Gazette contains multiple Subjects

रजिस्ट्री सं. डी. एल. ;एनद्ध 04/0007/2003—05 REGD. No. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05

प्राध्किार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक WEEKLY

सं. 23] नई दिल्ली, जून 10—जून 16, 2018, शनिवार/ज्येष्ठ 20—ज्येष्ठ 26, 1940

No. 23] NEW DELHI, JUNE 10—JUNE 16, 2018, SATURDAY/JYAISTHA 20—JYAISTHA 26, 1940

इस भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह पृथक संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके

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

भाग II—खण्ड 3—उप-खण्ड ;iiद्ध

PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)

भारत सरकार के मंत्राालयों ;रक्षा मंत्राालय को छोड़करद्ध द्वारा जारी किए गए सांविध्कि आदेश और अध्सिूचनाएं

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

(Other than the Ministry of Defence)

विदेश मंत्राालय

;सी.पी.वी. प्रभागद्ध

नई दिल्ली, 31 मई, 2018

का.आ. 927.—राजनयिक और कोंसुलीय अध्किारी ;शपथ एवं पफीसद्ध के अध्निियम, 1948 ;1948 का 41द्ध की धरा 2 के ख्ांड ;कद्ध के अनुसरण में वैधनिक आदेश ।

एतद्‌द्वारा, केंद्र सरकार भारत के दूतावास, मस्कत में श्री सोणी जोसपफ, सहायक अनुभाग अध्किारी को दिनांक 31 मई, 2018 से सहायक कोंसुलर अध्किारी के तौर पर कोंसुलर सेवाओं के निर्वहन के लिए प्राधिकृत करती है ।

[सं. टी-4330/01/2016]

प्रकाश चन्द, निदेशक ;कोंसुलरद्ध

MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

(C.P.V. DIVISION)

New Delhi, the 31st May, 2018

S.O. 927.—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 Sonny Joseph, Assistant Section Officer as Assistant Consular Officer in Embassy of India, Muscat to perform the Consular services with effect from 31st May, 2018.

[No. T-4330/01/2016]

PRAKASH CHAND, Director (Consular) 3128 GI/2018

(4215)4216 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 16, 2018/JYAISTHA 26, 1940 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 31 मई, 2018

का.आ. 928.—राजनयिक और कोंसुलीय अध्किारी ;शपथ एवं पफीसद्ध के अध्निियम, 1948 ;1948 का 41द्ध की धरा 2 के ख्ांड ;कद्ध के अनुसरण में वैधनिक आदेश ।

एतद्‌द्वारा, केंद्र सरकार भारत के उच्चायोग, दार-ए-सलाम में श्री नाचोन्सो, सहायक अनुभाग अध्किारी को दिनांक 31 मई, 2018 से सहायक कोंसुलर अध्किारी के तौर पर कोंसुलर सेवाओं के निर्वहन के लिए प्राधिकृत करती है ।

[सं. टी-4330/06/2018]

प्रकाश चन्द, निदेशक ;कोंसुलरद्ध

New Delhi, the 31st May, 2018

S.O. 928.—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 Ngachonso, Assistant Section Officer as Assistant Consular Officer in High Commission of India, Dar-es-Salaam to perform the Consular services with effect from 31st May, 2018.

[No. T-4330/06/2018]

PRAKASH CHAND, Director (Consular)

नई दिल्ली, 1 जून, 2018

का.आ. 929.—राजनयिक और कोंसुलीय अध्किारी ;शपथ एवं पफीसद्ध के अध्निियम, 1948 ;1948 का 41द्ध की धरा 2 के ख्ांड ;कद्ध के अनुसरण में वैधनिक आदेश ।

एतद्‌द्वारा, केंद्र सरकार भारत के उच्चायोग, विक्टोरिया में श्रीमती आरती तिवारी, सहायक अनुभाग अध्किारी को दिनांक 1 जून, 2018 से सहायक कोंसुलर अध्किारी के तौर पर कोंसुलर सेवाओं के निर्वहन के लिए प्राधिकृत करती है ।

[सं. टी-4330/05/2018]

प्रकाश चन्द, निदेशक ;कोंसुलरद्ध

New Delhi, the 1st June, 2018

S.O. 929.—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 Smt. Arti Tiwari, Assistant Section Officer as Assistant Consular Officer in High Commission of India, Victoria to perform the Consular services with effect from 1st June, 2018.

[No. T-4330/05/2018]

PRAKASH CHAND, Director (Consular)

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

¼dkfeZd vkSj izf'k{k.k foHkkx½

ubZ fnYyh] 15 ekpZ] 2018

dk-vk- 930.—कें (cid:3)ीय सरकार, दंड प्र(िcid:1⁵)या संहिता, ¹⁹⁷³ (¹⁹⁷⁴ का अधिनियम सं^{0 2}) की धारा ²⁴ की उपधारा (⁸) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते ,ए, .ी मनोहरन पी., अधिवक्ता को, के रल राज्य और लक्षद्वीप संघ राज्यक्षेत्र में दिल्ली िवशेष पुिलस स्थापन (के न्(cid:3)ीय अन्वेषण ब्यूरो) द्वारा संस्थित अपीलों, पुनरीक्षणों और उससे संबंधित और उसके आनुषंगिक अन्य मामलों का संचालन के िलए, नियुक्ति की तारीख से तीन वर्ष के लिए या अगले आदेश तक, इनमें से जो भी पूर्वतर हो, िवशेष लोक अिभयोजक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[Qk- la- 225@24@2017&,ohMh&II]

,l- ih- vkj- f=ikBh] voj lfpo4217 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 16, 2018/ज्येष्ठ 26, 1940

MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS

(Department of Personnel and Training)

New Delhi, the 15th March, 2018

S.O. 930.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (8) of section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Manoharan P. Advocate, as a Special Public Prosecutor for conducting prosecution of cases instituted by Delhi Special Police Establishment in the State of Kerala and Union territory of Lakshadweep as entrusted to him by the Central Bureau of Investigation in the trial courts, appeals, revisions and other matters arising out of these cases in Revisional or Appellate Courts established by law, for a period of three years from the date of appointment or further orders whichever is earlier.

[F.No. 225/24/2017-AVD-II]

S. P. R. TRIPATHI, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 5 जून, 2018

काकाकाका.आ..आ..आ..आ. 931931931931....————के न्(cid:3) सरकार, एतKारा दिल्ली िवशेष पुलिस स्थापना अिधिनयम, 1946 (1946 का अधिनियम संख्या 25) की धारा 6 के साथ पठित धारा 5 की उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते ,ए मध्य प्रदेश राज्य सरकार की अधिसूचना सं. F-12-28/2017/b-1/TWO दिनांक 02.03.2017 के माध्यम से प्राप्त सहमित से फे डरेशन ऑफ डेयरी कोऑपरेटिव एसोसियेशन

ऑफ इबाराकी (FDCAI) पीएचपी फाइलों को सर्वर में प्लांट करने के लिए सर्वर कं प्यूटर तक अनाधिकृ त एक्सेस और संयुक्त राष्ट्र में

स्थित वित्तीय संस्थानों के विरूद्व DDoS Attack करने के लिए एक के न्(cid:3) के रूप से तैयार किया और इस प्रकार सूचना प्रौद्योगिकी

अिधिनयम, 2000 की धारा 43 के साथ पठित धारा 66 के सदृश जापान के अनाधिकृ त कं प्यूटर एक्सेस निषेध अधिनियम के अनु[छेद 2-

4, अनु[छेद 3 एवं अनु[छेद 11 का उल्लंघन किया और FDCAI को क्षति प,ंचाने से संबंधित विधिक सहायता के िलए जापान दूतावास,

नई दिल्ली तथा विदेश मंत्रालय, नई दिल्ली/गृह मंत्रालय, नई दिल्ली के माध्यम से राष्ट्रीय पुलिस एजेन्सी से प्राप्त अनुरोध पत्र (नोट वब^ल

सं. 1/67/14 दिनांक 19.02.2014) की जांच करने के लिए तथा उक्त मामले से सम्ब' अपराधों में किए गए प्रयासों, दुष्प्रेरणाओं और षbंत्रों तथा उसी संcयवहार में किए गए या उन्हd तथ्यों से उत्पन्न प्रासंगिक अन्य अपराधों की जांच करने के लिए दिल्ली िवशेष पुिलस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों और क्षेत्राधिकार का समस्त मध्य प्रदेश राज्य में विस्तार करती है ।

[फा. सं. 228/82/2014-एवीडी-II]

एस. पी. आर. त्रिपाठी, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 5th June, 2018

S.O. 931.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946), the Central Government with the consent of State Government of Madhya Pradesh issued vide Notification No.F-12-28/2017/B-1/TWO dated 02.03.2017 hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment in the whole of the State of Madhya Pradesh for investigation in respect of execution of Letters Rogatory received from the National Police Agency Japan through Embassy of Japan, New Delhi (Note Verbale No. 1/67/14 dated 19.02.2014) and Ministry of External Affairs, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi for legal assistance relating to a case of violation of the Act on the Prohibition of unauthorized access to the server computer of the Federation of Dairy Co-operative Association of Ibaraki (FDCAI) planting PHP files in the server, and made it as a Springboard to make DDoS Attack against financial institutions located in the United States and thus caused damage to FDCAI which correspond to violation of article 2-4, article 3 and article 11 of Act on the Prohibition of Unauthorized Computer Access of Japan corresponding to section 43 r/w section 66 of Information Technology Act, 2000 and any other offence(s), attempt(s), abetments and conspiracies in relation to or in connection with above mentioned offence and any other offence or offences committed in the course of the same transaction arising out of the same facts.

[F. No. 228/82/2014-AVD-II]

S. P. R. TRIPATHI, Under Secy.

शु(िपत्रा

नई दिल्ली, 5 जून, 2018

का.आ. 932.—केन्द्र सरकार एतद्‌द्वारा दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापन अध्निियम, 1946 ;1946 का अध्निियम सं. 25द्ध की धरा 6 के साथ पठित धरा 5 की उप-धरा ;1द्ध द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए बिहार राज्य सरकार के गृह विभाग की अध्सिूचना सं.

8/सीबीआई-80-05/2007 एचपी-6888/पटना दिनांक 24.08.2017 में जारी शु(िपत्रा संख्या 8/सीबीआई-80-05/2007 एचपी-3253/पटना दिनांक 17.04.2018 के माध्यम से प्राप्त सहमति से अपनी अध्सिूचना एपफ. सं. 228/02/2018-एवीडी-II दिनांक 19.03.2018 में निम्नलिखित शु(िपत्रा जारी करता है ।

उपरोक्त अध्सिूचना दिनांक 19.03.2018 में फ्भागलपुर एवं सहरसा में सरकारी बैंक खातोंय् को फ्भागलपुर एवं बांका में सरकारी बैंक खातेय् पढ़ा जाएगा ।

उपरोक्त अध्सिूचना दिनांक 19.03.2018 की शेष अंतर्वस्तु यथावत रहेगी ।

[पफा. सं. 228/02/2018-एवीडी-II]

एस. पी. आर. त्रिापाठी, अवर सचिव

CORRIGENDUM

New Delhi, the 5th June, 2018

S.O. 932.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946), the Central Government with the consent of State Government of Bihar, Home Department, issued vide Corrigendum No. 8/C.B.I.-80-05/2017 HP-3253 Patna Dated 17.04.2018 issued in Notification No. 8/C.B.I.-80-05/2017 HP-6888 Patna Dated 24.08.2017, hereby issues the following Corrigendum in it Notification F.No. 228/02/2018-AVD-II dated 19.03.2018 :

"Government Bank Accounts in Bhagalpur and Saharsa" in the aforesaid Notification dated 19.03.2018 shall be read as "Government Bank Accounts in Bhagalpur and Banka".

Remaining contents of aforesaid Notification dated 19.03.2018 shall remain the same.

[F. No. 228/02/2018-AVD-II]

S. P. R. TRIPATHI, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 6 जून, 2018

काकाकाका.आ..आ..आ..आ. 933933933933....————के न्(cid:3) सरकार एतKारा दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना अिधिनयम, 1946 (1946 का अधिनियम संख्या 25) की धारा 6 के साथ पठित धारा 5 की उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते ,ए त्रिपुरा राज्य सरकार, गृह विभाग अगरतला की अिधसूचना सं. एफ.21(2)-पीडी/12(पी)/873 दिनांक 17.03.2018 के माध्यम से प्राप्त सहमति से सुदीप दत्ता भौमिक, सयनदान पत्रिका के पत्रकार, अगरतला की हत्या के संबंध में भारतीय दंड संहिता की धारा 302/120बी, 1860(1860 का अधिनियम संख्या 45), तथा आयुध अधिनियम की धारा 27 के अंतर्गत, बोधजोंग नगर पुलिस थाना मामला संख्या 2017/बीजेएन/50, दिनांक 21.11.2017 में अन्वेषण के लिए तथा उक्त मामले में भारतीय दंड संहिता में वर्णीत एक अथवा एक से अधिक अपराधों से सम्ब' में किए गए प्रयासों, दुष्प्रेरणाओं और षbंत्रों तथा उसी संcयवहार में किए गए या उन्हd तथ्यों से उत्पन्न प्रासंगिक कोई अन्य अपराध अथवा अपराधों की जांच करने के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों और क्षेत्राधिकार का विस्तार समस्त त्रिपुरा राज्य में करती है ।

[फा. सं. 228/15/2018-एवीडी-II]

एस. पी. आर. त्रिपाठी, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2018

S.O. 933.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946), the Central Government with the consent of State Government of Tripura, Home Department issued vide Notification No. F.21(2)-PD/12(P)/873 dated Agartala, 17.03.2018, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment in the whole of the State of Tripura for investigation in the Bodhjong Nagar PS Case No. 2017/BJN/50 dated 21.11.2017 U/s 302/120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860(Act No. 45 of 1860), and 27 of Arms Act in connection with the death of Sudip Datta Bhowmik, a reporter of the Syandan Patrika, Agartala and attempts, abetments and conspiracies in relation to or in connection with one or more of the offences mentioned in the Indian Penal Code and any other offence or offences committed in the course of the same transaction or arising out of the said facts.

[F. No. 228/15/2018-AVD-II]

S. P. R. TRIPATHI, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 7 जून, 2018

काकाकाका.आ..आ..आ..आ. ^934934934934....————dsUnz ljdkj ,rn~}kjk naM izfdz;k lafgrk] 1973 ¼1974 dk vf/kfu;e la- 2½ dh /kkjk 24 dh mi/kkjk ¼8½ }kjk iznRr 'kfä;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, xkft;kckn fLFkr fopkj.k U;k;ky; esa ¼1½ vkjlh bZvksMCY;w&II 02 bZ 1995] ,e,eVhlh ekeyk] ds-v- C;wjks cuke jeu esgrk ¼2½ vkjlh 3 bZ 1998 bZvksMCY;w&II ,e,eVhlh ekeyk ¼3½ vkjlh 3 bZ 2002 bZvksMCY;w&II] ,e,eVhlh ekeyk ¼4½ vkjlh 7 bZ 2003 bZvksMCY;w&II eSllZ vnkuh ,DliksVZ ¼5½ vkjlh 6 bZ 2003 bZvksMCY;w&II eSllZ txnEck IksVªksfy;e izk- fy- ¼6½ vkjlh 6 bZ 2003 bZvksMCY;w&II eSllZ nwxkZ vksojlht] ds-v-C;wjks] cuke ijohu pqx ds fopkj.k rFkk buls mRiUu izklafxd vU; ekeyksa esa vihy@iqujh{k.k dk lapkyu djus ds fy, Jh vkj-ch- 'kekZ] vf/koDrk dks mudh fu;qfDr dh rkjh[k ls rhu o"kksaZ ds fy, vFkok vf/koDrk dks lkSais x, ekeyksa ds fuiVku gksus rd vFkok vxys vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh igys gks] fo'ks"k yksd vfHk;kstd ds :i esa fu;qDr djrh gSA

[फा. सं. 225/14/2017-एवीडी-II]

एस. पी. आर. त्रिपाठी, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 7th June, 2018

S.O. 934.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (8) of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( 2 of 1974), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri R.B. Sharma, Advocate as the Special Public Prosecutor for conducting cases (1) RC EOW – II 02E 1995, MMTC case, CBI Vs. Raman Mehta; (2) RC 3 E 1998 EOW-II MMTC case; (3) RC 3 E 2002 EOW-II, MMTC case; (4) RC 7 E 2003 EOW-II M/s. Adani Exports; (5) RC 6 E 2003 EOW-II M/s. Jagdamba Petrolium Pvt. Ltd.; and (6) RC 6 E 2003 EOW-II M/s. Durga Overseas, CBI, V/s Parveen Chugh before the trial court at Ghaziabad and appeals, revisions or other matters connected therewith and incidental thereto for a period of three years from the date of appointment or disposal of the cases entrusted to the Counsel or until further orders whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 225/14/2017-AVD-II]

S. P. R. TRIPATHI, Under Secy.

वाणिज्य एवं उद्योग मंत्रालयवाणिज्य एवं उद्योग मंत्रालयवाणिज्य एवं उद्योग मंत्रालयवाणिज्य एवं उद्योग मंत्रालय

(वाणिज्य विभाग) (वाणिज्य विभाग) (वाणिज्य विभाग) (वाणिज्य विभाग)

नई दिल्ली, 7 जून, 2018

का.आ.का.आ.का.आ.का.आ. 935935935935....————के न्(cid:3)ीय सरकार, निर्यात (गुणवत्ता नियंत्रण एवं निरीक्षण) नियम, 1964 के िनयम 12 के उपिनयम (2) व (3) के साथ पठित, निर्यात (गुणवत्ता नियंत्रण एवं निरीक्षण) अधिनियम, 1963 (1963 का 22) की धारा 7 की उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते ,ए, मैसर्स मित्रा एस.के . प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, हाउसिग बोर्ड कोलोनी, एचबी -४४, मधुबन, पारादीप, िजला जगतसिघपुर, ओिडशा – 754142, को इस अिधसूचना के राजपत्र में प्रकाशन की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अविध के िलए खिनज और

अयस्क के निरीक्षण करने के लिए भारत सरकार के वाणिज्य मंत्रालय की शासकीय राजपत्र भाग-II, खंmड-3, उप-खंmड (ii), में दिनांक 20 दिसम्बर, 1965 की अिधसूचना सं. का.आ. 3975 तथा दिनांक 20 दिसम्बर, 1965 की अिधसूचना सं. का.आ. 3978 के तहत प्रकाशित अधिसूचना में उपाब' अनुसूचियों में विनिnदष्ट खनिज और अयस्क (cid:15)मश:

(क) मैंगनीज अयस्क, आयरन अयस्क, फे रोमैंगनीज स्लैग समेत फे रोमैंगनीज

(ख) मैंगनीज डाइऑक्साइड तथा (cid:15)ोम कं सन्ट्रेट सहित (cid:15)ोम अयस्क

को निर्यात से पूर्व निम्नलिखित शतs के अधीन पारादीप पत्तन, धामरा पत्तन तथा गोपालपुर पत्तन, में एक अभिकरण के tप में मान्यता देती है, अर्थात्:

(i) यह अिभकरण, खनिज और अयस्क समूह-I के निर्यात (निरीक्षण) नियम, 1965 तथा खनिज और अयस्क समूह-II के निर्यात (निरीक्षण) नियम, 1965 के नियम 4 के अधीन निरीक्षण की प'ति की जाँच करने के लिये निर्यात निरीक्षण परिषद् द्वारा निमित्त नामनिnदष्ट अधिकारियों को पर्याप्त सुविधाएं देगा; और

(ii) यह अिभकरण, इस अिधसूचना के अधीन अपने कायs के पालन में निदेशक (निरीक्षण और गुणवत्ता नियंत्रण) निर्यात निरीक्षण परिषद् द्वारा समय-समय पर, लिखित रूप में, दिए गए ऐसे निद^शों से आब' होगा।

[फा. सं. के -16014/3/2018-निर्यात निरीक्षण]

संतोष कु मार सारंगी, संयुक्त सचिव (निर्यात निरीक्षण विभाग)4220 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 16, 2018/JYAISTHA 26, 1940 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY

(Department of Commerce)

New Delhi, the 7th June, 2018

S.O. 935.—In exercise of the powers conferred by the sub-section (1) of section 7 of the Export (Quality Control and Inspection) Act, 1963 (22 of 1963) read with sub-rule (2) and (3) of rule 12 of the Export (Quality Control and Inspection) Rules, 1964, the Central Government hereby recognizes M/s Mitra S.K. Private Limited, Housing Board Colony, HB-44, Madhuban, Paradip, District. Jagatsinghpur, Odisha-754142, as an agency for a period of three years from the date of publication of this notification, for the inspection of-

(a) Manganese ore, Iron Ore , Ferromanganese including Ferromanganese Slag and

(b) Manganese Dioxide and Chrome Ore including Chrome Concentrate

specified in the Schedule annexed to the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Commerce, vide number S.O. 3975 dated the 20th December, 1965, and S.O.3978 dated the 20th December, 1965 respectively, prior to export of the said Minerals and Ores at Paradip Port, Dhamra Port, 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 and Export of Minerals and Ores - Group II (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. K-16014/3/2018- Export Inspection]

SANTOSH KUMAR SARANGI, Jt. Secy. (Export Inspection Division)

विद्युतविद्युतविद्युतविद्युत मंत्रालयमंत्रालयमंत्रालयमंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 10 मई, 2018

का.आ.का.आ.का.आ.का.आ. 936936936936....————कें (cid:3)ीय सरकार, राजभाषा (संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के िलए प्रयोग) िनयम, 1976 के िनयम 10 के उप िनयम (4) के अनुसरण में विद्युत मंत्रालय के प्रशासनिक नियंत्रणाधीन एनटीपीसी िलिमटेड के तालचेर थर्मल पावर स्टेशन, तालचेर अंगुल- 759101 (ओिडशा) तथा फरxा सुपर थर्मल पावर स्टेशन, नबाtण, मुyशदाबाद-742236 (पzिम बंगाल), िजनके 80 प्रतिशत कर्मचारीवृ ंद ने हिदी का कार्यसाधक {ान प्राप्त कर िलया है, को एतKारा अिधसूिचत करती है।

[सं. 11011/9/2017-हिदी]

भारती, संयुक्त सिचव

MINISTRY OF POWER

New Delhi, the 10th May, 2018

S.O. 936.—In pursuance of Sub Rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Languages (Use for Official Purpose of the Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government, hereby, notify the TALCHER THERMAL POWER STATION, TALCHER, ANGUL-759101 (ORISSA) and FARAKKA SUPER THERMAL POWER STATION, NABARUN, MURSHIDABAD-742236 (W.B.) of NTPC Limited under the administrative control of Ministry of Power, where 80% of the staff have acquired working knowledge of Hindi.

[No.11011/9/2017-Hindi]

BHARATI, Jt. Secy.

कोयला मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 12 जून, 2018

का.आ. का.आ. का.आ. का.आ. 937937937937....————के न्(cid:3)ीय सरकार, सरकारी स्थान (अप्राधिकृ त अधिभोगियों की बेदखली) अधिनियम,1971 (1971 का 40) की धारा 3 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते ,ए, भारत के राजपत्र के भाग II, खंड 3, उप-खंड (ii), तारीख 6 अगस्त, 1994 में प्रकाशित, भारत सरकार के कोयला मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्यांक का.आ. 1857, तारीख 24 जून, 1994, में निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है, अर्थात् :————

उक्त अधिसूचना की सारणी में (cid:15)म संख्यांक 57 और इससे संबंधित प्रविष्टियों के पzात् , निम्नलिखित (cid:15)म संख्यांक और प्रविष्टियां अंत:स्थापित की जाएंगी, अर्थात्:————

सारणीसारणीसारणीसारणी

आर. एस. सरोज, अवर सिचव

टिप्पणटिप्पणटिप्पणटिप्पण :::: मूल अिधसूचना, संख्यांक का.आ. 1857, तारीख 24 जून, 1994, द्वारा भारत के राजपत्र, भाग II, खंड 3, उप-खंड (ii), तारीख 6 अगस्त, 1994 में प्रकाशित की गई थी ।

MINISTRY OF COAL

New Delhi, the 12th June, 2018

S.O. 937.—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 amendment in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal, number S.O. 1857, dated the 24th June, 1994, published in Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii) of the Gazette of India, dated the 6th August, 1994.

In the Table of the said notification, after serial number 57 and the entries relating thereto, the following shall be inserted, namely:-

TABLE

[F.No. 43022/5/2018-LA&IR ]

R. S. SAROJ, Under Secy.

Note : The principal notification was published in the Gazette of India, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii), vide number S.O. 1857, dated the 24th June,1994, published on dated the 6th August,1994.

उपभोक्ता मामले, खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्राालय

;खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण विभागद्ध

नई दिल्ली, 7 जून, 2018

का.आ. 938.—केंद्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ;संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोगद्ध नियम, 1976 के नियम 10 के उपनियम ;4द्ध के अनुसरण में, उपभोक्ता मामले, खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्राालय ;खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण विभागद्ध के प्रशासनिक नियंत्राणाध्ीन निम्नलिखित कार्यालय, जिसके 80 प्रतिशत से अध्कि कर्मचारीवृन्द ने हदी का कार्यसाध्क ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, को राजपत्रा में अधिसूचित करती है :————

1. केन्द्रीय भंडारण निगम,

सेंट्रल वेयरहाऊस, नासिक रोड,

देवलाली विलेज, रेलवे स्टेशन के पास,

नासिक-422101

[सं. ई-11011/1/2008-हदी]

कमल दत्ता, संयुक्त सचिव

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Food and Public Distribution)

New Delhi, the 7th June, 2018

S.O. 938.—In pursuance of Sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Language (Use for Official Purpose of the Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies the following office under the administrative control of the Ministry of Conumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution (Department of Food and Public Distribution), whereof more than 80% of staff have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi :

1. Central Warehousing Corporation,

Central Warehouse, Nasik Road, Devlali Village, Near Railway Station, Nasik-422101

[No. E-11011/1/2008- Hindi]

KAMAL DATTA, Jt. Secy.

पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृ तिक गैस मंत्रालयपेट्रोलियम और प्राकृ तिक गैस मंत्रालयपेट्रोलियम और प्राकृ तिक गैस मंत्रालयपेट्रोलियम और प्राकृ तिक गैस मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 4 जून, 2018

का.आ. का.आ. का.आ. का.आ. 939939939939....————तेल उद्योग (विकास) अधिनियम 1974 (1974 का 47) की धारा (3) की उपधारा (3)(क) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते ,ए, के न्(cid:3) सरकार एतKारा .ी अमर नाथ, संयुक्त सचिव (अन्वेषण), पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृ तिक गैस मंत्रालय को दिनांक 01.06.2018 से 31.05.2020 तक अथवा अगले आदेश होने तक, जो भी पहले हो, तेल उद्योग विकास बोर्ड के सदस्य के रूप में नियुक्त करती है।

[फा.सं. जी-38011/41/2016-वित्त-I]

पेरिन देवी, िनदेशक4223 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 16, 2018/ज्येष्ठ 26, 1940

MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS

New Delhi, the 4th June, 2018

S.O. 939.—In exercise of the Powers conferred by Sub-Section (3)(a) of Section 3 of the Oil Industry (Development) Act, 1974 (47 of 1974), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Amar Nath, Joint Secretary(Exploration), Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas as a member of the Oil Industry Development Board w.e.f. 01-06-2018 to 31-05-2020 or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

[F.No. G-38011/41/2016-Fin.I]

PERIN DEVI, Director

नई दिल्ली, 8 जून, 2018

का.आ.का.आ.का.आ.का.आ. 940940940940....————के न्(cid:3)ीय सरकार ने पे(cid:128)ोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम 1962, (1962 का 50) की धारा 2 के खmड (अ) के अनुसरण में 26 नवम्बर, 2011 को भारत के राजपत्र में प्रकाशित, भारत सरकार के पे(cid:128)ोलियम और प्राकृ तिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 3384 तारीख 16 नवम्बर, 2011 में निम्नलिखित रूप में संशोधन संशोधन संशोधन संशोधन करती हैकरती हैकरती हैकरती है :-

".ी अिनल कु मार, उप प्रबन्धक (तकनीकी सेवाए) " शब्दों शब्दों शब्दों शब्दों के के के के स्थान स्थान स्थान स्थान परपरपरपर, ''.ी महें(cid:3) कु मार सा(cid:129) , वरिष्ठ अनुरक्षण प्रबन्धक, " शब्दशब्दशब्दशब्द रखेरखेरखेरखे जाएंगेजाएंगेजाएंगेजाएंगे।

यह अधिसूचना जारी होने की तारीख से लागू होगी । यह अधिसूचना जारी होने की तारीख से लागू होगी यह अधिसूचना जारी होने की तारीख से लागू होगी यह अधिसूचना जारी होने की तारीख से लागू होगी

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)/239/2017-ओआर-I/ई-13892]

पवन कु मार, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 8th June, 2018

S.O. 940.—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. 3384 dated 16th November 2011, published in the Gazette of India on 26th November, 2011 namely:

In the said notification, for the words "Shri Anil Kumar, Dy. Manager (Technical Services)" the words "Shri Mahendra Kumar Sahoo, Senior Maintenance Manager" shall be substituted.

The notification is applicable from the date of issue.

[F. No. R-11025(11)/239/2017-OR-I/E-13892]

PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 8 जून, 2018

का.आ.का.आ.का.आ.का.आ. ^941941941941....————dsUnzh; ljdkj us isVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbZiykbZu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e 1962 ¼1962 dk 50½ ¼ftls blesa blds Ik'pkr mä vf/kfu;e dgk x;k gSa½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu tkjh dh xbZ Hkkjr ljdkj ds isVªksfy;e vkSj izkd`frd xSl ea=ky; dh vf/klwpuk la[;k dk-vk- 2754 rkjh[k 7 fnlEcj 2017] tks Hkkjr ds jkti= rkjh[k 9 fnlEcj 2017] esa izdkf'kr dh xbZ Fkh }kjk ml vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa fofufnZ"V Hkwfe esa fcgkj jkT; esa ^^iVuk & eksfrgkjh & cSrkyiqj 'kk[kk ikbiykbu** ds vUrxZr ftyk xksikyxat esa isVªksfy;e ifjogu ds fy, bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbZiykbZu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds vtZu ds vius vk'k; dh ?kks"k.kk dh Fkh (

vkSj mä jkti= vf/klwpuk dh izfr;ka turk dks rkjh[k 11 ekpZ 2018 rd miyC/k djk nh xbZ Fkh (

vkSj l{ke izkf/kdkjh us mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu dsUnzh; ljdkj dks fjiksVZ ns nh gS ( vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj us] mä fjiksVZ ij fopkj djus ds Ik'pkr~ vkSj ;g lek/kku gks tkus ij fd mä Hkwfe ikbZiykbZu fcNkus ds fy, visf{kr gS] mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu djus dk fofu'p; fd;k gS (4224 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 16, 2018/JYAISTHA 26, 1940 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ }kjk izn~Ùk 'kfä;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ;g ?kks"k.kk djrh gS fd bl vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa fofufnZ"V Hkwfe esa ikbZiykbZu fcNkus ds fy, mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k tk, (

vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼4½ }kjk izn~Ùk 'kfä;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] ;g funsZ'k nsrh gS fd mä Hkwfe esa mi;ksx dk vf/kdkj bl ?kks"k.kk ds izdk'ku dh rkjh[k ls dsUnzh; ljdkj esa fufgr gksus ds ctk,] lHkh foYyaxeksa ls eqä gksdj bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM esa fufgr gksxhA

isVªksfy;e vksj [kfut ikbZiykbZu vf/kfu;e] 1962 dh /kkjk 10 ds v/khu fdlh Hkh {kfriwfrZ ds fy, bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM iw.kZr;k mÙkjnk;h gksxh vkSj ikbZiykbZu ls lEcfU/kr fdlh Hkh ekeys ij dsUnzh; ljdkj ds fo#) dksbZ okn nkok ;k dkuwuh dk;Zokgh ugha gks ldsxhA

अनुसूचीअनुसूचीअनुसूचीअनुसूची

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)/196/2017-ओआर-I/ई-9925]

पवन कु मार, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 8th June, 2018

S.O. 941.—Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas S.O. No. 2754 dated the 7th December, 2017, 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), (here in after referred to as the said Act), published in the Gazette of India dated the 9th December, 2017, the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying "Patna -4225 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 16, 2018/ज्येष्ठ 26, 1940 Motihari - Baitalpur Branch Pipeline" for the transportation of Petroleum Products in Gopalgunj District the state of Bihar by Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public up to 11th March, 2018;

And whereas the competent authority has under sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act submitted report to the Central Government;

And whereas the Central Government, after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline, has decided to acquire right of user therein;

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 land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

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 for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest on the date of publication of the declaration, in 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 & MP Act, 1962 and no suit, claim or legal proceeding would lie against the Central Government on any matter relating to the pipeline.

SCHEDULE

[F. No. R-11025(11)/196/2017-OR-I/E-9925] PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 8 जून, 2018

का.आ.का.आ.का.आ.का.आ. ^942942942942....————dsUnzh; ljdkj us isVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbZiykbZu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e 1962 ¼1962 dk 50½ ¼ftls blesa blds Ik'pkr mä vf/kfu;e dgk x;k gSa½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu tkjh dh xbZ Hkkjr ljdkj ds isVªksfy;e vkSj izkd`frd xSl ea=ky; dh vf/klwpuk la[;k dk-vk- 2685 rkjh[k 21 uoEcj 2017] tks Hkkjr ds jkti= rkjh[k 2 fnlEcj 2017] esa izdkf'kr dh xbZ Fkh }kjk ml vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa fofufnZ"V Hkwfe esa fcgkj jkT; esa ^^iVuk & eksfrgkjh & cSrkyiqj 'kk[kk ikbiykbu** ds vUrxZr ftyk iwohZ pEikj.k esa isVªksfy;e ifjogu ds fy, bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbZiykbZu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds vtZu ds vius vk'k; dh ?kks"k.kk dh Fkh (

vkSj mä jkti= vf/klwpuk dh izfr;ka turk dks rkjh[k 11 ekpZ 2018 rd miyC/k djk nh xbZ Fkh (

vkSj l{ke izkf/kdkjh us mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu dsUnzh; ljdkj dks fjiksVZ ns nh gS (

vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj us] mä fjiksVZ ij fopkj djus ds Ik'pkr~ vkSj ;g lek/kku gks tkus ij fd mä Hkwfe ikbZiykbZu fcNkus ds fy, visf{kr gS] mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu djus dk fofu'p; fd;k gS (

vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ }kjk izn~Ùk 'kfä;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ;g ?kks"k.kk djrh gS fd bl vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa fofufnZ"V Hkwfe esa ikbZiykbZu fcNkus ds fy, mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k tk, (

vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼4½ }kjk izn~Ùk 'kfä;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] ;g funsZ'k nsrh gS fd mä Hkwfe esa mi;ksx dk vf/kdkj bl ?kks"k.kk ds izdk'ku dh rkjh[k ls dsUnzh; ljdkj esa fufgr gksus ds ctk,] lHkh foYyaxeksa ls eqä gksdj bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM esa fufgr gksxhA

isVªksfy;e vksj [kfut ikbZiykbZu vf/kfu;e] 1962 dh /kkjk 10 ds v/khu fdlh Hkh {kfriwfrZ ds fy, bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM iw.kZr;k mÙkjnk;h gksxh vkSj ikbZiykbZu ls lEcfU/kr fdlh Hkh ekeys ij dsUnzh; ljdkj ds fo#) dksbZ okn nkok ;k dkuwuh dk;Zokgh ugha gks ldsxhA

अनुसूचीअनुसूचीअनुसूचीअनुसूची

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)/196/2017-ओआर-I/ई-9925]

पवन कु मार, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 8th June, 2018

S.O. 942.—Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas S.O. No. 2685 dated the 21st November, 2017, 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), (here in after referred to as the said Act), published in the Gazette of India dated the 2nd December, 2017, the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying "Patna - Motihari - Baitalpur Branch Pipeline" for the transportation of Petroleum Products in East Champaran District the state of Bihar by Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public up to 11th March, 2018;

And whereas the competent authority has under sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act submitted report to the Central Government;

And whereas the Central Government, after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline, has decided to acquire right of user therein;

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 land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

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 for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest on the date of publication of the declaration, in 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 & MP Act, 1962 and no suit, claim or legal proceeding would lie against the Central Government on any matter relating to the pipeline.

SCHEDULE

[F. No. R-11025(11)/196/2017-OR-I/E-9925] PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 8 जून, 2018

का.आ.का.आ.का.आ.का.आ. ^943943943943....————dsUnzh; ljdkj us isVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbZiykbZu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e 1962 ¼1962 dk 50½ ¼ftls blesa blds Ik'pkr mä vf/kfu;e dgk x;k gSa½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu tkjh dh xbZ Hkkjr ljdkj ds isVªksfy;e vkSj izkd`frd xSl ea=ky; dh vf/klwpuk la[;k dk-vk- 2755 rkjh[k 7 fnlEcj 2017] tks Hkkjr ds jkti= rkjh[k 9 fnlEcj 2017] esa izdkf'kr dh xbZ Fkh }kjk ml vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa fofufnZ"V Hkwfe esa fcgkj jkT; esa ^^iVuk & eksfrgkjh & cSrkyiqj 'kk[kk ikbiykbu** ds vUrxZr ftyk lkju esa isVªksfy;e ifjogu ds fy, bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbZiykbZu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds vtZu ds vius vk'k; dh ?kks"k.kk dh Fkh (

vkSj mä jkti= vf/klwpuk dh izfr;ka turk dks rkjh[k 11 ekpZ 2018 rd miyC/k djk nh xbZ Fkh (

vkSj l{ke izkf/kdkjh us mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu dsUnzh; ljdkj dks fjiksVZ ns nh gS (

vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj us] mä fjiksVZ ij fopkj djus ds Ik'pkr~ vkSj ;g lek/kku gks tkus ij fd mä Hkwfe ikbZiykbZu fcNkus ds fy, visf{kr gS] mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu djus dk fofu'p; fd;k gS (

vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ }kjk izn~Ùk 'kfä;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ;g ?kks"k.kk djrh gS fd bl vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa fofufnZ"V Hkwfe esa ikbZiykbZu fcNkus ds fy, mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k tk, (

vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼4½ }kjk izn~Ùk 'kfä;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] ;g funsZ'k nsrh gS fd mä Hkwfe esa mi;ksx dk vf/kdkj bl ?kks"k.kk ds izdk'ku dh rkjh[k ls dsUnzh; ljdkj esa fufgr gksus ds ctk,] lHkh foYyaxeksa ls eqä gksdj bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM esa fufgr gksxhA

isVªksfy;e vksj [kfut ikbZiykbZu vf/kfu;e] 1962 dh /kkjk 10 ds v/khu fdlh Hkh {kfriwfrZ ds fy, bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM iw.kZr;k mÙkjnk;h gksxh vkSj ikbZiykbZu ls lEcfU/kr fdlh Hkh ekeys ij dsUnzh; ljdkj ds fo#) dksbZ okn nkok ;k dkuwuh dk;Zokgh ugha gks ldsxhA

अनुसूचीअनुसूचीअनुसूचीअनुसूची

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)/196/2017-ओआर-I/ई-9925]

पवन कु मार, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 8th June, 2018

S.O. 943.—Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas S.O. No. 2755 dated the 7th December, 2017, 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), (here in after referred to as the said Act), published in the Gazette of India dated the 9th December, 2017, the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying "Patna - Motihari - Baitalpur Branch Pipeline" for the transportation of Petroleum Products in Saran District the state of Bihar by Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public up to 11th March, 2018;

And whereas the competent authority has under sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act submitted report to the Central Government;

And whereas the Central Government, after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline, has decided to acquire right of user therein;

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 land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

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 for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest on the date of publication of the declaration, in 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 & MP Act, 1962 and no suit, claim or legal proceeding would lie against the Central Government on any matter relating to the pipeline.

SCHEDULE

[F. No. R-11025(11)/196/2017-OR-I/E-9925] PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 8 जून, 2018

का.आ.का.आ.का.आ.का.आ. ^944944944944....————dsUnzh; ljdkj us isVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbZiykbZu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e 1962 ¼1962 dk 50½ ¼ftls blesa blds Ik'pkr mä vf/kfu;e dgk x;k gSa½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu tkjh dh xbZ Hkkjr ljdkj ds isVªksfy;e vkSj izkd`frd xSl ea=ky; dh vf/klwpuk la[;k dk-vk- 2688 rkjh[k 24 uoEcj 2017] tks Hkkjr ds jkti= rkjh[k 2 fnlEcj 2017] esa izdkf'kr dh xbZ Fkh }kjk ml vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa fofufnZ"V Hkwfe esa fcgkj jkT; esa ^^iVuk & eksfrgkjh & cSrkyiqj 'kk[kk ikbiykbu** ds vUrxZr ftyk iVuk esa isVªksfy;e ifjogu ds fy, bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbZiykbZu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds vtZu ds vius vk'k; dh ?kks"k.kk dh Fkh (

vkSj mä jkti= vf/klwpuk dh izfr;ka turk dks rkjh[k 12 ekpZ 2018 rd miyC/k djk nh xbZ Fkh (

vkSj l{ke izkf/kdkjh us mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu dsUnzh; ljdkj dks fjiksVZ ns nh gS (

vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj us] mä fjiksVZ ij fopkj djus ds Ik'pkr~ vkSj ;g lek/kku gks tkus ij fd mä Hkwfe ikbZiykbZu fcNkus ds fy, visf{kr gS] mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu djus dk fofu'p; fd;k gS (

vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ }kjk izn~Ùk 'kfä;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ;g ?kks"k.kk djrh gS fd bl vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa fofufnZ"V Hkwfe esa ikbZiykbZu fcNkus ds fy, mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k tk, (

vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼4½ }kjk izn~Ùk 'kfä;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] ;g funsZ'k nsrh gS fd mä Hkwfe esa mi;ksx dk vf/kdkj bl ?kks"k.kk ds izdk'ku dh rkjh[k ls dsUnzh; ljdkj esa fufgr gksus ds ctk,] lHkh foYyaxeksa ls eqä gksdj bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM esa fufgr gksxhA

isVªksfy;e vksj [kfut ikbZiykbZu vf/kfu;e] 1962 dh /kkjk 10 ds v/khu fdlh Hkh {kfriwfrZ ds fy, bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM iw.kZr;k mÙkjnk;h gksxh vkSj ikbZiykbZu ls lEcfU/kr fdlh Hkh ekeys ij dsUnzh; ljdkj ds fo#) dksbZ okn nkok ;k dkuwuh dk;Zokgh ugha gks ldsxhA

अनुसूचीअनुसूचीअनुसूचीअनुसूची

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)/196/2017-ओआर-I/ई-9925]

पवन कु मार, अवर सिचव4237 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 16, 2018/ज्येष्ठ 26, 1940

New Delhi, the 8th June, 2018

S.O. 944.—Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas S.O. No. 2688 dated the 24th November, 2017, 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), (here in after referred to as the said Act), published in the Gazette of India dated the 2nd December, 2017, the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying "Patna - Motihari - Baitalpur Branch Pipeline" for the transportation of Petroleum Products in Patna District the state of Bihar by Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public up to 12th March, 2018;

And whereas the competent authority has under sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act submitted report to the Central Government;

And whereas the Central Government, after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline, has decided to acquire right of user therein;

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 land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

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 for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest on the date of publication of the declaration, in 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 & MP Act, 1962 and no suit, claim or legal proceeding would lie against the Central Government on any matter relating to the pipeline.

SCHEDULE

[F. No. R-11025(11)/196/2017-OR-I/E-9925]

PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 8 जून, 2018

का.आ.का.आ.का.आ.का.आ. ^945945945945....————dsUnzh; ljdkj us isVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbZiykbZu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e 1962 ¼1962 dk 50½ ¼ftls blesa blds Ik'pkr mä vf/kfu;e dgk x;k gSa½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu tkjh dh xbZ Hkkjr ljdkj ds isVªksfy;e vkSj izkd`frd xSl ea=ky; dh vf/klwpuk la[;k dk-vk- 2633 rkjh[k 13 uoEcj 2017] tks Hkkjr ds jkti= rkjh[k 18 uoEcj 2017] esa izdkf'kr dh xbZ Fkh }kjk ml vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa fofufnZ"V Hkwfe esa fcgkj jkT; esa ^^iVuk & eksfrgkjh & cSrkyiqj 'kk[kk ikbiykbu** ds vUrxZr ftyk floku esa isVªksfy;e ifjogu ds fy, bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbZiykbZu fcNkus ds iz;kstu ds fy, mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj ds vtZu ds vius vk'k; dh ?kks"k.kk dh Fkh (

vkSj mä jkti= vf/klwpuk dh izfr;ka turk dks rkjh[k 11 ekpZ 2018 rd miyC/k djk nh xbZ Fkh (

vkSj l{ke izkf/kdkjh us mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu dsUnzh; ljdkj dks fjiksVZ ns nh gS (

vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj us] mä fjiksVZ ij fopkj djus ds Ik'pkr~ vkSj ;g lek/kku gks tkus ij fd mä Hkwfe ikbZiykbZu fcNkus ds fy, visf{kr gS] mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu djus dk fofu'p; fd;k gS (

vr% vc] dsUnzh; ljdkj mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ }kjk izn~Ùk 'kfä;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ;g ?kks"k.kk djrh gS fd bl vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa fofufnZ"V Hkwfe esa ikbZiykbZu fcNkus ds fy, mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k tk, (4239 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 16, 2018/ज्येष्ठ 26, 1940 vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼4½ }kjk izn~Ùk 'kfä;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] ;g funsZ'k nsrh gS fd mä Hkwfe esa mi;ksx dk vf/kdkj bl ?kks"k.kk ds izdk'ku dh rkjh[k ls dsUnzh; ljdkj esa fufgr gksus ds ctk,] lHkh foYyaxeksa ls eqä gksdj bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM esa fufgr gksxhA

isVªksfy;e vksj [kfut ikbZiykbZu vf/kfu;e] 1962 dh /kkjk 10 ds v/khu fdlh Hkh {kfriwfrZ ds fy, bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM iw.kZr;k mÙkjnk;h gksxh vkSj ikbZiykbZu ls lEcfU/kr fdlh Hkh ekeys ij dsUnzh; ljdkj ds fo#) dksbZ okn nkok ;k dkuwuh dk;Zokgh ugha gks ldsxhA

अनुसूचीअनुसूचीअनुसूचीअनुसूची

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)/196/2017-ओआर-I/ई-9925]

पवन कु मार, अवर सिचव4245 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 16, 2018/ज्येष्ठ 26, 1940

New Delhi, the 8th June, 2018

S.O. 945.—Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas S.O. No. 2633 dated the 13th November, 2017, 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), (here in after referred to as the said Act), published in the Gazette of India dated the 18th November, 2017, the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying "Patna - Motihari - Baitalpur Branch Pipeline" for the transportation of Petroleum Products in Siwan District the state of Bihar by Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public up to 12th March, 2018;

And whereas the competent authority has under sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act submitted report to the Central Government;

And whereas the Central Government, after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline, has decided to acquire right of user therein;

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 land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

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 for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest on the date of publication of the declaration, in 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 & MP Act, 1962 and no suit, claim or legal proceeding would lie against the Central Government on any matter relating to the pipeline.

SCHEDULE

[F. No. R-11025(11)/196/2017-OR-I/E-9925]

PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.

श्रम और रोजगार मंत्राालय

नई दिल्ली, 24 मई, 2018

का.आ. 946.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकोंंंंंं और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक

अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय, अहमदाबाद के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 75/2015द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24.05.2018 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-12011/45/2015-आईआर ;बी-Iद्ध]

रवि कुमार, अनुभाग अध्किारी

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

New Delhi, the 24th May, 2018

S.O. 946.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 75/2015) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Ahmedabad 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 24.05.2018.

[No. L-12011/45/2015-IR (B-I)]

RAVI KUMAR, 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 23rd April, 2018

Reference: (CGITA) No. 75/2015

1. The General Manager,

State Bank of India, Local Head Office, Lal Darwaja, Ahmedabad (Gujarat)

2. The Branch Manager,

State Bank of India, Radhanpur Branch, Dhiraj Chamber, Lal Baug, Radhanpur, Pathan, Ahmedabad

…First Party

V/s

The President, Akhil Bhartiya Karmachari Mahasangh, 28-B, Narayan Park, Behind Chandkheda Railway Station, Sabarmati, Ahmedabad (Gujarat)

…Second Party

For the First Party No : Shri D.C. Gandhi Associates

For the Second Party : Shri R.S. Sisodiya

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-12011/45/2015– IR(B-I) dated 04.09.2015 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 State Bank of India, Radhanpur Branch, District Pathan, North Gujarat in terminating the services of Shri I.M. Pathan, Armed Guard w.e.f. 15.02.2010 without issuing notice to him is legal, just and proper? If not, to what relief the concerned workman, Shri I.M. Pathan, Armed Guard is entitled to and what other directions are necessary in the matter?"

1. The reference dates back to 04.09.2015. The second party union The President, Akhil Bhartiya Karmachari Mahasangh, 28-B, Narayan Park, Behind Chandkheda Railway Station, Sabarmati, Ahmedabad submitted the statement of claim Ex. 3 on 10.02.2016 alleging that the workman I.M. Pathan, a retired Armed Guard from security forces was engaged and appointed on 01.09.1993 in the State Bank of India, Radhanpur Branch, District Pathan where he worked continuously till the year 2010. He was discharged from security forces on fictitious complaint which is pending adjudication in the Hon'ble High Court. He was an honest person and was also removed from service from State Bank of India on 15.02.2010 without serving any notice which was against the due procedure of law. The dispute was raised by the second party union before the management of State Bank of India but to no result. Therefore, also the management did not concede to demand of the second party union, the Reconciliation Officer referred the dispute to the Government of India for adjudication. Thus the second party union has challenged the action of the removal from service of the second party workman on the ground that his removal was against the procedure of law; therefore, he is entitled for reinstatement.

2. The first party The General Manager, State Bank of India, Local Head Office, Lal Darwaja, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) and The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Radhanpur Branch, Dhiraj Chamber, Lal Baug, Radhanpur, Pathan, Ahmedabad, submitted a joined written statement Ex. 7 on 16.01.2017 partly admitting the averments made in the statement of claim regarding his engagement as Armed Guard at Vasta Devdi Branch, Surat for 6 months from 01.09.1993. His services were confirmed from 01.03.1994 vide order dated 04.04.1994. It is further submitted that a citizen named P.R. Mehta of Radhanpur lodged an FIR against the workman I.M. Pathan on 12.12.1998 alleging that the workman persuaded the aforesaid complainant P.R. Mehta offering him cooked chicken and took him to his house where the workman physically abused to him and has also threatened him to death. The Police into the said FIR arrested the workman wherein the Police submitted the charge-sheet against him in the court. He was also put in the judicial remand; therefore, the first party served him with the suspension order. It is further submitted that under Paragraph 521 (2)(b) of the Sastri Award read with Paragraph 3 (b) and Clause 6 (2) of the aforesaid award, if the workman is found guilty of gross misconduct under the aforesaid provisions, can be removed from service. Paragraph 521 (2)(b) of Sastri Award, read with Paragraph 3 (b) and Clause 6 (2) are as under: "By the expression, "offence" shall be meant any offence involving moral turpitude for which an employee is liable to conviction and sentence under any provisions of law."

While, Provisions of Clause 3 (b) are as under:

"If, he be convicted, he may be dismissed with the effect from the date of his conviction or be given any lesser forum of punishment as mentioned in Clause as below:

Clause 6:— "An employee found guilty of gross misconduct may

(a) Be dismissed without notice."

Thus under the aforesaid provisions, the services of the workman were terminated as he was convicted under Section 377 read with 506 (2) of the IPC for a period of 3 years rigorous imprisonment with Rs. 20000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) as fine."

3. On the basis of the pleadings, the following issues arise:

I. Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India, Radhanpur Branch, District Pathan, North Gujarat in terminating the services of I.M. Pathan, Armed Guard w.e.f. 15.02.2010 without issuing notice to him is legal, just and proper?

II. To what relief, if any, the concerned workman, I.M. Pathan, Armed Guard is entitled to and what other directions are necessary in the matter?

4. Both these issues are interrelated, therefore, are decided together.

5. Issue No. I& II: The burden of proof of these issues was lying on the second party union who submitted the affidavit Ex. 8 of the workman reiterating the averments made in the statement of claim but in his cross-examination, the workman has admitted that his date of birth is 20.12.1954. His education qualification is 10th standard. He also admitted that a person resident of Radhanpur lodged an FIR against him under Section 377 read with 506 (2) of the IPC wherein he was sentenced for a period of 3 years rigorous imprisonment with Rs. 20000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand)4253 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 16, 2018/ज्येष्ठ 26, 1940 as fine in Criminal Case No. 149/2009. He has also admitted that his reinstatement was denied due to the aforesaid sentence.

6. The first party did not submit any oral evidence but submitted the photocopy of the memorandum of settlement on disciplinary action procedure for workman Ex. 29. The said document has been admitted by the second party workman. The settlement provide as under:

"By the expression "offence" shall be meant any offence involving moral turpitude for which an employee is liable to conviction and sentence under any provisions of law.

(a) When in the opinion of the management an employee has committed an offence, unless he may be otherwise prosecuted, the bank may take steps to prosecute him or get him prosecuted and in such a case he may also be suspended.

(b) If he be convicted, he may be dismissed with effect from the date of his conviction or be given any lesser form of punishment as mentioned in Clause 6 below.

(c) If he be acquitted, it shall be open to the management to proceed against him under the provisions set out below in Clauses 11 and 12 infra relating to discharge. However, in the event of the management deciding after enquiry not to continue him in service, he shall be liable only for termination of service with three months' pay and allowances in lieu of notice. And he shall be deemed to have been on duty during the period of suspension, if any, and shall be entitled to the full pay and allowances minus such subsistence allowance as he has drawn and to all other privileges for the period of suspension provided that if he be acquitted by being given the benefit of doubt he may be paid such portion of such pay and allowances as the management may deem proper and the period of his absence shall not be treated as a period spent on duty unless the management so directs.

(d) If he prefers an appeal or revision application against his conviction and is acquitted, in case he had already been dealt with as above and he applies to the management for reconsideration of his case, the management shall review his case and may either reinstate him or proceed against him under the provisions set out below in Clause 11 and 12 infra relating to discharge and the provisions set out above as to pay allowances and the period of suspension will apply the period up to date for which full pay and allowances have not been drawn being treated as one of suspension. In the event of the management deciding, after enquiry not to continue him in service, the employee shall be liable only for termination with three months' pay and allowance in lieu of notice, as directed above."

"6. An employee found guilty of gross misconduct may:

(a) Be dismissed without notice; or

(b) Be removed from service with superannuation benefits i.e. Pension and/or Provident Fund and Gratuity as would be due otherwise under the rules or regulations prevailing at the relevant time and without disqualification from future employment; or

(c) Be compulsorily retired superannuation benefits i.e. Pension and/or Provident Fund and Gratuity as would be due otherwise under the rules or regulations prevailing at the relevant time and without disqualification from future employment; or

(d) Be discharged from service with superannuation benefitsi.e. Pension and/or Provident Fund and Gratuity as would be due otherwise under the rules or regulations prevailing at the relevant time and without disqualification from future employment; or

(e) Be brought down to lower stage in the scale of pay up to a maximum of two stages; or

(f) Have his increment's stopped with or without cumulative effect; or

(g) Have his special pay withdrawn; or

(h) Be warned or censured, or have an adverse remark entered against him; or

(i) Be final. "

7. I heard the arguments of the learned counsel of the parties and also considered their evidences besides the settlement, Paragraph 521 (2)(b) of the Sastri Award read with Paragraph 3 (b) and Clause 6 (2) of the aforesaid award as well as the memorandum of settlement on disciplinary action procedure of workman Ex. 29 dated 18.12.2002. It is admitted by the workman that he was put in suspension and was also terminated from service on the ground that he was sentenced for a period of 3 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 20000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand). Such punishment deserves dismissal or termination of service under Paragraph 521 (2)(b) of the Sastri Award read with4254 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 16, 2018/JYAISTHA 26, 1940 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] Paragraph 3 (b) and Clause 6 (2) of the aforesaid award as well as the memorandum of settlement on disciplinary action procedure of workman Ex. 29 dated 18.12.2002. Thus the action taken by the bank does not deserve any interference by the tribunal. Thus the issue no. I is decided in affirmative and against the second party workman. Therefore, the workman deserves no relief. Thus the issues no. I & II are decided accordingly.

8. The award is passed in terms of the observation made in Para 7 of the award.

P. K. CHATURVEDI, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 24 मई, 2018

का.आ. 947.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय पश्चिमी रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकोंंंंंं और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय, अहमदाबाद के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 683/2004द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24.05.2018 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-41011/11/99-आईआर ;बी-Iद्ध]

रवि कुमार, अनुभाग अध्किारी

New Delhi, the 24th May, 2018

S.O. 947.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 683/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Ahmedabad as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Western Railway and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 24.05.2018.

[No. L-41011/11/99-IR (B-I)]

RAVI KUMAR, 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 27th April, 2018

Reference: (CGITA) No. 683/2004

1. The Principal,

Railway Staff College, Lalbaug, Baroda (Gujarat) – 390004

2. The Chairman,

Railway Staff College Officer's Mess Management Committee, Lal Baug, Baroda (Gujarat) – 394220 …First Party V/s

The General Secretary, Western Railway Contractors Employees Union, Faramji Road, Nr. Guard Running Room, Alkapuri, Baroda (Gujarat) – 394220

…Second Party For the First Party No : Shri K.V. Gadhia

For the Second Party : Shri M.V. Jadhav

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-41011/11/99– IR(B-I) dated 26.10.1999 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) in respect of the matter specified in the Schedule:

SCHEDULE

"Whether the charter of demands raised by the General Secretary, Western Railway Contractors Employees Union Vadodara vide its representation dated 05.08.1998 against the management of the Principal, Railway Staff College, Vadodara and the Chairman, Railway Staff College Mess Management Committee, Vadodara is proper and justified? If so, to what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to?"

1. The reference dates back to 26.10.1999. The second party union submitted the statement of claim Ex. 3 alleging that the second party union is a registered union and its registration number is 5058. The concerned workmen working in this railway staff college Mess and getting monthly salary of Rs. 1125 to 1822/-. The railway authority has not given permanent status not paid the salary to those workmen detailed in the reference and they were paid less than the minimum wage. At present, 33 workmen are there. The first party college give the education to the selected officers and for providing the food facility to the officers. The college has started the mess from the day 1 of the establishment of the college. The second party workmen are the workmen and the first party is an industry. The second party workmen were working with the first party since last 20 to 25 years and they were paid less than the minimum wages. Inspite of numerous complaints they were not paid even minimum wages. They were working under direct control of Railway Administration. The first party deduct the provident fund and the second party workmen are working as clerk, waiter, head cook and sweeper. The union has raised the demand vide letter dated 05.08.1998 and demand in increase in wages, HRA, children education allowance, dues and other benefits since the first party has not response to the same, the union has raised this dispute. The second party workmen have filed the case before the CAT in OA No. 180/1996 for permanency. The second party has stated that at present the minimum wage is Rs. 1950/- whereas the lowest category permanent category grade is Rs. 4500/- per month. Therefore, they are entitled for the salary at par with permanent employee. The second demand of the union is different in allowance likewise HRA, convence allowance, attendance allowance etc. The union further stated that the allowances at present paid to the concerned workmen in compare to the permanent employee are less hence they are entitled to get the aforesaid allowances as par with permanent employees. The third demand of the union is regarding various leaves. The leaves are granted to the concerned workmen are very less in compare to the government employees. They are not getting the benefit of ESI, therefore, the demand is just, legal and proper and is to be granted with arrears. Regarding demand numbers 4, 5 and 6, same are as per the provisions of the act. At present the concerned workmen are getting less than the minimum wages. As per the act the first party is bound to pay minimum wages. The permanent employees of the railway paid the double overtime whereas these workmen were not paid overtime and takes work from them for more than 8 years. Therefore, the demand is justified and prayed for grant of demand with arrears. The second party union is the only union working in the first party therefore the said union is considered as representative union and the benefits to the union representative is to be given like to attend the union training course, the workmen education central course etc. and prayed for granting the said benefits with cumulative effect. The union has demanded and prayed the aforesaid benefits w.e.f. 01.01.1998 and prayed for cost of Rs. 5000 for litigation.

2. The first party submitted the written statement Ex. 9 denying the averments made in the statement of claim submitted that the second party union approach the Central Administrative Tribunal vide OA No. 180/1996 wherein the tribunal ordered for regularisation of all the workman detailed in the reference w.e.f. 22.02.1996. Thus the dispute raised in the reference and prayers sought in the statement of claim are not tenable in the eye of law.

3. On the basis of the pleadings, the following issues arise:

I. Whether the charter of demands raised by the General Secretary, Western Railway Contractors Employees Union Vadodara vide its representation dated 05.08.1998 against the management of the Principal, Railway Staff College, Vadodara and the Chairman, Railway Staff College Mess Management Committee, Vadodara is proper and justified?

II. To what relief, if any, the concerned workmen are entitled?

4. Both the issues are interrelated, therefore, are decided together.

5. Issue No. I & II: The burden of proof of these issues was lying on the second party workman who was examined vide document Ex. 20 wherein he has reiterated the averments made in the statement of claim and has not said anything contrary in his cross-examination.

6. The first party has not examined any of his witness in support of the written statement.

7. Since long, neither of the parties and their advocates are appearing and the reference is pending for argument, therefore, I considered the whole oral and documentary evidences on the record.

8. It is noteworthy that the second party union approached the Central Administrative Tribunal vide OA No. 180/1996 wherein the tribunal ordered for regularisation of all the workman detailed in the reference w.e.f. 22.02.1996. The Central Administrative Tribunal in its order has granted regularisation as well as all the benefits of service w.e.f.

22.02.1996 while the second party has sought the relief w.e.f. 01.01.1998. As the Central Administrative Tribunal has already granted the relief as sought by the second party union from the aforesaid earlier date. Therefore, no further relief can be granted being barred by the principle of res-judicata.

9. Thus the reference is finally disposed of as not maintainable.

P. K. CHATURVEDI, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 5 twu] 2018

dk-vk- 948-—vkS?kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 (a1947 dk 14 ) dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj iatkc us"kuy cSad ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ'V vkS?kksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS?kksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] dkuiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 59/2015) izdkf"kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 05.06.2018 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la0 ,y-12011/45/2015-vkbZ vkj (ch-II)]

jfo dqekj, vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh

New Delhi, the 5th June, 2018

S.O. 948.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 59/2015) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, KANPUR(U.P.) 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 05/06/2018.

[No. L-12011/45/2015 - IR(B-II)]

RAVI KUMAR, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI SHUBHENDRA KUMAR, HJS, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOR COURT, KANPUR

ID No. 59/2015

Between :

The Member, State Working Committee of UP Bank workers Org. , 3/13 Mathura Nagar, ALIGARH(U.P)-202001

AND

The General Manager, Punjab National Bank, 7, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi.

AWARD

1. Central Government, MOL, New Delhi, vide notification no. L-12011/45/2015-IR(B-II) dated 03/08/2015 has referred this Industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication.

2. 'Whether the action of the management of Punjab National Bank, New Delhi deciding payment of ex-gratia in lieu of employment of compassionate ground to Smt. Sudha Rani W/o late Tara Chand conveyed vide letter dated 8th December, 2006 is legal & just and if not, what relief the concerned applicant is entitled to ?"

3. Union raising the dispute on behalf of worker Smt. Sudha Rani widow of Late Tara Chand has filed claim petition alleging that Shri Tara Chand was appointed at the post of clerk on 15.10.1976 in the bank who was subsequently promoted as officer. Unfortunately said Tara Chand expired on 12.04.2006 due to heart failure leaving behind him 3 unemployed sons and one unemployed daughter. Smt. Sudha Rani widow of deceased employee has applied for payment of ex-gratia amount within prescribed period on 29.04.2006 but the management vide their letter dated 8.12.2006 rejected the request of Smt. Sudha Rani and their after she again made a request before the Chairman4257 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 16, 2018/ज्येष्ठ 26, 1940 of the Bank but her request was again rejected by the Bank vide letter dated 18.05.2012. It is also alleged that bank has also not provided any appointment on compassionate ground nor In lieu of it had made payment of any amount by way of lump sum ex-gratia for which widow of Shri Tara Chand is entitled for the same.

4. Therefore on these grounds it has been prayed by the widow of Late Shri Tara Chand that the Bank be directed to make payment of ex-gratia in view of employment on compassionate ground.

5. Management has filed objection against the claim petition admitting the fact that Shri Tara Chand was in the employment of the Bank and was performing his duties in managerial/administrative capacity and was having power of assigning duties and distribution of work as such his service condition were governed by officer employees regulation therefore Late Tara Chand cannot be treated as workmen. It is also denied that any valid Industrial dispute exist between the bank and the Union over the issue and thus the answering Bank raises an objection over the maintainability of this issue/reference. It is further submitted by the Bank that the Bank had submitted the scheme for payment of ex-gratia (lump sum amount) in lieu of appointment on compassionate grounds vide circular no. 235 dated 07.01.2005 and this scheme is a welfare measure to provide relief to the family of employee dying in harness or taking premature retirement owing to incapacitation on medical grounds before attaining the age of 55 years to tide over the sudden crisis brought out by such premature death/ incapacitation of the earning family member and to offer immediate financial assistance and succor to the distrust family to recover from the unexpected deprivation of the income of the bread winner. It is also stated that ex-gratia cannot be claimed as matter of right and same cannot be granted beyond the preview of the guidelines of the Bank of which Para 9.2 provides that while dealing with the proposal for grant of ex- gratia, in cases where discipline action was taken/pending against the employee dying in harness or where the deceased employee was involved in financial irregularities, embezzlement of funds committing of frauds etc. Bank will continue to avoid by the guidelines issued by the government of India requiring consideration and decision in each case by the Board of the Bank. Similarly Para 19.4 provides that the ex-gratia relief under the above scheme is not entitlement but may be granted at the soul discretion of the Bank looking into the financial condition of the family and in deserving and eligible cases only.

6. It is further pleaded that the deceased husband of Smt. Sudha Rani was involved in financial irregularities and 3 penalties have been imposed on him for various lapses/ irregularities. The proposal of the claimant was placed before the Board for consideration and the Board decline the request of the dependence of the deceased employee for payment of ex-gratia (lump sum amount) in view of his involvement in financial irregularities.

7. It is further pleaded by the Bank that other dues like PF, Gratuity, Financial Aid and Contributory Benefit Fund Scheme were timely paid to the legal heirs of Late Tara Chand. Lastly it is prayed that the claim of the Smt. Sudha Rani is neither legal nor valid according to rules of the Bank therefore her claim is liable to be rejected.

8. Rejoinder statement has been filed by the union wherein it is pleaded that any family member of deceased employee can raise claim for payment of ex-gratia amount for which it is not necessary that the deceased employee should be a workman under the act.

9. It is pertinent to point out that when case was taken up for hearing on 13.04.18 none appeared on the behalf of the parties, no documents have been filed therefore opportunity to lead evidence and to file documents is closed by fixing 25.04.18 in the case. Again on 25.04.18 none appeared in the case and the case was reserved for award.

10. It is settled legal position that it is claimant who has prove his case by his evidence oral and documentary and where neither any oral evidence nor documentary evidence has been adduced, the claimant is liable to face the music of law in as much as in the absence of evidence his claim cannot be accepted by court of law and on same analogy as the union / claimant Smt. Sudha Rani has not been able to prove their case by adducing admissible evidence therefore her claim is liable to be rejected and is accordingly rejected.

11. Reference is therefore answered against the union/claimant Smt. Sudha Rani.

SHUBHENDRA KUMAR, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 5 twu] 2018

dk-vk- 949-—vkS?kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 (a1947 dk 14 ) dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ikjknhi iksVZ VªLV ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjks ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ'V vkS?kksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS?kksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] Hkqous"oj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 36/2011) dks izdkf"kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 05.06.2018 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la0 ,y-38011/01/2011-vkbZ vkj (ch-II)]

jfo dqekj] vuqHkkx vf?kdkjh4258 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 16, 2018/JYAISTHA 26, 1940 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi, the 5th June, 2018

S.O. 949.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 36/2011) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Paradip Port Trust, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 05/06/2018.

[No. L-38011/01/2011 - IR(B-II)]

RAVI KUMAR, 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. 36/2011

No. L-38011/01/2011-IR(B-II), dated 18.07.2011

Date of Passing Award –13th April, 2018

Between:

1. The Chairman,

Management Committee, Paradip Port, Paradip, Dist. Jagatsinghpur, Orissa.

2. The President,

Paradip Port Stevedores' Association, Trade Centre (Ground Floor), Paradip Port, Dist. Jagatsinghpur, Orissa – 754 142 …1st Party-Managements

(And)

The General Secretary, Utkal Port & Dock Workers' Union, Brundaban Colony, Housing Complex, Paradip Port, Dt. Jagatsinghpur, Paradip, Orissa – 754 142.

…2nd Party-Union

Appearances:

None            …       For the 1st Party-Managements
None            …       For the 2nd Party-Union

AWARD

None of the parties are found present on repeated calls. It is seen from the record that after filing of Statement of claim the 2nd party-Union failed to attend the proceeding despite repeated notice. The 1st Party-Management has already submitted its written statement. The reference is lingering only due to non-attendance of the 2nd party-Union. As the Union failed to attend the proceeding as well as to adduce any evidence in addition to its claim there is no alternative than to return the reference without giving any findings on the merit of the pleadings advanced by the parties.

2. The reference is disposed of in the above terms.

Dictated and Corrected by me.

B.C. RATH, Presiding Officer4259 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 16, 2018/ज्येष्ठ 26, 1940

ubZ fnYyh] 5 twu] 2018

dk-vk- 950-—vkS?kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 (a1947 dk 14 ) dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj cSad vkQ cM+kSnk ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjks ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ'V vkS?kksfxd fookn esa Je U;k;ky;] vkSjaxkckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 06/2016) dks izdkf"kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 05.06.2018 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y-39025/01/2017-vkbZ vkj (ch-II)]

jfo dqekj, vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh

New Delhi, the 5th June, 2018

S.O. 950.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 06/2016) of the Labour Court, Aurangabad as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Bank of Baroda, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 05/06/2018.

[No. L-39025/01/2017 - IR(B-II)]

RAVI KUMAR, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE LABOUR COURT-I AT AURANGABAD

(Presided over by D.V.Joshi)

Ex. No. O-3

REFERENCE (IDA) NO. 06 of 2016

(CNR. No. MHLC-20-000234-2016)

Between :

The Dy. General Manager, Bank of Baroda, Main Branch, Talik Road, P.B.No.40, Aurangabad - 431 001 …First Party

And

Shri Nandu Banshi Tupare, Kranti Chowk, Ajab Nagar, Opp. Telephone Bhavan, (Milind Nagar), AURANGABAD - 431 001

…Second Party

Advocates: Mr. S.S. Vidwauns for the second Party. Mr. M.S.Mahajan for the First party.

AWARD

( Dtd. 17.04.2018 )

1. This Reference is referred by the Central Government u/s clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for adjudication in respect of termination of second party.

2 After registration of said Reference notice was issued against both the parties. Second party appeared and filed his statement of claim at Ex.U-2. Notice against the first party was duly served. Inspite of service of notice first party has not filed written statement. Therefore, matter proceeded ex parte against the first party as per the order below Ex.U-2.

3 The contention of the second party that he is a workman as per Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the first party is an industry. Second party was appointed as a Peon in the main Branch at Tilak Road, Aurangabad on 17.06.2011 on daily wages. His service was continued by the first party till 25.07.2011. First party used to pay wages on weekly basis by way of vouchers in the custody of the first party. Attendance register in the possession of first party. Second party applied for the post of Peon in the recruitment procedure of 2013, but the second party was not called for interview. Later on he got information that one Dinesh Chavan and Arjun Gaikwad were selected in the said process and the said persons were junior daily wagers to the second party. Therefore, the act of the first party is against the law and procedure. In the recruitment of 2014 considering the application of second party he was called for4260 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 16, 2018/JYAISTHA 26, 1940 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] interview, but again he was not selected. Second party was even thereafter continued in the same Branch as a Peon. He has completed more 240 days service without any break. First party has not followed the procedure as per Section 25F & 25G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Said termination order is illegal and liable to be set aside. Second party is not gainfully employed. Therefore, he is entitled for reinstatement in service along with back wages.

4 Notice against the first party was duly served. Inspite of service of notice first party has not filed written statement. Therefore, matter proceeded ex parte against the first party.

5 Following points arise for my determination. They are as under along with my findings thereon for the reasons given below:

REASONS

6 In order to prove his case, second party examined himself at Ex.U-4. He filed documents below Ex.U-6, U-11 and closed his evidence by filing pursis Ex.U-13.

7 As to Point Nos. 1 & 2:— Learned Advocate of the second party submits that second party workman has completed 240 days continuous service with the first party without any break. He was orally terminated by the second party without following procedure laid down under Section 25F & 25G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Therefore, termination order is illegal and liable to be set aside. Second party workman is entitled for reinstatement in service with continuity along with back wages.

8. Second party workman at Ex.U-4 deposes that, he was working as a Peon with the first party bank and its branch at Tilak Road, Aurangabad on daily wages from 17.06.2011 to 25.07.2015 without any break. He also deposes that for the said period first party has paid bonus to him and he filed said slip of bonus below Ex.U-6/3 and below Ex.U-11. First party has not produced any contrary evidence against the evidence of the second party. On perusal of evidence and documents produced by the second party it shows that he was in continuous service for 4 years with the first party. He filed application in the recruitment procedure on 2013 and 2014. He was not selected in the said recruitment procedure. Even then also he was in continuous service with the first party till 25.07.2015.

9. From the said evidence it shows that he has continuously worked with the first party for more than 240 days in each year before termination. He also deposes that he has completed more than 240 days service before his termination. First party has not complied provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. First party has violated the condition precedent for retrenchment. Therefore, termination is illegal and liable to be set aside.

10. Section 25 F & 25 B of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is as under : "Section 25 F :— Conditions precedent to retrenchment of workmen.- No workman employed in any industry who has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer until -

(a) the workman has been given one month's notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment

and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been paid in lieu of such notice, wages for

the period of the notice:

(b) the workman has been paid, at the time of retrenchment, compensation which shall be equivalent to

fifteen days' average pay [for every completed year of continuous service] or any part thereof in

excess of six months; and

(c) notice in the prescribed manner is served on the appropriate Government [or such authority as may

be specified by the appropriate Government by notification in the Official Gazette.]"

"Section 25 B. Definition of continuous service.- For the purposes of this Chapter, —

(1) a workman shall be said to be in continuous service for a period if he is, for that period, in

uninterrupted service, including service which may be interrupted on account of sickness or

authorise leave or an accident or a strike which is not illegal, or a lock-out or a cessation of work

which is not due to any fault on the part of the workman;

(2) Where a workman is not in continuous service within the meaning of clause (1) for a period of one

year or six months, he shall be deemed to be in continuous service under an employer—

(a) for a period of one year, if the workman, during a period of twelve calendar months preceding

the date with reference to which calculation is to be made, has actually worked under the

employer for not less than—

(i) one hundred and ninety days in the case of a workman employed below ground in a mine;

and

(ii) two hundred and forty days, in any other case;

(b) for a period of six months, if the workman, during a period of six calendar months preceding

the datge with reference to which calculation is to be made, has actually worked under the

employer for not less than -

(i) ninety five days, in the case of a workman employed below ground in a mine; and

(ii) one hundred and twenty days, in any other case."

From the above provisions if, the employee has completed continuous service of 240 days as defined in Section 25 B of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 then employer has to follow the procedure laid down under Section 25F of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

11. Therefore, from oral evidence it shows that, second party has continuously worked for more lthan 240 days with the first party before his termination in the last preceding year of his termination. He was orally terminated without compliance of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Therefore, non-compliance of Section 25F itself makes termination order illegal. Therefore, oral termination order dated 25.07.2015 is illegal and liable to be set aside. Therefore, I answer Points No.1 & 2 in the affirmative.

12. As to Point No.3 :— On perusal of entire evidence and record, it shows that the appointment of second party workman is not according to the due procedure of law. It is admitted fact that, he was not selected in the recruitment procedure of 2013 and 2014. He has not filed any appointment letter on record. Therefore, in such circumstances second party is not entitled for reinstatement on the said post. As the first party has not followed procedure laid down under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 while terminating the services of second party workman. Therefore, considering the period of service of second party workman in place of reinstatement and back wages he is entitled for monetary compensation of Rs.25,000/- (Rs.Twenty Five Thousand only) from the first party. Therefore, I answer the point No.3 accordingly.

13. As to Point No.4 :— As the termination order is illegal and set aside as the first party has not complied provisions of Section 25 F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 while terminating the services of the second party. As the appointment of second party is not according to due procedure of law. Therefore, instead of reinstatement second party is entitled for compensation of Rs.25,000/- (Rs.Twenty Five Thousand only) from the first party. Therefore, in order to answer point No.4 I pass the following Award :

AWARD

1. The Reference is answered partly in affirmative.

2. Termination order dated 25.07.2015 of second party is illegal, hence it is set aside.

3. The second party is entitled for monetary compensation of Rs.25,000/- from the first party.

4. Order be complied within the period of three months from the date of publication of Award.

5. No order as to costs.

6. The copy of the Award be sent to the Desk Officer, Government of India/Bhat Sarkar, Ministry of Labour/ Shram Mantralaya, New Delhi for publication and necessary action as per rules.

D.V. JOSHI, Presiding Officer & Judge Date : 17.04.20184262 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 16, 2018/JYAISTHA 26, 1940 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 6 जून, 2018

का.आ. का.आ. का.आ. का.आ. 951951951951....————राष्ट्रपति, (cid:16)ी मुरलीधर प्रधान पीठासीन अधिकारी, के न्(cid:27) सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण-सह-(cid:16)म न्यायालय, हैदराबाद को दिनांक 05.05.2018 से छ: माह की आगे की अवधि तक अथवा नियमित पदस्थ अधिकारी नियुक्ति तक अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले हो, पीठासीन अिधकारी, कें (cid:27) सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- (cid:16)म न्यायालय, बैंगलोर के पद का अतिरिक्त प्रभार स4पते है ।

[सं. ए-11016/03/2009-सीएलएस-II]

अजय मिलक, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2018

S.O. 951.—The President is pleased to extend the period of additional charge of the post of Presiding Officer of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Bangalore entrusted to Shri Murlidhar Pradhan, Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour, Hyderabad for a further period of 06 months with effect from 05.05.2018, or till the appointment of a regular incumbent, or until further orders, whichever is the earliest.

[No. A-11016/03/2009-CLS-II]

AJAY MALIK, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 12 जून, 2018

का.आ. 952.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई.सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकोंंंंंं और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण-सह-श्रम न्यायालय, आसनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 04/2008द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 06.06.2018 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-22012/345/2007-आईआर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]

राजेन्द्र सिंह, अनुभाग अध्किारी

New Delhi, the 12th June, 2018

S.O. 952.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Corrigendum of Award (Ref. No. 04/2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. E.C.L. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 06.06.2018.

[No. L-22012/345/2007-IR (CM-II)]

RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE COURT OF CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL

Ref.: Ministry's Order No. L-22012/345/2007 - IR (CM-II) dated 07.01.2008

This office Reference No. 04 of 2008 dated 16.01.2008

Management of Parascole Colliery under Kajora Area of M/s. ECL

v/s

Shri Krishna Bhuiya

SETTLEMENT IN LOK ADALAT

Held on 17th May, 2018 at C.G.I.T.-cum- L.C., Asansol4263 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 16, 2018/ज्येष्ठ 26, 1940

AWARD

On amicable settlement by both parties the dispute is resolved in the Lok Adalat. The Form 'H' containing the terms of agreement of this settlement to be executed by both the parties in due course. Award is passed and signed accordingly.

PRAMOD KUMAR MISHRA, Presiding Officer

IN THE COURT OF CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL

LOK ADALAT SETTLEMENT

Place : Asansol Date : 17.05.2018

Reference No. 04 of 2008

Parascole Colliery under Kajora Area of M/s. ECL

v/s

Shri Krishna Bhuiya

Both the parties hereby mutually and amicable settle up the dispute for the interest of both sides and to help securing a healthy & conducive relationship for maximization of output in the industry.

Terms :-

• Reinstatement of the concerned employee in the initial basic of General Mazdoor Category – I and treating the period of his absence as dies non. The concerned employee will also get continuity of service for the purpose of Gratuity only. He will not get any Back Wages.

Shri S. Goswami Dy. Manager (Personnel), Kajora Area, M/s. ECL

Shri S.K. Pandey Gen. Secy., CM.C. (H.M.S.) (Representative of the Workman)

Shri Ashish Mohan Assistant Manager (Personnel), Parascole Colliery, M/s. ECL

PRAMOD KUMAR MISHRA

(Presiding Officer)

नई दिल्ली, 12 जून, 2018

का.आ. 953.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकोंंंंंं और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण-सह-श्रम न्यायालय, आसनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 04/2016द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 06.06.2018 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-22012/95/2015-आईआर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]

राजेन्द्र सिंह, अनुभाग अध्किारी

New Delhi, the 12th June, 2018

S.O. 953.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Corrigendum of Award (Ref. No. 04/2016) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. E.C.L. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 06.06.2018.

[No. L-22012/95/2015-IR (CM-II)]

RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer4264 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 16, 2018/JYAISTHA 26, 1940 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

IN THE COURT OF CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL

Ref.: Ministry's Order No. L-22012/95/2015 - IR (CM-II) dated 23.12.2015

This office Reference No. 04 of 2016 dated 08.01.2016

Management of Parascole Colliery under Kajora Area of M/s. ECL

v/s

Shri Sanjeeb Kora

SETTLEMENT IN LOK ADALAT

Held on 17th May, 2018 at C.G.I.T.-cum- L.C., Asansol

AWARD

On amicable settlement by both parties the dispute is resolved in the Lok Adalat. The Form 'H' containing the terms of agreement of this settlement to be executed by both the parties in due course. Award is passed and signed accordingly.

PRAMOD KUMAR MISHRA, Presiding Officer

IN THE COURT OF CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL

LOK ADALAT SETTLEMENT

Place : Asansol Date : 17.05.2018

Reference No. 04 of 2016

Parascole Colliery under Kajora Area of M/s. ECL

v/s

Shri Sanjeeb Kora

Both the parties hereby mutually and amicable settle up the dispute for the interest of both sides and to help securing a healthy & conducive relationship for maximization of output in the industry.

Terms :-

• Reinstatement of the concerned employee in the initial basic of General Mazdoor Category–I and treating the period of his absence as dies non. The concerned employee will also get continuity of service for the purpose of Gratuity only. He will not get any Back Wages.

Shri S. Goswami Dy. Manager (Personnel), Kajora Area, M/s. ECL

Shri Sajeeb Kora (Workman)

Shri Ashish Mohan Assistant Manager (Personnel), Parascole Colliery, M/s. ECL

PRAMOD KUMAR MISHRA

(Presiding Officer)

नई दिल्ली, 12 जून, 2018

का.आ. 954.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स बी.सी.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकोंंंंंं और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण-सह-श्रम न्यायालय, आसनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 08/2011द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 06.06.2018 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-22012/12/2011-आईआर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]

राजेन्द्र सिंह, अनुभाग अध्किारी

New Delhi, the 12th June, 2018

S.O. 954.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Corrigendum of Award (Ref. No. 08/2011) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. B.C.C.L. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 06.06.2018.

[No. L-22012/12/2011-IR (CM-II)]

RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT : Shri Pramod Kumar Mishra, Presiding Officer

REFERENCE NO. 08 OF 2011

PARTIES :

The management of Begunia Colliery / Project of M/s. BCCL

v/s

Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay

REPRESENTATIVES :

For the Management            :     Shri P. K. Das, Learned Advocate
For the Union (Workmen)       :     Shri Gora Chand Chatterjee, Learned Union Representative

Industry : Coal

State : West Bengal

DATED : 10.05.2018

A W A R D

In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub-section(1) and Sub-section 2(A) 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-22012/12/2011-IR(CM-II) dated 18.05.2011 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.

SCHEDULE

" Whether the action of management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat

Coking Coal Limited in not giving wages from 16.07.2004 to 10.02.20085 along with all consequential

benefits such as (i) Arrear payment of NCWA–VIII effective from 01.07.2006 (ii) LTC/LLTC – for the block

year 2004-2007 (iii) Annual increment off the year 2004 to 2007 (iv) pending TA bills for the period from

10.09.2003 to 09.074.2004 (v) Annual Bonus for the service period i.e. from 2004 to 2007 (vi) Quarterly

Bonus for the service period i.e. from 2004 to 2007 (vii) benefit of basic fitment of wages (viii) any other

consequential benefits arising out of wrongful withdrawal of service / illegal stoppage from duty (ix)

continuity in service for the period from 16.07.2004 to 10.02.2008 and benefit of Gratuity linked there is fair

and justified? To what relief the concerned workman Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay is entitled to? "

1. Having received the Order NO. L-22012/12/2011-IR(CM-II) dated 18.05.2011 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a Reference4266 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 16, 2018/JYAISTHA 26, 1940 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] Case No. 08 of 2011 was registered on 07.06.2011. 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. Shri Mukti Pada Banerjee father of concerned workman was in employment of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited as Dy. Personnel Manager in E IV Grade. He was declared medically unfit on 19.08.1991 by competent medical board. Therefore he proceeded on Voluntary Retirement on Medical Ground w.e.f. 06.12.1991 vide Ref No. BCCL/EE/91/26513-21 (A) dated 06.12.1991. There is provision for providing one employment to the dependent of the person who seeks Voluntary Retirement on Medical Ground. Shri Mukti Pada Banerjee preferred claim for the employment of his son Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay but the same was regretted. Shri Mukti Pada Banerjee filed a Writ Petition before the Hon'ble High Court of Kolkata. The Hon'ble High Court of Kolkata was pleased to pass order to consider the case of son of Shri Mukti Pada Banerjee on compassionate ground in terms of provision of Common Coal Cadre preferably within 6 (Six) weeks. The management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited in compliance with the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court's judgment provided provisional employment to Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay as General Mazdoor. After providing employment the management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court. The Hon'ble Kolkata High Court was pleased to pass an order on 09.09.2003 with direction to the management to consider giving employment to the son of petitioner, if he is suitable for post within a period of 4 (Four) weeks. The management of Begunia Colliery/ Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited against the order of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court filed special writ petition in 2004 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court stayed the operation of impugned order dated 09.09.2003 of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court. In view of the Order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court the employment of Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay was withdrawn vide Letter No. BCCL/PA-VI/ 11269-74 dated 14/15.07.04. Consequently Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay was stopped form employment w.e.f. 16.07.2004 the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the Appeal No. 5462 of 2005. The Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that since the appeal is dismissed, therefore Interim Order dated 16.01.2004 is set-a-side. In light of order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court the management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited again provided employment to Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay vide Office Order No. DY.CPM/CV/Pers/00/08/150 dated 28.01.2008. Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay since then has been working as General Mazdoor. The concerned workman Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay had to remain idle form 16.07.2004 to 10.02.2008 without his fault. He was deprived of the following benefits which are as follows :

(i) Wages for the period 16.07.2004 to 10.02.2008 (for the period of years 6 months and 25 days)

(ii) Arrear Payments as per NCWA VII effective from 01.07.2001.

(iii) Arrear Payments of wages as per NCWA VIII effective from 01.07.2006.

(iv) LTC / LLTC for the block year 2004 to 2007.

(v) Annual increment from 2004 to 2007.

(vi) Pending TA Bill from 10.09.2003 to 09.07.2004.

(vii) Annual Bonus for the year 2004 to 2007.

(viii) Quarterly Bonus from 2004 to 2007.

(ix) Benefit of Basic fitment of wages.

(x) Continuity of service for the broken period and benefit of Gratuity.

(xi) Any other benefit arising out of wrongful withdrawal of Service like promotion to next higher grade/ Post.

The concerned workman shall be allowed continuity of service and all benefits during his period of idleness. The management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited has not allowed the concerned workman the continuity of service and consequential benefits even at the time of providing employment for 2nd time as per order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The workman has prayed that the Tribunal may kindly consider the claim of the workman Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay and direct the management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited to pay all these monetary benefits including the continuity of service as mentioned above.

3. The management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited has filed written statement. The management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited has admitted in their written statement that Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay was dependent son of Shri Mukti Pada Banerjee. He was offered appointment on compassionate ground, as dependent son of Shri Mukti Pada Banerjee, on the post of General Mazdoor. The management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited has admitted in his written statement that on rejection of appointment proposal of Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay son of Shri Mukti Pada Banerjee, Shri Mukti Pada Banerjee moved to the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court. On the order of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay was offered provisional employment on the post of General Mazdoor. The appeal of management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court. The management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited filed Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court passed an interim order on 16.01.2004 and stayed the operation of order of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court dated 09.09.2003. But ultimately the Hon'ble Supreme Court Civil Appeal no. 5462 of 2005 dismissed the appeal of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited. The Hon'ble Supreme Court by dismissing the appeal vacated the stay order dated 16.01.2004. The management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited has also admitted that consequently Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay was offered 2nd time employment. Management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited passed the order to re-instate Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay. Consequently Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay joined on the post of General Mazdoor. The management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited has alleged that the concerned workman Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay is not entitled for payment form 16.07.2004 to 10.02.2008 because he was not in service. But management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited has admitted that for the period in which Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay was in service he is entitled for Arrear payment as per National Coal Wage Agreement – VII. He is also entitled for LTC / LLTC for Block year 2004-2007. He is also entitled for pending TA bill. Rest of the benefit has been denied.

4. Workman has filed the following documentary evidences :

(i) Photocopy of the Letter Ref No. BCCL/EE/91/26513-21 (A) dated 06.12.1991, (ii) Photocopy of the Ref. No. DCPM/XII/03/A-7/93/1520 dated 14/15.06.1993, (iii) Photocopy of the decision of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court dated 11.11.1998, (iv) Photocopy of the Letter Bef. No. CGM.DCPM:XII 03:A-7/Disability/HC/99/2367 dated 22.10.1999, (v) Photocopy of the decision of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court dated 09.09.2003, (vi) Photocopy of the Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 42 of 2004, (vii) Photocopy of the Letter Ref. No. BCCL/PA-VI/11269-74 dated 14/15.07.2004, (viii) Photocopy of the Award of Civil Appeal No. 5462 of 2005, (ix) Photocopy of the Letter Ref. No. DCPM/CV/Pers/00/08/150 dated 28.01.2008, (x) Photocopy of the Letter Ref. No. BCCL/XII/BP/09/151 dated 09.02.1999, (xi) Copy of National Coal Wage Agreement – VII Implementation Instruction No. 1

The workman Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay has filed affidavit in his oral evidence. He has been cross- examined by the learned advocate of the management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited.

The management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited has filed any documentary or oral evidence.

5. I have heard the arguments of Shri Gora Chand Chatterjee, learned Joint General Secretary of Dhanbad Colliery Karmachari Sangh (B.M.S) on behalf of the workman and Shri P. K. Das learned advocate on behalf of the management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited.

6. Shri P. K. Das, learned advocate of the management has argued that since workman Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay was out of employment for the period 16.07.2004 to 10.02.2008 he is not entitled for any service benefits as claimed by the workman. On the other hand Shri Gora Chand Chatterjee, learned union representative, representing the workman has argued that the workman Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay was offered employment on compassionate ground on the order of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court. Since, the order was stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court his service was discontinued. But in final order the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. In light of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay was re-instated therefore he is entitled for all the service benefits.

7. It is admitted by both the parties that Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay is son of Shri Mukti Pada Banerjee. Shri Mukti Pada Banerjee was an employee of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited on the post of Dy. Personnel Manager. It is also admitted fact that as per provision of Common Coal Order if any workman seeks Voluntary Retirement on Medical ground his dependent son is entitled for employment on Compassionate ground. But the employment proposal of Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay was rejected4268 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 16, 2018/JYAISTHA 26, 1940 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] by the management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited. Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay was offered employment as per direction of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court. In appeal the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court reaffirmed its order. In Special Leave Petition the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed interim order and stayed the order of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court. But the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 5462 of 2005 dismissed the appeal of management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited and clarified that interim order dated 16.01.2004 does not survive.

8. In view of the above admitted facts it is apparent that Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay was offered employment as per direction of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court though. In light of interim order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court the Order of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court was stayed. But management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited without waiting the final order in Civil Appeal No. 5462 of 2005 discontinued the service of Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay. In Final Order in Civil Appeal No. 5462 of 2005 the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and vacated the order of interim stay dated 16.01.2004. Consequently the management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited had no option left but to permit the joining of Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay in second time. Had the management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited, in his wisdom, would have waited for final order this situation would not have arisen.

9. In this factual matrix it is needless to say that Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay, in spite of provision of Common Coal Cadre for compassionate appointment was unable to get employment without intervention of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court. His period of idleness i.e. form 16.07.2004 to 10.02.2008 was without his own fault. At the cost of repetition it is relevant to mention that if management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited would have waited for the final order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay would not have been thrown form employment form 16.07.2004 to 10.02.2008. It will be deemed that he was in employment form 16.07.2004 to 10.02.2008. In light of National Coal Wage Agreement he is entitled for service benefits as claimed in his written statement.

10. In light of above discussion the action of management of Begunia Colliery / Project under Chanch Victoria Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited in not giving wages from 16.07.2004 to 10.02.20085 along with all consequential benefits such as (i) Arrear payment of NCWA–VIII effective from 01.07.2006 (ii) LTC/LLTC – for the block year 2004-2007 (iii) Annual increment off the year 2004 to 2007 (iv) pending TA bills for the period from 10.09.2003 to 09.074.2004 (v) Annual Bonus for the service period i.e. from 2004 to 2007 (vi) Quarterly Bonus for the service period i.e. from 2004 to 2007 (vii) benefit of basic fitment of wages (viii) any other consequential benefits arising out of wrongful withdrawal of service / illegal stoppage from duty (ix) continuity in service for the period from 16.07.2004 to 10.02.2008 and benefit of Gratuity linked there is unfair and unjustified. The workman Shri Biswajit Bandyopadhyay is entitled for above mentioned benefits.

O R D E R

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

नई दिल्ली, 12 जून, 2018

का.आ. 955.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई.सी.

एल. के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकोंंंंंं और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक

अधिकरण-सह-श्रम न्यायालय, आसनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 26/2009द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 06.06.2018 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-22012/34/2009-आईआर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]

राजेन्द्र सिंह, अनुभाग अध्किारी

New Delhi, the 12th June, 2018

S.O. 955.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 26/2009) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. E.C.L. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 06.06.2018.

[No. L-22012/34/2009-IR (CM-II)]

RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer4269 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जून 16, 2018/ज्येष्ठ 26, 1940

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT : Shri Pramod Kumar Mishra, Presiding Officer

REFERENCE NO. 26 OF 2009

PARTIES :

The management of Lachipur Colliery of M/s. ECL

v/s

Shri Barun Chandra Mondal

REPRESENTATIVES :

For the Management            :     Shri P. K. Das, Learned Advocate
For the Union (Workmen)       :     Shri Rakesh Kumar, Gen. Secy. of K.M.C.

Industry : Coal

State : West Bengal

DATED : 16.05.2018

A W A R D

In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub-section(1) and Sub-section 2(A) 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-22012/34/2009–IR (CM-II) dated 10.11.2009 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.

SCHEDULE

" Whether the action of the management of M/s. ECL in not promoting Shri Barun Chandra Mondal, Asstt.

Foreman to the post of Foreman is legal and justified? To what relief is the workman concerned entitled? "

1. Having received the Order NO. L-22012/34/2009–IR (CM-II) dated 10.11.2009 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a Reference Case No. 26 of 2009 was registered on 30.11.2009. 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. Case called out. Shri P. K. Das, learned advocate appeared on behalf of the management of Lachipur Colliery of M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited and Shri Rakesh Kumar, union representative appeared on behalf of the workman Shri Barun Chandra Mondal.

3. Shri Rakesh Kumar representative of the workman Shri Barun Chandra Monda submits that the case may be closed as the workman is not interested to proceed with the case further. He also made an endorsement on the Order Sheet to this effect. Since, the workman as well as the union are now not at all interested to proceed with the case further. Therefore the Tribunal has no option left but to close the case. As such the case is closed and accordingly a 'No Dispute Award' is hereby passed.

O R D E R

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]

नई दिल्ली, 12 जून, 2018

का.आ. 956.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ई.सी.

एल. के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकोंंंंंं और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक4270 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 16, 2018/JYAISTHA 26, 1940 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] अधिकरण-सह-श्रम न्यायालय, आसनसोल के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 15/2009द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 06.06.2018 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-22012/152/2005-आईआर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]

राजेन्द्र सिंह, अनुभाग अध्किारी

New Delhi, the 12th June, 2018

S.O. 956.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Corrigendum of Award (Ref. No. 15/2009) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s. E.C.L. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 06.06.2018.

[No. L-22012/152/2005-IR (CM-II)]

RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

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

PRESENT : Shri Pramod Kumar Mishra, Presiding Officer

REFERENCE NO. 15 OF 2009

PARTIES :

The management of Ratibati Colliery of M/s. ECL

v/s

Late Shri Budhan Bouri

REPRESENTATIVES :

For the Management         :    Shri P. K. Das, Learned Advocate
For the Union (Workman)    :    None

Industry : Coal

State : West Bengal

Dated : 11.05.2018

A W A R D

In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub-section(1) and Sub-section 2(A) 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-22012/152/2005–IR (CM-II) dated 23.03.2009 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.

SCHEDULE

" Whether the action of the management of M/s. ECL in not providing employment to the dependent of Late

Shri Budhan Bouri is legal and justified? To what relief is the dependent entitled? "

1. Having received the Order NO. L-22012/152/2005–IR (CM-II) dated 23.03.2009 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a Reference Case No. 15 of 2009 was registered on 31.03.2009 / 01.04.2009. 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. Case called out. Shri P. K. Das, learned advocate appeared on behalf of the management of Ratibati Colliery of M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited and filed his authorization. But none appeared on behalf of the workman Late Shri Budhan Bouri.

3. On perusal of the case record I find that the workman / union has not been appearing before the Tribunal from the very beginning. Since then 14 dates have been granted. Registered notices were also issued on 08.04.2009, 16.01.2014 and 09.07.2015 but all are in vain. It seems that the workman has no interest to proceed with the reference.

As such no dispute exists between both the parties and I have no option left but to close the case. As such the case is closed and accordingly a 'No Dispute Award' is hereby passed.

O R D E R

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]

नई दिल्ली, 12 जून, 2018

का.आ. 957.—औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 ;1947 का 14द्ध की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार

महानिर्देशिक, भारतीय पुरातत्व सर्वेक्षण के प्रबंधतंत्रा के संब( नियोजकोंंंंंं और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद

में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण-सह-श्रम न्यायालय, कानपुर के पंचाट ;संदर्भ संख्या 19/2006द्ध को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29.05.2018 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-42012/54/2005-आईआर ;सीएम-IIद्ध]

राजेन्द्र सिंह, अनुभाग अध्किारी

New Delhi, the 12th June, 2018

S.O. 957.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 19/2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Kanpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Director General, Archaelogical Survey of India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 29.05.2018.

[No. L-42012/54/2005-IR (CM-II)]

RAJENDER SINGH, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI SHUBHENDRA KUMAR, HJS,

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT

SHRAM BHAWAN, ATI CAMPUS, UDYOG NAGAR, KANPUR

ID. No. 19 of 2006

The General Secretary, All India Archaeological Survey Mazdoor Union, 43/305/18, Nai Awadi, Near Mission Church, Sikandara, AGRA(U.P)-282007

Versus

1. The Director General, Archaelogical Survey of India, Janpath, New Delhi-110011

2. The Superintending Archaeologist, Archeological Survey of India, Agra Division, 22, Mall Road, AGRA (U.P)-282001.

A W A R D

1. Central Government, MOL, vide notification no. L-42012/54/2005-IR (CM-II) dated 24.02.2006 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication.

2. "Whether the claim of the union for reinstatement & regularization in services of Shri Rakesh S/o Shri Ram Chandra & 7 others (list enclosed) is legal and justified? If yes to what relief the workmen concerned are entitled?"4272 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 16, 2018/JYAISTHA 26, 1940 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

List of Workers made part of the reference order

3. The union raising the dispute on behalf of the above workers has stated in its statement of claim that the above workers have been employed as casual labors by the opposite party at different monuments located at Agra who have worked continuously for more than 240 days in each calendar year from the date of their initial engagements till the date of their respective disengagement. It is further pleaded that at the time of disengagement of their services management has not complied with the provisions of section 25H and 25G of the Act. The union further pleaded that hundreds of junior casual labors are still in the employment of the management at different monuments but the disputed workers were not retained in the service by the management and as such management has breached the provisions of Rule 77 and 78 of I.D. Rules. Their services have been dispensed with by the management without any reason or rhyme thus the worker himself with their family members are facing problems of starvation. Worker Chob Singh died during the pendency of the dispute on 08.04.15.

4. In this way the Union has prayed that the workers shown in the enclosed list be reinstated from the date of their disengagement with full back wages and be declared as regular employee.

5. The union has filed certain photocopies of documents with their claim statement and that shall be dealt with at the appropriate stage while discussing the merit of the case.

6. In reply the management has filed their written statement alleging therein that the allegations of the union are baseless, false and fictitious. It is stated that the applicants had worked during the intermittent periods for short durations against sanctioned estimates and they were disengaged as soon as the works ere completed or the funds exhausted. The provisions of Industrial Disputes Act are not applicable upon the management and the casual labors like the applicants cannot claim their continuation in work or regularization as a matter of right. It is further alleged that the applicants had left the engagement of their own and hence exigency of work required the utilization of other casual labors to complete given assignment. The department has its obligations and it is unanswerable to the teeming millions of the country and the respondent cannot wait to return of the applicants to wok to complete the assignment. The work is time bound and the sanctioned items of work of a year have to be completed in the same year.

7. It is stated in the written statement that Sri Rakesh has worked for 78 days in the year 1987, 130 days in the year 1999-2000 and 158 days in the year 2001. Likewise Balbir has worked for 83 days during the period 1.12.99 to 28.02.2001 and Sri Ram Bharose has worked for 111 days in 2000, Sri Pooram Singh has worked for 439 days during the period from 1.9.98 to 31.8.2003 and Sri Braj Mohan has worked for 295 days during the period from 1.8.97 to 29.3.2001 and Sri Chob Singh has worked for 26 days in the year 1999 and lastly Smt. Bhagwan dei has never worked with the management.

8. Accordingly it is prayed that under the facts and circumstances narrated herein above the claim of the union be rejected.

9. In the instant case no rejoinder statement has been filed by the union.

10. On behalf of Union Rakesh has been examined as w.w.1, whereas the management has examined Raj Narain as M.W.1, in support of their respective cases.

11. I have heard the arguments of both the parties and have also gone through the records of the case.

12. The reference is with regard to reinstatement and regularization in the service of worker under the management. As the union itself has admitted in the claim statement that the workers whose case is referred to this Tribunal were working as casual labor, therefore, the demand of the union for regularization of services of worker cannot be held legal and justified as per settled legal position that casual employee has no right to claim regularization of his service therefore these casual employee cannot be granted relief of regularization of their service under the management.

13. As regards breach of provisions of section 25H of the act, it has to be seen in this case that whether the worker have worked with the management and whether management after terminating the services of workers have inducted fresh hands in service without considering the fact that retrenched workers should be given priority in reemploying fresh worker as casual labours.

14. WW1 Rakesh, worker has stated on oath that his services were terminated without notice and retrenchment compensation. He further stated that after disengagement management appointed 40 new faces in the service. He has also stated that the workers worked for more than 240 days which fact is denied by management witness MW1 Sri Raj Narayan who has stated that Smt. Bhagwan dei had never worked with the management and seven other workers have not worked continuously for 240 days.

15. As worker Rakesh in his statement on oath has specifically stated that after their retrenchment management has engaged 40 new faces and this fact was neither rebutted by the management witness Raj Narayan nor there was any cross examination of witness Rakesh WW1 on this point. Therefore this statement of worker stands un- rebutted. It is settled law by Hon'ble Apex Court and several Hon'ble High Courts that for applicability of section 25H of the act it is not required that a worker must be under continuous employment for 240 days.

16. Worker has also filed information received under RTI act from the management which shows that 4 person in group D were engaged from 2010 by way of direct recruitment and also from SSC. It is also proved that after termination of worker management engaged persons from outside also apart from engaging worker through SSC at the post of MTS and it is also case of management (to quote para 3 of management parawise reply) wherein it is alleged that the spirit of the judgment of the Hon'ble apex court holds that while granting engagement to a particular person, the department should not be oblivious of the requirements of the teeming millions of the country. Their interests are also needed to be guarded. However, it is submitted that the applicants had left the engagements on their own and hence exigencies of work required the utilization of other casual laborers to complete given assignments. The department has its obligations and it is answerable to the teeming millions of the country. The answering respondent cannot wait for the return of the applicants to work to complete the assignment. The works are time bound and the sanctioned items of work of a year have to be competed in the same year. Hence, if one does not turn up, the department has to get the work done by other available work force. The claims of the applicants do not stand to any legal justification.

17. The admission made by the management in para 3 (Supra) it absolutely contradicts the provisions of 25H of the act and is directly against it. It is provided in section 25H of ID ACT of 1947 that if employer proposes to take up into his employment any person, it is duty of employer to give an opportunity to the retrenched workman to offer themselves for reemployment and those retrenched workmen who offers themselves shall have preference over other persons.

18. As provided in section 25H of the act it was duty of the management that before giving employment to another person from outside, first to call upon the retrenched employee and offer them for reemployment. As management failed to adopt the provision of section 25H of the ID ACT and have not stated anywhere that workers were given notices offering their reemployment, therefore, the action of the management for not reinstating the workers mentioned at serial no. 1 to 6 as above in service is neither legal nor justified.

19. As worker Chob Singh mentioned at serial no.7 was admittedly died during the pendency of this dispute and Smt. Bhagwan Dei had never worked with the management, hence they are held entitled to no relief.

20. Having concluded that the action of the management is in gross violation of section 25-H of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, when they failed to offer reemployment to the workers involved in the present case at the time of engaging fresh persons, it is held that the action of the management in not reinstating the workers in their service is neither legal nor just.

21. Accordingly Shri Rakesh s/o Ram Chandra is entitled to be reinstated in service w.e.f 1.08.2003, Shri Balbir Singh s/o Tikaram is held entitled for his reinstatement form 29.07.2003, Shri Ramborashi s/o Pritam Singh is entitled for his reinstatement w.e.f from 1.4.2002, Shri Omi s/o Tikaram is entitled for his reinstatement w.e.f 1.4.2001,4274 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 16, 2018/JYAISTHA 26, 1940 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] Shri Puran singh s/o Ojhammanlal is entitled for his reinstatement w.e.f 1.7.2003 and lastly Shri BrajMohan s/o Hotilal is held entitled for his reinstatement w.e.f 26.3.2001, in the services of Management.

22. As regards admissibility of back wages to these workers is concerned, admittedly workers have failed to prove that they were not in gainful employment anywhere else during the period they remained outside the job of the management, hence it is held that they are not entitled for any back wages, but shall be entitled for continuity of service and other consequential benefits.

23. In view of above observations the reference is answered in favor of the Union and against the management.

SHUBHENDRA KUMAR, Presiding Officer

Uploaded by Dte. of Printing at Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064 and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054.