlh,y ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] /uckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 79@1996) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06-
09-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@260@1995&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º
,e- ds- flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 19th September, 2017
S.O. 2256.—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. 79 of 1996) as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to
the management of M/s. BCCL and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 06.09.2017.
[No. L-20012/260/1995-IR (C-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7511
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. 79/1996
Employer in relation to the management of Sudamdih 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- 14/08/2017
AWARD
By order No. L-20012/260/1995-IR(C-I) dated 26/09/1996, 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 demand by the Union that Sh. Srichand kumar was denied. The benefit of the
employment by management of Sudamdih Area of M/s. BCCL though his co-workers were provided
employment as per the Award of the C.G.I.T. is justified? if so, to what relief is shri Srichand Kumar
entitled?
2.
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] 21 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2257-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ
¯lxkjsuh dksfy;jht daiuh fyfeVsM ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k&lg&Je U;k;ky;] gSnjkckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k ,ylh 4@2012) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 22-08-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&22013@01@2017&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º
jktsUæ flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 21st September, 2017
S.O. 2257.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. LC 4/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, Hyderabad as shown in Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. Singareni
Collieries Company Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 22.08.2017.
[No. L-22013/01/2017-IR (CM-II)]
RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer
7512
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT AT
HYDERABAD
Present : Sri Muralidhar Pradhan, Presiding Officer
Dated : the 10th day of July, 2017
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C. No. 4/2012
Between :
Sri More Chandra Mouli,
S/o More Durgaiah,
R/o H.No.DA-1464, 3 Incline,
Ramavaram, Kothagudem Mandal,
Khammam District
…Petitioner
AND
1.
The Chairman and Managing Director,
M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,
Head Office at Kothagudem
Khammam District.
2.
The Deputy General Manager,
M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,
VK-7 Incline,
Kothagudem, Khammam District
…Respondents
Appearances :
For the Petitioner
:
M/s. Venkateshwar Varanasi, M.V.L. Narasaiah & Macharal Manohar, Advocates
For the Respondent
:
M/s. P.A.V.V.S. Sarma & Vijaya Laxmi Panguluri, Advocates
AWARD
Sri More Chandra Mouli, the Petitioner has filed this petition under Sec. 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act,
1947 against the Respondents M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., and it was registered in this Tribunal as LC
No. 4/2012 and notices were issued to the Respondents.
2.
Petitioner filed the present case seeking for declaring the action on the part of the Respondents in dismissing the
services of the Petitioner vide order dated 1.9.2011 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of law and
consequentially directing the Respondents to reinstate the Petitioner into service with full back wages, continuity of
service and all other benefits.
3.
The Respondents entered their appearance and filed counter.
4.
While the case was posted for Petitioner’s evidence, the Petitioner remained absent. Several opportunities were
given to the Petitioner to adduce evidence, but the Petitioner failed to avail such opportunities which clearly indicates
that perhaps the dispute of the Petitioner has already been settled and the Petitioner has got nothing to raise any claim.
Hence, the case is closed and ‘No Dispute’ award is passed.
Award is passed accordingly. Transmit.
Typed to my dictation by Smt. P. Phani Gowri, Personal Assistant and corrected by me on this the 10th day of
July, 2017.
MURALIDHAR PRADHAN, Presiding Officer
Appendix of evidence
Witnesses examined for the Petitioner
Witnesses examined for the Respondent
NIL
NIL
Documents marked for the Petitioner
NIL
Documents marked for the Respondent
NIL
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7513
ubZ fnYyh] 21 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2258-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ
¯lxkjsuh dksfy;jht daiuh fyfeVsM ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k&lg&Je U;k;ky;] gSnjkckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k ,ylh 9@2009) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 22-08-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&22013@01@2017&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º
jktsUæ flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 21st September, 2017
S.O. 2258.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. LC 9/2009) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, Hyderabad as shown in Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. Singareni
Collieries Company Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 22.08.2017.
[No. L-22013/01/2017-IR (CM-II)]
RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT AT
HYDERABAD
Present : Sri Muralidhar Pradhan, Presiding Officer
Dated : the 10th day of July, 2017
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C. No. 9/2009
Between :
Sri Durgam Guruvaiah,
S/o Posham,
R/o H.No.8-6-429, Bhagathsingh Nagar,
Godavarikhani, Karimnagar District
…Petitioner
AND
1.
The Chief General Manager,
M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,
RG-I Area, Godavarikhani,
Karimnagar District.
2.
The Colliery Manager,
M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,
GDK I & 3 Incline, Godavarikhani,
Karimnagar District
…Respondents
Appearances :
For the Petitioner
:
M/s. Venkateshwar Varanasi & G. Ravi, Advocates
For the Respondent
:
M/s. P.A.V.V.S. Sarma & Vijaya Laxmi Panguluri, Advocates
AWARD
Sri Durgam Guruvaiah, the Petitioner has filed this petition under Sec. 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act,
1947 against the Respondents M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., and it was registered in this Tribunal as LC No.
9/2009 and notices were issued to the Respondents.
2.
Petitioner filed the present case seeking for declaring the action on the part of the Respondents in terminating
the service of the Petitioner vide order dated 20.10.2008 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of law and
consequentially directing the Respondents to reinstate the Petitioner into service with full back wages, continuity of
service and all other benefits.
7514
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
3.
The Respondents entered their appearance and filed counter.
4.
This Tribunal held the domestic enquiry conducted in this case as legal and valid vide order dated 18.4.2017 as
none challenged the same. While the case was posted for arguments under Sec.11(A), the Petitioner remained absent.
Several opportunities were given to the Petitioner to advance argument, but the Petitioner failed to avail such
opportunities which clearly indicates that perhaps the dispute of the Petitioner has already been settled and the
Petitioner has got nothing to raise any claim. Hence, ‘No Dispute’ award is passed.
Award is passed accordingly. Transmit.
Typed to my dictation by Smt. P. Phani Gowri, Personal Assistant and corrected by me on this the 10th day of
July, 2017
MURALIDHAR PRADHAN, Presiding Officer
Appendix of evidence
Witnesses examined for the Petitioner
Witnesses examined for the Respondent
NIL
NIL
Documents marked for the Petitioner
NIL
Documents marked for the Respondent
NIL
ubZ fnYyh] 21 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2259-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ
¯lxkjsuh dksfy;jht daiuh fyfeVsM ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k&lg&Je U;k;ky;] gSnjkckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k ,ylh 28@2009) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 22-08-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&22013@01@2017&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º
jktsUæ flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 21st September, 2017
S.O. 2259.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. LC 28/2009) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, Hyderabad as shown in Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. Singareni
Collieries Company Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 22.08.2017.
[No. L-22013/01/2017-IR (CM-II)]
RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT AT
HYDERABAD
Present : Sri Muralidhar Pradhan, Presiding Officer
Dated : the 12th day of July, 2017
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C. No. 28/2009
Between :
Sri Parvathi Sridhar,
S/o Sathaiah,
C/o Smt. A. Sarojana,
Advocate, Flat No.G7,
Rajeshwari Gayatri Sadan,
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7515
Opp: Badruka Jr. College for Girls,
Kachiguda, Hyderabad
…Petitioner
AND
1.
The General Manager,
M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,
Kasipeta Mine, Mandamarri,
Adilabad District.
2.
The Superintendent of Mines,
M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,
Kasipeta Mine, Mandamarri,
Adilabad District
…Respondents
Appearances :
For the Petitioner
:
M/s. A. Sarojana & K. Vasudeva Reddy, Advocates
For the Respondent
:
M/s. P.A.V.V.S. Sarma & Vijaya Laxmi Panguluri, Advocates
AWARD
Sri Parvathi Sridhar who worked as Badli Filler (who will be referred to as the workman) has filed this petition
under Sec. 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 against the Respondents M/s. Singareni Collieries Company
Ltd., seeking for declaring the proceeding No. MMR/PER/D/072/08/6368 dated 16.12.2008 issued by Respondent No.1
as illegal, arbitrary and to set aside the same consequently directing the Respondents to reinstate the Petitioner into
service duly granting all the consequential benefits such as continuity of service, back wages and all other attendant
benefits etc., and such other reliefs as this court may deems fit.
2.
The averments made in the petition in brief are as follows:
The Petitioner was appointed as badli filler on 13.1.2007. But during the year 2007, the Petitioner’s mother
suffered illness, for which the Petitioner remained absent as he was compelled to accompany his mother to various
hospitals for better medication. While the matters stood thus, one charge sheet dated 10.1.2008 was issued to the
Petitioner by the Respondents alleging that the Petitioner absented from duty during the year 2007, which amounts to
misconduct under company’s Standing Order No.25.25. Subsequently, one inquiry was conducted and during the time
of the enquiry, the Petitioner was not given any opportunity much less valid in nature to put forth his grievances.
Basing on such lopsided enquiry, the Enquiry Officer held the charges as proved and basing on the erroneous findings
of the Enquiry Officer, the Petitioner was dismissed from service vide order No. MMR/PER/D/072/08/6368 dated
16.12.2008. It is stated that during the course of the enquiry the Petitioner has categorically stated, his inability to
perform his duties regularly during the year 2007, was only on account of his mother’s ill-health and other family
problems. But without considering any of his submissions, the Petitioner was dismissed from service. It is also stated
that the action of the Respondents management in dismissing the Petitioner from service is wholly illegal, arbitrary,
violative of the principles of natural justice. The Petitioner approached the Respondents to consider his case
sympathetically, but the management did not pay any heed to it. Therefore, the Petitioner was constrained to approach
this Tribunal to declare the impugned order No. MMR/PER/D/072/08/6368 dated 16.12.2008 issued by the
Respondents is illegal and arbitrary and to set aside the same and consequently to direct the Respondents to reinstate the
Petitioner into service duly granting all other attendant benefits such as continuity of service, back wages etc..
3.
The Respondents filed counter denying the averments made in the petition, with the averments in brief
which runs as follows:
In the counter the Respondents while admitting some of the factual aspects to be true, stated that the Petitioner
was appointed in the Respondents’ company on 10.1.2007 and after a few months he become irregular to his duties. He
was dismissed from service on proved charges of absenteeism, after conducting a detailed domestic enquiry duly
following the principles of natural justice. The Petitioner has attended the enquiry fixed and had fully participated in
the enquiry. He was given full, fair and reasonable opportunity to defend himself in the enquiry. The enquiry was
conducted purely following the principles of natural justice. It is stated that basing on the evidence adduced before the
Enquiry Officer, the Enquiry Officer submitted his report holding the charges levelled against the Petitioner was
proved. A copy of the enquiry report and the enquiry proceeding was sent to the Petitioner by way of show cause
notice giving him an opportunity to make representation against the findings of the enquiry report; since the charge
levelled against the Petitioner is proved and it was serious in nature, punishment warranted was dismissal from service.
7516
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
The Disciplinary Authority has gone through the enquiry proceeding and his past record and found that there was no
extenuating circumstances to take a lenient view and lastly, the Respondents were constrained to dismiss the Petitioner
from service. It is stated that in fact the Petitioner was irregular to his duties and he did not improve his attendance
even after issuing charge sheet to him, and after receiving the show cause notice. It is further stated that the
punishment imposed on the Petitioner is justified and legal and as such the claim petition is liable to be dismissed in
limini.
4.
In view of the memo filed by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner admitting the validity of the domestic
enquiry to be legal and valid, the domestic enquiry conducted in the present case is held as legal and valid vide order
dated 7.7.2010.
5.
Both the parties have advanced their arguments under Sec.11(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, in support
of their claim.
6.
In view of the above facts, the points for determination are:
I.
Whether the action of the management of M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., in imposing the
punishment of dismissal from service to Sri Parvathi Sridhar is legal and justified?
II.
Whether the Petitioner is entitled for reinstatement into service?
III.
If not, to what other relief he is entitled?
7.
Point No. I: During the course of argument, the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner
submitted that due to illness of his mother and other family problems, the Petitioner could not be able to attend his duty
sincerely. Even in his show cause the Petitioner has mentioned the above fact but it has not been considered during the
course of the enquiry and on account of absenteeism capital punishment of dismissal from service was imposed on the
Petitioner. When the Petitioner has taken a stand that due to his illness, and other family problems he could not be able
to attend his duties regularly and remained absent, the authority should have considered his case while imposing
punishment. But, without considering any of the explanations of the Petitioner the authority has given capital
punishment to the Petitioner when several modes of punishment are enumerated in the company’s Standing Orders.
8.
On the other hand, the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents submitted that when the
Petitioner was a chronic absentee and was found guilty in the charges levelled against him, the punishment imposed
by the Respondents’ company is legal and proper. When the Petitioner was not sincere in his duty and failed to
maintain minimum musters in a year he is not entitled to be reinstated in service.
9.
Admittedly, working in the Mines is hazardous and remaining absent is not unusual. In this case, due to his
mother’s illness and other family problems, the Petitioner could not be able to be regular in his duty. Further, the
Petitioner has remained absent in his duties and a proceeding was initiated against him for his absenteeism followed by
an enquiry. In the enquiry, the charges levelled against the Petitioner were proved. For this, capital punishment was
imposed. After dismissal of service, the Petitioner has become jobless and unable to provide a square meal to his
family members. He has already realised his mistake and has taken shelter in the court of Law at the age of 22 years,
but he is now aged about 30 years and is searching ways and means to provide bread and butter to his family
members. When the Petitioner being an able bodied, young and energetic man has already realised his mistake and is
coming forward to work, atleast one chance should be given to him for his reinstatement into service. Admittedly
several modes of punishment are enumerated in company’s Standing Orders. The Petitioner is a first offender and had
started his work under the Respondents. While imposing capital punishment to his employees, the management
should think of the condition of the workers as well as his family members. In this case, the punishment imposed by
the Respondents for dismissal of service is too harsh. Therefore, it can safely be stated that the action taken by the
management in imposing the punishment of dismissal from service to Sri Parvathi Sridhar is not legal and justified.
Thus, Point No.I is answered accordingly.
10.
Point Nos. II & III : In Point No.I, it has already been discussed that the punishment of dismissal from service
to Sri Parvathi Sridhar is not legal and justified. After dismissal of service as stated earlier, when the Petitioner has
already realised his mistake and has come to the court with a prayer for reinstatement into service he should be given a
chance to serve for his family members. After dismissal of service the Petitioner has become jobless and he being the
sole bread earner of his family, is unable to provide a square meal to his family members. In such a circumstances
atleast the Petitioner should be given a chance to maintain his livelihood and to work under the Respondents’
management. But in this case, the Petitioner has not come to the court soon after his dismissal of service. In the
opinion of this Tribunal the Petitioner is not entitled to get all the relief as claimed in his claim petition. But he is only
entitled to be given a chance to work in the Respondents’ management.
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7517
Thus, Point Nos. II & III are answered accordingly.
ORDER
Proceeding No. MMR/PER/D/072/08/6368 dated 16.12.2008 issued by Respondent No.1 is declared as illegal
and is hereby set aside. It is ordered that the workman Sri Parvathi Sridhar be taken into service as a fresh employee
i.e., Badli filler in Cat.I, on initial basic pay without back wages and continuity of service, subject to medical fitness by
the company Medical Board and the workman be kept under probation for a period of two years. The management is
also directed to take an undertaking of good behaviour from the workman at the time of his posting.
The Workman can not claim for his posting in the same place, where he was last employed. The workman
shall have either to maintain either minimum mandatory 20 musters every month or 190 musters in a year and the
management shall have the right to review the work of the workman in every three months. In the event of any short
fall of attendance during the period of the three months, the service of the workman will not be terminated and he will
be cautioned to improve his performance by issuing him a warning letter. However, in the event of any shortfall of
attendance during the two years of service of the workman, he will be terminated from service without any further
notice and enquiry. The management shall consider any forced absenteeism on account of Mine accidents/ Natural
disasters, taking treatment in the company’s hospital, as attendance. All other usual terms and conditions of
appointment will be applicable i.e., transfer, hours of work, day of rest, holidays etc.. to the workman for appointment
afresh.
Award is passed accordingly. Transmit.
Typed to my dictation by Smt. P. Phani Gowri, Personal Assistant and corrected by me on this the 12th day of
July, 2017.
MURALIDHAR PRADHAN, Presiding Officer
Appendix of evidence
Witnesses examined for the Petitioner
Witnesses examined for the Respondent
NIL
NIL
Documents marked for the Petitioner
NIL
Documents marked for the Respondent
NIL
ubZ fnYyh] 21 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2260-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ
¯lxkjsuh dksfy;jht daiuh fyfeVsM ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k&lg&Je U;k;ky;] gSnjkckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k ,ylh 64@2008) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 22-08-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&22013@01@2017&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º
jktsUæ flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 21st September, 2017
S.O. 2260.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. LC 64/2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, Hyderabad as shown in Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. Singareni
Collieries Company Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 22.08.2017.
[No. L-22013/01/2017-IR (CM-II)]
RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer
7518
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT AT
HYDERABAD
Present : Sri Muralidhar Pradhan, Presiding Officer
Dated : the 13th day of July, 2017
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C. No. 64/2008
Between :
Sri Ingu Rajam,
S/o Bheemaiah,
C/o Smt. A. Sarojana,
Advocate, Flat No.G7,
Rajeshwari Gayatri Sadan,
Opp: Badruka Jr. College for Girls,
Kachiguda, Hyderabad
…Petitioner
AND
1.
The General Manager,
M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,
Mandamarri, Adilabad District.
2.
The Colliery Manager,
M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,
Kasipeta Mine, Mandamarri.
Adilabad District
…Respondents
Appearances :
For the Petitioner
:
M/s. A. Sarojana & K. Vasudeva Reddy, Advocates
For the Respondent
:
Sri S.M. Subhani, Advocate
AWARD
Sri Ingu Rajam who worked as Coal Filler (who will be referred to as the workman) has filed this petition under
Sec. 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 against the Respondents M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,
seeking for declaring the proceeding No. MMR/PER/D/072/2093 dated 28.5.2003 issued by Respondent No.1 as
illegal, arbitrary and to set aside the same consequently directing the Respondents to reinstate the Petitioner into service
duly granting all the consequential benefits such as continuity of service, back wages and all other attendant benefits
etc., and such other reliefs as this court may deems fit.
2.
The averments made in the petition in brief are as follows:
The Petitioner was appointed as badli filler in the year 1978 and later he was promoted as Coal Filler in the year
1981. The Petitioner was regular to his duties till the year 2000. But during the year 2001 the Petitioner’s father
expired and the Petitioner suffered ill-health and other family problems. While the matters stood thus, charge sheet
dated 23.2.2002 was issued to the Petitioner by the Respondents alleging that the Petitioner absented for duty during the
year 2001, which amounts to misconduct under company’s Standing Order No.25.25. Subsequently, one inquiry was
conducted and during the time of the enquiry, the Petitioner was not given any opportunity much less valid in nature to
put forth his grievances. Basing on such lopsided enquiry, the Enquiry Officer held the charges as proved and further
basing on the erroneous findings of the Enquiry Officer, the Petitioner was dismissed from service vide order No.
MMR/PER/D/072/2093 dated 28.5.2003. It is stated that during the course of the enquiry the Petitioner has
categorically stated that his inability to perform his duties regularly during the year 2001 was only on account of his ill-
health and other family problems. But without considering any of his submissions, the Petitioner was dismissed from
service. It is also stated that the action of the Respondents management in dismissing the Petitioner from service is
wholly illegal, arbitrary, violative of the principles of natural justice. The Petitioner has rendered about 20 years of
continuous service in the Respondents’ management. The Petitioner approached the Respondents to consider his case
sympathetically, but the management did not pay any heed to it. Therefore, the Petitioner was constrained to approach
this Tribunal to declare the impugned order No. MMR/PER/D/072/2093 dated 28.5.2003 issued by the Respondents is
illegal and arbitrary and to set aside the same and consequently to direct the Respondents to reinstate the Petitioner into
service duly granting all other attendant benefits such as continuity of service, back wages etc..
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7519
3.
The Respondents filed counter denying the averments made in the petition, with the averments in brief
which runs as follows:
In the counter the Respondents while admitting some of the factual aspects to be true, stated that the Petitioner
was appointed in the Respondents’ company on 12.3.1978 as Badli Filler and he was regularized as Coal Filler. He
was dismissed from service on proved charges of absenteeism, after conducting a detailed domestic enquiry duly
following the principles of natural justice. The Petitioner has attended the dates fixed for the enquiry fixed and had
fully participated in the enquiry. He was given full, fair and reasonable opportunity to defend himself in the enquiry.
The enquiry was conducted purely following the principles of natural justice. It is stated that basing on the evidence
adduced before the Enquiry Officer, the Enquiry Officer submitted his report holding the charges levelled against the
Petitioner was proved. A copy of the enquiry report and the enquiry proceeding was sent to the Petitioner by way of
show cause notice giving him an opportunity to make representation against the findings of the enquiry report; since
the charge levelled against the Petitioner is proved and it was serious in nature, punishment warranted was dismissal
from service. The Disciplinary Authority has gone through the enquiry proceeding and his past record and found that
there was no extenuating circumstances to take a lenient view and lastly, the Respondents were constrained to dismiss
the Petitioner from service. It is stated that in fact the Petitioner was irregular to his duties and he did not improve his
attendance even after issuing charge sheet to him, and after receiving the show cause notice. It is further stated that the
punishment imposed on the Petitioner is justified and legal and as such the claim petition is liable to be dismissed in
limini.
4.
The domestic enquiry conducted in the present case is held as legal and valid vide order dated 21.12.2011.
5.
Both the parties have advanced their arguments under Sec.11(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, in support
of their claim.
6.
In view of the above facts, the points for determination are:
I.
Whether the action of the management of M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., in imposing the
punishment of dismissal from service to Sri Ingu Rajam is legal and justified?
II.
Whether the Petitioner is entitled for reinstatement into service?
III.
If not, to what other relief he is entitled?
7.
Point No. I : During the course of argument, the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner
submitted that due to illness and family problems, the Petitioner could not be able to attend his duty sincerely. Even in
his show cause the Petitioner has mentioned the above fact but it has not been considered during the course of the
enquiry and on account of absenteeism capital punishment of dismissal from service was imposed on the Petitioner.
When the Petitioner has taken a stand that due to his illness, and other family problems he could not be able to attend
his duties regularly and remained absent, the authority should have considered his case while imposing punishment.
But the authority has not considered any of the submissions of the Petitioner, and has imposed capital punishment to
the Petitioner when several modes of punishment are enumerated in the company’s Standing Orders.
8.
On the other hand, the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents submitted that when the
Petitioner was a chronic absentee and was found guilty in the charges levelled against him, the punishment imposed
by the Respondents’ company is legal and proper. When the Petitioner was not sincere in his duty and failed to
maintain minimum musters in a year he is not entitled to be reinstated in service.
9.
Admittedly, working in the Mines is hazardous and remaining absent is not unusual. In this case, after the death
of the father of the Petitioner, due to his illness and other family problems, the Petitioner could not be able to be
regular in his duty, the Petitioner has remained absent in his duties and a proceeding was initiated against him for his
absenteeism followed by an enquiry. In the enquiry, the charges levelled against the Petitioner were proved. For this,
capital punishment was imposed. After dismissal of service, the Petitioner has become jobless and unable to provide a
square meal to his family members. He has already realised his mistake and has taken shelter in the court at the age of
50 years, he is now aged about 59 years and is searching ways and means to provide bread and butter to his family
members. The Petitioner being an able bodied and energetic man has already realised his mistake and is coming
forward at the age of 50 years to work under the Respondents, and in the mean time 9 (Nine) years have elasped,
maximum the Petitioner can work for one year only. In such a circumstances, atleast one chance should be given to
him for reinstatement into service in order to get all his terminal benefits. Admittedly several modes of punishment are
enumerated in company’s Standing Orders. The Petitioner is a first offender and has worked for about 20 years under
the Respondent. While imposing capital punishment to his employees, the management should think of the condition
of the workers as well as his family members. In this case, the punishment imposed by the Respondents for dismissal
of service is too harsh. Therefore, it can safely be stated that the action taken by the management in imposing the
punishment of dismissal from service to Sri Ingu Rajam is not legal and justified.
7520
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Thus, Point No.I is answered accordingly.
10.
Point Nos. II & III : In Point No.I, it has already been discussed that the punishment of dismissal from service
to Sri Ingu Rajam is not legal and justified. After dismissal of service as stated earlier, when the Petitioner has already
realised his mistake and has come to the court with a prayer for reinstatement into service he should be given a chance
to serve for his family members. After dismissal of service the Petitioner has become jobless and he being the sole
bread earner of his family, is unable to provide a square meal to his family members. In such a circumstances atleast
the Petitioner should be given a chance to maintain his livelihood and to work under the Respondents’ management.
But in this case, the Petitioner has not come to the court soon after his dismissal of service. In the opinion of this
Tribunal the Petitioner is not entitled to get all the relief as claimed in his claim petition. But he is only entitled to be
given a chance to work in the Respondents’ management.
Thus, Point Nos. II & III are answered accordingly.
ORDER
Proceeding No. MMR/PER/D/072/2093 dated 28.5.2003 issued by Respondent No.1 is declared as illegal and is
hereby set aside. It is ordered that the workman Sri Ingu Rajam be taken into service as a fresh employee i.e., Badli
filler in Cat.I, on initial basic pay without back wages and continuity of service, subject to medical fitness by the
company Medical Board and the workman be kept under probation for a period of three months. The management is
also directed to take an undertaking of good behaviour from the workman at the time of his posting.
The Workman can not claim for his posting in the same place, where he was last employed. The workman
shall have to maintain either minimum mandatory 20 musters every month or 190 musters during the year and the
management shall have the right to review the work of the workman in a month during the period of probation. In the
event of any short fall of attendance during the period of review, the service of the workman will not be terminated
and he will be cautioned to improve his performance by issuing him a warning letter. In the event of any absence in
duty, the management shall consider the forced absenteeism on account of Mine accidents/ Natural disasters, taking
treatment in the company’s hospital, as attendance. All other usual terms and conditions of appointment will be
applicable i.e., transfer, hours of work, day of rest, holidays etc.. to the workman for appointment afresh.
Award is passed accordingly. Transmit.
Typed to my dictation by Smt. P. Phani Gowri, Personal Assistant and corrected by me on this the 13th day of
July, 2017.
MURALIDHAR PRADHAN, Presiding Officer
Appendix of evidence
Witnesses examined for the Petitioner
Witnesses examined for the Respondent
NIL
NIL
Documents marked for the Petitioner
NIL
Documents marked for the Respondent
NIL
ubZ fnYyh] 21 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2261-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ
¯lxkjsuh dksfy;jht daiuh fyfeVsM ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k&lg&Je U;k;ky;] gSnjkckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k ,ylh 67@2007) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 22-08-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&22013@01@2017&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º
jktsUæ flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 21st September, 2017
S.O. 2261.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. LC 67/2007) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7521
Labour Court, Hyderabad as shown in Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. Singareni
Collieries Company Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 22.08.2017.
[No. L-22013/01/2017-IR (CM-II)]
RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT AT
HYDERABAD
Present : Sri Muralidhar Pradhan, Presiding Officer
Dated : the 11th day of July, 2017
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C. No. 67/2007
Between :
Sri Bathula Venkateshwarlu,
S/o Sathaiah,
C/o Smt. A. Sarojana,
Advocate, Flat No.G7,
Rajeshwari Gayatri Sadan,
Opp: Badruka Jr. College for Girls,
Kachiguda, Hyderabad
…Petitioner
AND
1.
The General Manager,
M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,
Bhupalpally area, Bhupalapally,
Warangal District.
2.
The Superintendent of Mines,
M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,
KTK-2 Incline, Bhupalpally,
Warangal District
…Respondents
Appearances :
For the Petitioner
:
M/s. A. Sarojana & K. Vasudeva Reddy, Advocates
For the Respondent
:
Sri M.V Hanumantha Rao, Advocate
AWARD
Sri Bathula Venkateshwarlu who worked as Badli Filler (who will be referred to as the workman) has filed this
petition under Sec. 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 against the Respondents M/s. Singareni Collieries
Company Ltd., seeking for declaring the proceeding No. BHP/PER/20-D/3795 dated 5.10.2006 issued by Respondent
No.1 as illegal, arbitrary and to set aside the same consequently directing the Respondents to reinstate the Petitioner
into service duly granting all the consequential benefits such as continuity of service, back wages and all other attendant
benefits etc., and such other reliefs as this court may deems fit.
2.
The averments made in the petition in brief are as follows:
The Petitioner was initially appointed as badli filler on 28.3.1993 and got confirmed as Coal Filler during the
year 1994. The Petitioner was regular to his duties till the year 2003. But during the year 2003, the Petitioner suffered
illness, hypo pigmented patches and several other ailments apart from other family problems, for which the Petitioner
remained absent. While the matters stood thus, one charge sheet dated 19.5.2004 was issued to the Petitioner by the
Respondents alleging that the Petitioner absented from duty during the year 2003, which amounts to misconduct under
company’s Standing Order No.25.25. Subsequently, one inquiry was conducted and during the time of the enquiry, the
Petitioner was not given any opportunity much less valid in nature to put forth his grievances. Basing on such lopsided
enquiry, the Enquiry Officer held the charges as proved and basing on the erroneous findings of the Enquiry Officer,
the Petitioner was dismissed from service vide order No. BHP/PER/20-D/3795 dated 5.10.2006. It is stated that during
the course of the enquiry the Petitioner has categorically stated, his inability to perform his duties regularly in the year
2003, was only on account of his ill-health and other family problems. But without considering any of his
submissions, the Petitioner was dismissed from service. It is also stated that the action of the Respondents management
7522
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
in dismissing the Petitioner from service is wholly illegal, arbitrary, violative of the principles of natural justice. The
Petitioner has rendered ten years of continuous service in the Respondents’ management. The Petitioner approached
the Respondents’ to consider his case sympathetically, but the management did not pay any heed to it. Therefore, the
Petitioner was constrained to approach this Tribunal to declare the impugned order No. BHP/PER/20-D/3795 dated
5.10.2006 issued by the Respondents is illegal and arbitrary and to set aside the same and consequently to direct the
Respondents to reinstate the Petitioner into service duly granting all other attendant benefits such as continuity of
service, back wages etc.
3.
The Respondent filed counter denying the averments made in the petition, with the averments in brief
which runs as follows:
In the counter the Respondent while admitting some of the factual aspects to be true, stated that the Petitioner was
appointed in the Respondent’ company on 28.3.1993 as Badli Filler and his services were regularized as a Coal filler
on 1.9.1995. He was dismissed from service on proved charges of absenteeism, after conducting a detailed domestic
enquiry duly following the principles of natural justice. The Petitioner has attended the dates fixed for enquiry and had
fully participated in the enquiry. He was given full, fair and reasonable opportunity to defend himself in the enquiry.
The enquiry was conducted purely following the principles of natural justice. It is stated that basing on the evidence
adduced before the Enquiry Officer, the Enquiry Officer submitted his report holding the charges levelled against the
Petitioner was proved. A copy of the enquiry report and the enquiry proceeding was sent to the Petitioner by way of
show cause notice giving him an opportunity to make representation against the findings of the enquiry report; since
the charge levelled against the Petitioner is proved and it was serious in nature, punishment warranted was dismissal
from service. The Disciplinary Authority has gone through the enquiry proceeding and his past record and found that
there was no extenuating circumstances to take a lenient view and lastly, the Respondent was constrained to dismiss the
Petitioner from service. It is stated that in fact the Petitioner was irregular to his duties and he did not improve his
attendance even after issuing charge sheet to him, and after receiving the show cause notice. It is further stated that the
punishment imposed on the Petitioner is justified and legal and as such the claim petition is liable to be dismissed in
limini.
4.
In view of the memo filed by the counsel for the Petitioner conceding the validity of the domestic enquiry
conducted in the present case, the same is held as legal and valid vide order dated 27.4.2009.
5.
Both the parties have advanced their arguments under Sec.11(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, in support
of their claim.
6.
In view of the above facts, the points for determination are:
I.
Whether the action of the management of M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., in imposing the
punishment of dismissal from service to Sri Bathula Venkateshwarlu is legal and justified?
II.
Whether the Petitioner is entitled for reinstatement into service?
III.
If not, to what other relief he is entitled?
7.
Point No.I: During the course of argument, the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner
submitted that due to ill-health the Petitioner could not be able to attend his duty sincerely in the year 2003. Even in
his show cause the Petitioner has mentioned the above fact but it has not been considered during the course of the
enquiry and on account of absenteeism capital punishment of dismissal from service was imposed on the Petitioner.
When the Petitioner has taken a stand that due to his illness he could not be able to attend his duties regularly and
remained absent, the authority should have considered his case while imposing punishment. The authority has not
considered any of the submissions of the Petitioner and has given capital punishment to the Petitioner when several
modes of punishment are enumerated in the company’s Standing Orders.
8.
On the other hand, the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent submitted that when the
Petitioner was a chronic absentee and was found guilty in the charges levelled against him, the punishment imposed
by the Respondent’ company is legal and proper. When the Petitioner was not sincere in his duty and failed to maintain
minimum musters in a year he is not entitled to be reinstated in service.
9.
Admittedly, working in the Mines is hazardous and remaining absent is not unusual. In this case, due to his
illness, the Petitioner could not be able to be regular in his duty, the Petitioner has remained absent in his duties and a
proceeding was initiated against him for his absenteeism followed by an enquiry. In the enquiry, the charges levelled
against the Petitioner were proved. For this, capital punishment was imposed. After dismissal of service, the
Petitioner has become jobless and unable to provide a square meal to his family members. He has already realised his
mistake and has taken shelter in the court at the age of 37 years, he is now aged about 47 years and is searching ways
and means to provide bread and butter to his family members. When the Petitioner being an able bodied and energetic
man has already realised his mistake and is coming forward to work under the Respondent, atleast one chance should
be given to him for reinstatement into service. Admittedly several modes of punishment are enumerated in company’s
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7523
Standing Orders. The Petitioner is a first offender and has worked for about 10(ten) years under the Respondent.
While imposing capital punishment to his employees, the management should think of the condition of the workers as
well as his family members. In this case, the punishment imposed by the Respondent for dismissal of service is too
harsh. Therefore, it can safely be stated that the action taken by the management in imposing the punishment of
dismissal from service to Sri Bathula Venkateshwarlu is not legal and justified.
Thus, Point No.I is answered accordingly.
10.
Point Nos. II & III : In Point No.I, it has already been discussed that the punishment of dismissal from service
to Sri Bathula Venkateshwarlu is not legal and justified. After dismissal of service as stated earlier, when the
Petitioner has already realised his mistake and has come to the court with a prayer for reinstatement into service he
should be given a chance to serve for his family members. Further, after dismissal of service the Petitioner has become
jobless and he being the sole bread earner of his family, is unable to provide a square meal to his family members. In
such a circumstances atleast the Petitioner should be given a chance to maintain his livelihood and to work under the
Respondent’ management. But in this case, the Petitioner has not come to the court soon after his dismissal of service.
In the opinion of this Tribunal the Petitioner is not entitled to get all the relief as claimed in his claim petition. But he
is only entitled to be given a chance to work in the Respondent’ management.
Thus, Point Nos. II & III are answered accordingly.
ORDER
Proceeding No. BHP/PER/20-D/3795 dated 5.10.2006 issued by Respondent No.1 is declared as illegal and is
hereby set aside. It is ordered that the workman Sri Bathula Venkateshwarlu be taken into service as a fresh employee
i.e., Badli filler in Cat.I, on initial basic pay without back wages and continuity of service, subject to medical fitness by
the company Medical Board and the workman be kept under probation for a period of one year. The management is
also directed to take an undertaking of good behaviour from the workman at the time of his posting.
The Workman can not claim for his posting in the same place, where he was last employed. The workman
shall have either to maintain either minimum mandatory 20 musters every month or 190 musters in a year and the
management shall have the right to review the work of the workman in every three months. In the event of any short
fall of attendance during the period of the three months, the service of the workman will not be terminated and he will
be cautioned to improve his performance by issuing him a warning letter. However, in the event of any shortfall of
attendance during one year of service of the workman, he will be terminated from service without any further notice
and enquiry. The management shall consider any forced absenteeism on account of Mine accidents/ Natural disasters,
taking treatment in the company’s hospital, as attendance. All other usual terms and conditions of appointment will be
applicable i.e., transfer, hours of work, day of rest, holidays etc.. to the workman for appointment afresh.
Award is passed accordingly. Transmit.
Typed to my dictation by Smt. P. Phani Gowri, Personal Assistant and corrected by me on this the 11th day of
July, 2017.
MURALIDHAR PRADHAN, Presiding Officer
Appendix of evidence
Witnesses examined for the Petitioner
Witnesses examined for the Respondent
NIL
NIL
Documents marked for the Petitioner
NIL
Documents marked for the Respondent
NIL
ubZ fnYyh] 21 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2262-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ
¯lxkjsuh dksfy;jht daiuh fyfeVsM ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k&lg&Je U;k;ky;] gSnjkckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k ,ylh 103@2009) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 22-08-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&22013@01@2017&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º
jktsUæ flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
7524
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 21st September, 2017
S.O. 2262.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. LC 103/2009) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s.
Singareni Collieries Company Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 22.08.2017.
[No. L-22013/01/2017-IR (CM-II)]
RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT AT
HYDERABAD
Present : Sri Muralidhar Pradhan, Presiding Officer
Dated : the 12th day of July, 2017
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C. No. 103/2009
Between :
Sri Adavala Mallesham,
S/o Late Rajam,
R/o Q.No.T2, 167, Centinary Colony,
Sector, IVR.G.II. Ramagundam,
Kareem Nagar Dist.
…Petitioner
AND
The General Manager,
M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,
Kalyani Khani, Mandamarri Area,
Adilabad District
…Respondent
Appearances :
For the Petitioner
:
M/s. A.K. Jayaprakash Rao, M. Govind & Venkatesh Dixit, Advocates
For the Respondent
:
M/s. P.A.V.V.S. Sarma & Vijaya Lakshmi Panguluri, Advocates
AWARD
Sri Adavala Mallesham who worked as Badli Filler (who will be referred to as the workman) has filed this
petition under Sec. 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 against the Respondent M/s. Singareni Collieries
Company Ltd., seeking for declaring the proceeding No. MMR/PER/O/072/5443 dated 26.12.2002 issued by the
Respondent as illegal, arbitrary and to set aside the same consequently directing the Respondent to reinstate the
Petitioner into service duly granting all the consequential benefits such as continuity of service, back wages and all
other attendant benefits etc., and such other reliefs as this court may deems fit.
2.
The averments made in the petition in brief are as follows:
The Petitioner was appointed on 8.4.2000 as Badli Coal Filler on compassionate appointment. The Petitioner
was regular to his duties. While the matters stood thus, charge sheet dated 9.2.2001 was issued to the Petitioner by the
Respondent alleging that the Petitioner absented for duty during the year 2000, which amounts to misconduct under
company’s Standing Order No.25.25. Subsequently, one inquiry was conducted and during the time of the enquiry, the
Petitioner was not given any opportunity much less valid in nature to put forth his grievances. Basing on such lopsided
enquiry, the Enquiry Officer held the charges as proved and basing on the erroneous findings of the Enquiry Officer,
the Petitioner was dismissed from service vide order No. MMR/PER/O/072/5443 dated 26.12.2002. It is stated that
during the course of the enquiry the Petitioner has categorically stated that his inability to perform his duties regularly
during the year 2000 was only on account of his ill-health and other family problems. But without considering any of
his submissions, the Petitioner was dismissed from service. It is also stated that the action of the Respondent
management in dismissing the Petitioner from service is wholly illegal, arbitrary, violative of the principles of natural
justice. The Petitioner has rendered continuous service in the Respondent’s management. The Petitioner approached
the Respondent to consider his case sympathetically, but the management did not pay any heed to it. Therefore, the
Petitioner was constrained to approach this Tribunal to declare the impugned order No. MMR/PER/O/072/5443 dated
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7525
26.12.2002 issued by the Respondent is illegal and arbitrary and to set aside the same and consequently to direct the
Respondent to reinstate the Petitioner into service duly granting all other attendant benefits such as continuity of
service, back wages etc..
3.
The Respondent filed counter denying the averments made in the petition, with the averments in brief
which runs as follows:
In the counter the Respondent while admitting some of the factual aspects to be true, stated that the Petitioner was
appointed in the Respondent’s company on 11.4.2000 as Badli Filler and continued to be in the same designation till his
dismissal without regularization of his services. He was dismissed from service on proved charges of absenteeism,
after conducting a detailed domestic enquiry duly following the principles of natural justice. The Petitioner has
attended the dated fixed for enquiry and had fully participated in the enquiry. He was given full, fair and reasonable
opportunity to defend himself in the enquiry. The enquiry was conducted purely following the principles of natural
justice. It is stated that basing on the evidence adduced before the Enquiry Officer, the Enquiry Officer submitted his
report holding the charges levelled against the Petitioner was proved. A copy of the enquiry report and the enquiry
proceeding was sent to the Petitioner by way of show cause notice giving him an opportunity to make representation
against the findings of the enquiry report; since the charge levelled against the Petitioner is proved and it was serious
in nature, punishment warranted was dismissal from service. The Disciplinary Authority has gone through the enquiry
proceeding and his past record and found that there was no extenuating circumstances to take a lenient view and lastly,
the Respondent was constrained to dismiss the Petitioner from service. It is stated that in fact the Petitioner was
irregular to his duties and he did not improve his attendance even after issuing charge sheet to him, and after receiving
the show cause notice. It is further stated that the punishment imposed on the Petitioner is justified and legal and as
such the claim petition is liable to be dismissed in limini.
4.
The domestic enquiry conducted in the present case is held as legal and valid vide order dated 23.1.2017 as
none has challenged the domestic enquiry.
5.
Both the parties have advanced their arguments under Sec.11(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, in support
of their claim.
6.
In view of the above facts, the points for determination are:
I.
Whether the action of the management of M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., in imposing the
punishment of dismissal from service to Sri Adavala Mallesham is legal and justified?
II.
Whether the Petitioner is entitled for reinstatement into service?
III.
If not, to what other relief he is entitled?
7.
Point No. I : During the course of argument, the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner
submitted that due to ill-health the Petitioner could not be able to attend his duty sincerely. Even in his show cause the
Petitioner has mentioned the above fact but it has not been considered during the course of the enquiry and on account
of absenteeism capital punishment of dismissal from service was imposed on the Petitioner. When the Petitioner has
taken a stand that due to his illness he could not be able to attend his duties regularly and remained absent, the
authority should have considered his case while imposing punishment. But the authority has not considered any of the
submissions of the Petitioner and has given capital punishment to the Petitioner when several modes of punishment are
enumerated in the company’s Standing Orders.
8.
On the other hand, the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent submitted that when the
Petitioner was a chronic absentee and was found guilty in the charges levelled against him, the punishment imposed
by the Respondent’ company is legal and proper. When the Petitioner was not sincere in his duty and failed to maintain
minimum musters in a year he is not entitled to be reinstated in service.
9.
Admittedly, working in the Mines is hazardous and remaining absent is not unusual. In this case, due to his
illness, the Petitioner could not be able to be regular in his duty, the Petitioner has remained absent in his duties and a
proceeding was initiated against him for his absenteeism followed by an enquiry. In the enquiry, the charges levelled
against the Petitioner were proved. For this, capital punishment was imposed. After dismissal of service, the
Petitioner has become jobless and unable to provide a square meal to his family members. He has already realised his
mistake and has taken shelter in the court at the age of 26 years, he is now aged about 34 years and is searching ways
and means to provide bread and butter to his family members. When the Petitioner being an able bodied and energetic
man has already realised his mistake and is coming forward to work under the Respondent, atleast one chance should
be given to him for reinstatement into service. Admittedly several modes of punishment are enumerated in company’s
Standing Orders. The Petitioner is a first offender and has worked for one year under the Respondent. While
imposing capital punishment to his employees, the management should think of the condition of the workers as well as
his family members. In this case, the punishment imposed by the Respondent for dismissal of service is too harsh.
7526
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Therefore, it can safely be stated that the action taken by the management in imposing the punishment of dismissal
from service to Sri Adavala Mallesham is not legal and justified.
Thus, Point No.I is answered accordingly.
10.
Point Nos. II & III : In Point No.I, it has already been discussed that the punishment of dismissal from service
to Sri Adavala Mallesham is not legal and justified. After dismissal of service as stated earlier, when the Petitioner
has already realised his mistake and has come to the court with a prayer for reinstatement into service he should be
given a chance to serve for his family members. After dismissal of service the Petitioner has become jobless and he
being the sole bread earner of his family, is unable to provide a square meal to his family members. In such a
circumstances atleast the Petitioner should be given a chance to maintain his livelihood and to work under the
Respondent’ management. But in this case, the Petitioner has not come to the court soon after his dismissal of service.
In the opinion of this Tribunal the Petitioner is not entitled to get all the relief as claimed in his claim petition. But he
is only entitled to be given a chance to work in the Respondent’ management.
Thus, Point Nos. II & III are answered accordingly.
ORDER
Proceeding No. MMR/PER/O/072/5443 dated 26.12.2002 issued by Respondent No.1 is declared as illegal and
is hereby set aside. It is ordered that the workman Sri Adavala Mallesham be taken into service as a fresh employee
i.e., Badli filler in Cat.I, on initial basic pay without back wages and continuity of service, subject to medical fitness by
the company Medical Board and the workman be kept under probation for a period of two years. The management is
also directed to take an undertaking of good behaviour from the workman at the time of his posting.
The Workman can not claim for his posting in the same place, where he was last employed. The workman
shall have either to maintain either minimum mandatory 20 musters every month or 190 musters in a year and the
management shall have the right to review the work of the workman in every three months. In the event of any short
fall of attendance during the period of the three months, the service of the workman will not be terminated and he will
be cautioned to improve his performance by issuing him a warning letter. However, in the event of any shortfall of
attendance during the two years of service of the workman, he will be terminated from service without any further
notice and enquiry. The management shall consider any forced absenteeism on account of Mine accidents/ Natural
disasters, taking treatment in the company’s hospital, as attendance. All other usual terms and conditions of
appointment will be applicable i.e., transfer, hours of work, day of rest, holidays etc.. to the workman for appointment
afresh.
Award is passed accordingly. Transmit.
Typed to my dictation by Smt. P. Phani Gowri, Personal Assistant and corrected by me on this the 12th day of
July, 2017.
MURALIDHAR PRADHAN, Presiding Officer
Appendix of evidence
Witnesses examined for the Petitioner
Witnesses examined for the Respondent
NIL
NIL
Documents marked for the Petitioner
NIL
Documents marked for the Respondent
NIL
ubZ fnYyh] 21 flrEcj] 2017
dk-vk- 2263-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947 dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ
¯lxkjsuh dksfy;jht daiuh fyfeVsM ds çcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k&lg&Je U;k;ky;] gSnjkckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k ,ylh 115@2007) dks çdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 22-08-2017 dks çkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&22013@01@2017&vkbZvkj (lh,e&II)º
jktsUæ flag] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7527
New Delhi, the 21st September, 2017
S.O. 2263.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. LC 115/2007) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s.
Singareni Collieries Company Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 22.08.2017.
[No. L-22013/01/2017-IR (CM-II)]
RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT AT
HYDERABAD
Present : Sri Muralidhar Pradhan, Presiding Officer
Dated : the 13th day of July, 2017
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C. No. 115/2007
Between :
Late Durgam Durgaiah, S/o Rajam
Died per LRs
1. Durgam Lakshmi, W/o Late Durgam Durgaiah
2. Durgam Sridhar, S/o Late Durgam Durgaiah
3. Durgam Srikanth, S/o Late Durgam Durgaiah
4. Durgam Soundarya, D/o Late Durgam Durgaiah
5. Durgam Swapna, D/o Late Durgam Durgaiah
6. Durgam Sandhya, D/o Late Durgam Durgaiah
7. Durgam Sahithi, D/o Late Durgam Durgaiah
All are R/o H.No.2-61, Andugulapet,
Mandamarri, Adilabad District
…Petitioner
AND
1.
The General Manager,
M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,
Sreerampur Area, Sreerampur,
Adilabad District.
2.
The Superintendent of Mines,
M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.,
SRP-1 Incline, Sreerampur,
Adilabad District
…Respondents
Appearances :
For Late Durgaiah
:
M/s. A. Sarojana & K. Vasudeva Reddy, Advocates
For the Respondent
:
M/s. P.A.V.V.S.Sarma & Vijaya Lakshmi Panguluri, Advocates
AWARD
Late Durgam Durgaiah who worked as Badli Filler (who will be referred to as the workman) had filed this
petition under Sec. 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 against the Respondents M/s. Singareni Collieries
Company Ltd., seeking for declaring the proceeding No. SRP/PER/13.008/5163 dated 1.11.2003 issued by Respondent
No.1 as illegal, arbitrary and to set aside the same consequently directing the Respondents to reinstate Late Durgaiah
7528
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
into service duly granting all the consequential benefits such as continuity of service, back wages and all other attendant
benefits etc., and such other reliefs as this court may deems fit.
2.
The averments made in the petition in brief are as follows:
The original Petitioner Late Durgam Durgaiah was appointed in the year 1978 as a Badli Filler and from the date
of his appointment he was regular to his duties till the year 2001. It is submitted that the wife of Late Durgaiah expired
leaving their children in distress. Due to that, Late Durgaiah suffered mental illness and as such, he could not be
regular to his duties during the year 2002. While the matters stood thus, one chargesheet was issued to Late Durgaiah
by the Respondents under company’s Standing Order No. 25.25 for habitual absenteeism during the year 2002.
Subsequently, one inquiry was conducted, and during the time of the enquiry, Late Durgaiah was not given any
opportunity much less valid in nature to put forth his grievances. Basing on such lopsided enquiry, the Enquiry Officer
held the charges as proved and also basing on the erroneous findings of the Enquiry Officer, Late Durgaiah was
dismissed from service vide order No. SRP/PER/13.008/5163 dated 1.11.2003. It is stated that during the course of the
enquiry Late Durgaiah has categorically stated about his inability to perform his duties regularly during the year 2002
as it was only on account of his ill-health and other family problems. But without considering any of his submissions,
Late Durgaiah was dismissed from service. It is also stated that the action of the Respondents management in
dismissing Late Durgaiah from service is wholly illegal, arbitrary, violative of the principles of natural justice. Late
Durgaiah had rendered 23 years of continuous service in the Respondents’ management. Late Durgaiah approached the
Respondents to consider his case sympathetically, but the management did not pay any heed to it. Therefore, Late
Durgaiah was constrained to approach this Tribunal to declare the impugned order No.SRP/PER/13.008/5163 dated
1.11.2003 issued by the Respondents is illegal and arbitrary and to set aside the same and consequently to direct the
Respondents to reinstate Late Durgaiah into service duly granting all other attendant benefits such as continuity of
service, back wages etc.. Unfortunately, during the pendency of the case original Petitioner Late Durgam Durgaiah
died on 19.9.2010 leaving behind the present Petitioners who has pursued the case.
3.
The Respondents filed counter denying the averments made in the petition, with the averments in brief
which runs as follows:
In the counter the Respondents while admitting some of the factual aspects to be true, stated that Late Durgaiah was
appointed in the Respondents’ company as a Badli Filler. He was dismissed from service on proved charges of
absenteeism, after conducting a detailed domestic enquiry duly following the principles of natural justice.
Late Durgaiah had attended the enquiry on the date fixed and had fully participated in the enquiry. He was given full,
fair and reasonable opportunity to defend himself in the enquiry. The enquiry was conducted purely following the
principles of natural justice. It is stated that basing on the evidence adduced before the Enquiry Officer, the Enquiry
Officer submitted his report holding the charges levelled against Late Durgaiah was proved. A copy of the enquiry
report and the enquiry proceeding was sent to Late Durgaiah by way of show cause notice giving him an opportunity to
make representation against the findings of the enquiry report; since the charge levelled against Late Durgaiah was
proved and it was serious in nature, punishment warranted was dismissal from service. The Disciplinary Authority has
gone through the enquiry proceeding and his past record and found that there was no extenuating circumstances to take
a lenient view and lastly, the Respondents were constrained to dismiss Late Durgaiah from service. It is stated that in
fact Late Durgaiah was irregular to his duties and he did not improve his attendance even after issuing charge sheet to
him, and after receiving the show cause notice. It is further stated that the punishment imposed on Late Durgaiah is
justified and legal and as such the claim petition is liable to be dismissed in limini.
4.
In view of the memo filed by the Learned Counsel for Late Durgaiah not to challenge the validity of the
domestic enquiry, the domestic enquiry conducted in the present case is held as legal and valid vide order dated
24.2.2009.
5.
Both the parties have advanced their arguments under Sec.11(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, in support
of their claim.
6.
In view of the above facts, the points for determination are:
I.
Whether the action of the management of M/s. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., in imposing the
punishment of dismissal from service to Late Durgam Durgaiah is legal and justified?
II.
Whether the Petitioners are entitled for reinstatement into service?
III.
If not, to what other relief they are entitled to?
7.
Point No. I : During the course of argument, the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Late Durgaiah
submitted that due to illness and family problems, Late Durgaiah could not be able to attend his duty sincerely. Even in
¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 23] 2017@vkf'ou 1] 1939
7529
his show cause Late Durgaiah has mentioned the above fact but it has not been considered during the course of the
enquiry and on account of absenteeism capital punishment of dismissal from service was imposed on Late Durgaiah.
When Late Durgaiah has taken a stand that due to his illness, and other family problems he could not be able to attend
his duties regularly and remained absent, the authority should have considered his case while imposing punishment.
The authority has not considered any of the submissions of Late Durgaiah, and has imposed capital punishment to Late
Durgaiah when several modes of punishment are enumerated in the company’s Standing Orders.
8.
On the other hand, the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents submitted that when Late
Durgaiah was a chronic absentee and was found guilty in the charges levelled against him, the punishment imposed by
the Respondents’ company is legal and proper. When Late Durgaiah was not sincere in his duty and failed to maintain
minimum musters in a year he is not entitled to be reinstated in service.
9.
Admittedly, working in the Mines is hazardous and remaining absent is not unusual. In this case, due to his
wife’s death, his illness and other family problems, Late Durgaiah could not be able to be regular in his duty, Late
Durgaiah has remained absent in his duties and a proceeding was initiated against him for his absenteeism followed by
an enquiry. In the enquiry, the charges levelled against Late Durgaiah were proved. For this, capital punishment was
imposed. After dismissal of service, Late Durgaiah became jobless and unable to provide a square meal to his family
members. He has already realised his mistake and has taken shelter in the court at the age of 49 years. But
unfortunately, Late Durgaiah expired on 19.9.2010. His LRs have brought on record. During his life time Late
Durgaiah had realised his mistake and was interested to work again under the Respondents. After the death of Late
Durgaiah his family members are suffering a lot. Dismissal of service had given a stigma to Late Durgaiah.
Admittedly several modes of punishment are enumerated in company’s Standing Orders and the management could
have imposed lesser punishment. Late Durgaiah was a first offender and has worked for more than 23 years under the
Respondent. While imposing capital punishment to his employees, the management should think of the condition of
the workers as well as his family members. In this case, the punishment imposed by the Respondents for dismissal of
service is too harsh. Therefore, it can safely be stated that the action taken by the management in imposing the
punishment of dismissal from service to Sri Durgam Durgaiah is not legal and justified.
Thus, Point No.I is answered accordingly.
10.
Point Nos. II & III : In Point No.I, it has already been discussed that the punishment of dismissal from service
to Sri Durgam Durgaiah is not legal and justified. After dismissal of service as stated earlier, when Late Durgaiah
realised his mistake and came to the court with a prayer for his reinstatement into service he should be given a chance
to serve for his family members. But, unfortunately, during the pendency of the case Late Durgaiah died. In such a
circumstances atleast one of the legal representatives of Late Durgaiah should be given a chance to maintain the family
of Late Durgaiah and to work under the Respondents’ management. But in this case, Late Durgaiah had not come to the
court soon after his dismissal of service and died during the pendency of the case. In the opinion of this Tribunal Late
Durgaiah is not entitled to get all the relief as claimed in his claim petition. But one of the Legal representatives of
Late Durgaiah namely, Sri Durgam Sridhar, the eldest male member of the family, only is entitled to be given a chance
to work in the Respondents’ management.
Thus, Point Nos. II & III are answered accordingly.
ORDER
Proceeding No. SRP/PER/13.008/5163 dated 1.11.2003 issued by Respondent No.1 is declared as illegal and is
hereby set aside. It is ordered that Sri Durgam Sridhar, one of the legal representatives of Late Durgam Dugaiah be
taken into service as a fresh employee i.e., Badli filler in Cat.I, on initial basic pay if he has filled up the eligibility
criteria for the post, subject to medical fitness by the company Medical Board and the workman be kept under
probation for a period of two years. The management is also directed to take an undertaking of good behaviour from
the workman at the time of his posting.
The legal representative of the deceased workman shall have to maintain either minimum mandatory 20 musters
every month or 190 musters in a year and the management shall have the right to review the work of the Legal
Representative of the deceased workman in every three months. In the event of any short fall of attendance during the
period of the three months, the service of the legal representative of the deceased workman will not be terminated and
he will be cautioned to improve his performance by issuing him a warning letter. However, in the event of any
shortfall of attendance during two years of service of the workman, he will be terminated from service without any
further notice and enquiry. The management shall consider any forced absenteeism on account of Mine accidents/
Natural disasters, taking treatment in the company’s hospital, as attendance. All other usual terms and conditions of
appointment will be applicable i.e., transfer, hours of work, day of rest, holidays etc.. to the workman for appointment
afresh.
7530
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 23, 2017/ASVINA 1, 1939
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Award is passed accordingly. Transmit.
Typed to my dictation by Smt. P. Phani Gowri, Personal Assistant and corrected by me on this the 13th day of
July, 2017.
MURALIDHAR PRADHAN, Presiding Officer
Appendix of evidence
Witnesses examined for the Petitioner
Witnesses examined for the Respondent
NIL
NIL
Documents marked for Late Durgaiah
NIL
Documents marked for the Respondent
NIL
Uploaded by Dte. of Printing at Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064
and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054.
RAKESH
SUKUL
Digitally signed by RAKESH
SUKUL
Date: 2017.10.18 09:42:27
+05'30'