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 िसत बर, 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 िसत बर, 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 साव जिनक

साव जिनक

साव जिनक

साव जिनक ि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,

कोय ब ूर-642127

 वण@ एवं  वण@

िम,धातुएं, आभूषण/

िश पकारी – शुMता एवं

मुहरांकन

IS 1417 :

2016

2.

6590001313

20170801

मेसस@ ,ी अ मन तंगामािलगै

123/1, अNल जोती कॉ PलेQस,

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 प प ायवेट िलिमटड

एस एफ सं. 76/1B & 2,

ओरैकालपालयम,

कुRतुरपुदुर पोट, कोय ब ूर -

641107.

गहरे कुS के िलए

िन मजनीय प पसेट

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 कॉ PलेQस

के सामने,

कोय ब ू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),

कोय ब ू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, कोय ब ूर

– 641 006

िन मजनीय प पसेट

IS 8034:

2002

11.

6500027612

20170821

मेसस@ िशवम इंजीिनय`रंग इंडTीस

ायवेट िलिमटड

255/2 A, नालु कवलै तोaम,

मिणयकरमपालयम, गणपित, कोय ब ूर

– 641 006

गहरे कुS के िलए

िन मजनीय प पसेट

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. कॉ पलेQस, 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 स बM 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)]

वािण य एवं उोग मंालय

वािण य एवं उोग मंालय

वािण य एवं उोग मंालय

वािण य 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 दस बर, 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”, टाइ स 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 कॉ पलेQस, 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 कॉ पलेQस, 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 िसत बर, 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 वण€त 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@ कोलफस िलिमटेड, सांकतोिड़या, डाकघर िडसेरगढ़, िजला –

बM@वान – 713333, पि}म बंगाल (िजसे इसम8 इसके प}ात् उ" कंपनी कहा गया है), ऐसे िनबंधन# और शतƒ 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 शतƒ 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 शतƒ 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 स बध 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 स बिधत 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'