7560 GI/2018

(1)

jftLVªh la- Mh- ,y- (,u) 04@0007@2003µ05

REGD. No. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05

izkf/dkj ls izdkf'kr

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

lkIrkfgd

WEEKLY

la- 1]

ubZ fnYyh] fnlEcj 30—tuojh 5] 2019] 'kfuokj@IkkS"k 9—ikS"k 15] 1940

No. 1]

NEW DELHI, DECEMBER 30—JANUARY 5, 2019, SATURDAY/ PAUSHA 9— PAUSHA 15, 1940

bl Hkkx esa fHkUu i`"B la[;k nh tkrh gS ftlls fd ;g i`Fkd ladyu ds :i esa j[kk tk lds

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

Hkkx II—[k.M 3—mi&[k.M (ii)

PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)

Hkkjr ljdkj ds ea=kky;ksa (j{kk ea=kky; dks NksM+dj) }kjk tkjh fd, x, lkafof/d vkns'k vkSj vf/lwpuk,a

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

(Other than the Ministry of Defence)

िव

िव

िव

िव मंालय

मंालय

मंालय

मंालय

(िवीय

िवीय

िवीय

िवीय सेवाएं

सेवाएं

सेवाएं

सेवाएं िवभाग

िवभाग

िवभाग

िवभाग)

नई द ली, 22 नव बर, 2018

का.आ.

का.आ.

का.आ.

का.आ. 1.— ब ककारी िविनयमन अिधिनयम, 1949 (1949 का 10) क धारा 53 क उप-धारा (1) ारा द

शिय का योग करते %ए, के'(ीय सरकार, भारतीय +रजव- ब क क िसफा+रश पर एत/ारा, यह घोषणा करती है क उ

अिधिनयम क धारा 10 क उप-धारा (1) के ख6ड (ग) के उप-ख6ड (i) के उपबंध यूिनयन ब क आफ इंिडया पर लागू नह<

ह गे, जहां तक इसका संबंध ब क के बंध िनदेशक एवं मु>य काय-कारी अिधकारी ?ी राज करन राय जी. को Aटार यूिनयन

दाई-ईची लाइफ इंCयोरDस कंपनी िलिमटेड के बोड- मD िनदेशक के पद पर नािमत करने से है।

[फा.सं. 13/2/2016-बीओ-I]

Fानोतोष राय, अवर सिचव

2

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department of Financial Services)

New Delhi, the 22nd November, 2018

S.O. 1.— In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 53 of the Banking Regulation Act,

1949 (10 of 1949), the Central Government on the recommendation of the Reserve Bank of India, hereby declare that the

provisions of sub-clause (i) of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 10 of the said Act shall not apply to Union Bank of

India in relation to the nomination of Shri Raj Kiran Rai G., Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, Union

Bank of India on the Board of Star Union Dai-Ichi Life Insurance Company Limited as Director.

[F. No. 13/2/2016-BO-I]

JNANATOSH ROY, Under Secy.

नई द ली, 4 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 2.—ब ककारी कंपनी (उपGम का अज-न एवं अंतरण) अिधिनयम, 1970 क धारा 9 क उप-धारा (3) के

खंड (ख) ारा द शिय का योग करते %ए, के'(ीय सरकार, एत/ारा, ?ी आनंद मधुकर, िवशेष काय- अिधकारी

(ओएसडी), भारत सरकार, िव मंHालय, िवीय सेवाएं िवभाग को तIकाल भाव से और अगले आदेश तक, सु?ी Kसधु

िपलई के Aथान पर यूको ब क के िनदेशक म6डल मD सरकारी नािमती िनदेशक नािमत करती है।

[फा. सं. 6/3/2012-बीओ-I]

Fानोतोष राय, अवर सिचव

New Delhi the 4th December, 2018

S.O. 2.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of sub-section (3) of section 9 of the Banking

Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, the Central Government hereby nominates Shri Anand

Madhukar, Officer on Special Duty, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Financial Services as

Government nominee Director on the Board of Directors of UCO Bank, with immediate effect and until further orders,

vice Ms. Sindhu Pillai.

[F. No. 6/3/2012-BO-I]

JNANATOSH ROY, Under Secy.

नई द ली, 11 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 3.—भारतीय +रजव- ब क अिधिनयम, 1934 क धारा 11 क उप-धारा (6) ारा द शिय का योग

करते %ए, के'(ीय सरकार, एत/ारा, भारतीय +रजव- ब क के गवन-र डॉ. उQजत आर. पटेल के Iयाग-पH को Aवीकार करती है।

[फा. सं. 1/3/2013-बीओ-I]

Fानोतोष राय, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 11th December, 2018

S.O. 3.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (6) of section 11 of the Reserve Bank of India Act,

1934, the Central Government, hereby accepts the resignation of Dr Urjit R. Patel as Governor, Reserve Bank of India.

[F. No. 1/3/2013-BO-I]

JNANATOSH ROY, Under Secy.

नई द ली, 11 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 4.— भारतीय +रजव- ब क अिधिनयम, 1934 क धारा 8 क उप-धारा (4) के साथ प+ठत उप-धारा (1) के

खंड (क) ारा द शिय का योग करते %ए, के'(ीय सरकार, एत/ारा, ?ी शिकांत दास, आईएएस सेवािनवृ (टीएन:

80), भूतपूव- सिचव, आQथक काय- िवभाग को तीन वष- क अविध के िलए भारतीय +रजव- ब क (आरबीआई) के गवन-र के पद

पर िनयु करती है।

[फा. सं. 1/3/2013-बीओ-I]

Fानोतोष राय, अवर सिचव

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

3

New Delhi, the 11th December, 2018

S.O. 4.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-section (1) read with sub-section (4) of section

8 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Shaktikanta Das, IAS Retd.

(TN:80), former Secretary, Department of Economic Affairs, as Governor, Reserve Bank of India (RBI), for a period of

three years.

[F. No. 1/3/2013-BO-I]

JNANATOSH ROY, Under Secy.

नई द ली, 21 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 5.—भारतीय िनया-त-आयात ब क अिधिनयम, 1981 (1981 का 28) क धारा 6 क उप-धारा (1) के खंड

(ग) के अनुसरण मD, के'(ीय सरकार, एत/ारा, आईडीबीआई ब क के बंध िनदेशक एवं मु>य काय-कारी अिधकारी (एमडी एवं

सीईओ) को तIकाल भाव से अगले आदेश तक, भारतीय िनया-त-आयात ब क (एिWजम ब क) के िनदेशक म6डल मD पदेन

आधार पर िनदेशक के पद पर नािमत करती है।

[फा. सं. 9/16/2012-आईएफ-I]

सौ यिजत घोष, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 21st December, 2018

S.O. 5.—In pursuance of Clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the Export Import Bank of India Act,

1981 (28 of 1981), the Central Government hereby nominates MD&CEO, IDBI Bank as Director on ex-officio basis on

the Board of Directors of Export Import Bank of India (EXIM Bank) with immediate effect until further orders.

[F. No. 9/16/2012-IF-I]

SOUMYAJIT GHOSH, Under Secy.

िवदेश मंालय

िवदेश मंालय

िवदेश मंालय

िवदेश मंालय

(पी. ए

(पी. ए

(पी. ए

(पी. ए-1 अनुभाग)

1 अनुभाग)

1 अनुभाग)

1 अनुभाग)

नई द ली, 30 नव बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 6.—उI वासन अिधिनयम 1983 (1983 का 31) क धारा 3 क उप-धारा (1) ारा द शिय का

योग करते %ए के' ( सरकार एतदारा िवदेश मंHालय मD संयुW त सिचव ?ी अमृत लुगून को पदभार Yहण करने क तारीख

अथा-त 30.11.2018 (अपराZन) से अगले आदेश तक िवदेश मंHालय मD उI वासी महा संर[क के \प मD िनयुW त करती है।

[सं. पीए-I/34/2018 ]

िमजीतो िविनतो, अवर सिचव (एफएसपी एवं कैडर)

MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

(PA-I SECTION)

New Delhi, the 30th November, 2018

S.O. 6.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Emigration Act, 1983 (31 of

1983), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Amrit Lugun, Joint Secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs as

Protector General of Emigrants, Ministry of External Affairs w.e.f. the date of assumption of charge of the post i.e.

30.11.2018 (A/N) until further orders.

[No. PA-I/34/2018]

MIJITO VINITO, Under Secy. (FSP & Cadre)

4

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

वाय और प रवार कयाण मंालय

वाय और प रवार कयाण मंालय

वाय और प रवार कयाण मंालय

वाय और प रवार कयाण मंालय

नई दली, 10 दस बर, 2018

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ. 7.—के'(ीय सरकार, सरकारी Aथान (अािधकृत अिधभोिगय क बदेखली) अिधिनयम, 1971 (1971 का

40) क धारा 3 ारा द शिय का योग करते %ए, नीचे सारणी के Aतंभ (2) मD उिलिखत अिधकारी को, जो सरकार के

राजिपHत अिधकारी ह , उ अिधिनयम के योजन के िलए संपदा अिधकारी िनयु करती है और उ अिधकारी उ

सारणी के Aतंभ (3) मD तIAथानी िवि_ मD िविन`द_ सरकारी Aथान के वगa क बावत अपनी अिधका+रता को Aथानीय

सीमाb के भीतर उ अिधिनयम ारा या उसके अधीन वगa संपदा अिधकारी को द शिय का योग और उन पर

अिधरोिपत क-c का पालन करेगा ।

सारणी

सारणी

सारणी

सारणी

Gम सं.

अिधकारी का नाम और पदािभधान

सरकारी Aथान के वग- और अिधका+रता क Aथानीय

सीमाएं

)

1

(

)

2

(

)

3

(

1

डॉ. एस. आनंद पशुिचकIसक, बीसीजी टीका

योगशाला, चेdई

बीसीजी टीका योगशाला, Kगडी, चेdई 600032 के

शासिनक िनयंHाणीन और कम-चा+रवृंद W वाट-र के

वत-न संबंधी प+रसर, W वाट-र से बेदखली और अAथायी

आंवटन से संबंिधत मामले ।

[फा. सं. जेड – 28020/11/2018-ईपीआई]

व+र'दर कौर भला, अवर सिचव

MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE

New Delhi, the 10th December, 2018

S.O. 7.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised

Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971), the Central Government hereby appoints the officer mentioned in the column (2) of

the Table below, being Gazetted Officer of the Government, to be the Estate Officer for the purposes of the said Act, and

the said officer shall exercise all powers conferred and perform the duties imposed on Estate Officer by under the said

Act, within the local limits of his jurisdiction in respect of the categories of Public Premises specified in the

corresponding entry in column (3) of the said Table.

TABLE

Sl. No.

Name & Designation of the Officer Categories of Public Premises and Local limits of

Jurisdiction.

(1)

(2)

(3)

1.

Dr. S. Anand, Veterinarian, BCG Vaccine

Laboratory, Chennai

Premises relating to enforcement, eviction of quarters and

matters relating to BCG Staff Quarters and temporary

allotment under the administrative control of the BCG

Vaccine Laboratory, Guindy, Chennai – 600032.

[F. No. Z-28020/11/2018-EPI]

Ms. VARINDER KAUR BHALLA, Under Secy.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

5

मिहला एवं बाल िवकास मंालय

मिहला एवं बाल िवकास मंालय

मिहला एवं बाल िवकास मंालय

मिहला एवं बाल िवकास मंालय

(बाल क या

बाल क या

बाल क या

बाल क याण-I अनुभाग

अनुभाग

अनुभाग

अनुभाग)

शुि

शुि

शुि

शुि-प

प

प

प

नई द ली, 10 दस बर, 2018

का.आ.

का.आ.

का.आ.

का.आ. 8.—बाल अिधकार संर[ण आयोग अिधिनयम, 2005 (2006 का 4) क धारा 4 के अनुसरण मD, मिहला

एवं बाल िवकास मंHालय ने अिधसूचना सं> या 13/106/2015/यूएस(सीडg  यू-I) का काया-लय, दनांक 31.10.2018 के

माh यम से ?ी ियंक कानूनगो को 17.10.2018 (पूवा-Zन) से तीन वष- क अविध के िलए, अथवा अगले आदेश होने तक, जो

भी पहले हो, राi jीय बाल अिधकार संर[ण आयोग का अh य[ िनयुW त कया था ।

2. अिधसूचना दनांक 31.10.2018 के Kहदी पाठ मD '?ी ियांक कानूनगो' शg द को '?ी ियंक कानूनगो' पढ़ा जाए ।

[सं.13/106/2015/यूएस(सीडg  यू-I) का काया-लय (ई-13342)]

आA था सW सेना खटवानी, संयुW त सिचव

MINISTRY OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT

(CHILD WELFARE-I SECTION)

CORRIGENDUM

New Delhi, the 10th December, 2018

S.O. 8.—In pursuance of Section 4 of the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 ( 4 of 2006),

Ministry of Women & Child Development vide notification No.13/106/2015-O/O US(CW-I) dated 31.10.2018 had

appointed Shri Priyank Kanoongo as Chairperson, National Commission for Protection of Child Rights with effect from

17.10.2018 (A/N) for a period of three years, or until further orders, whichever is the earlier.

2.) In the Hindi version of notification dated 31.10.2018 , the words '?ी ियांक कानूनगो' may be read as

‘‘?ी ियंक कानूनगो'’।

[No. 13/106/2015-O/O US(CW-I) (e-13342)]

AASTHA SAXENA KHATWANI, Jt. Secy.

नई द ली, 10 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 9.—बाल अिधकार संर[ण आयोग अिधिनयम, 2005 (2006 का 4) क धारा 4 के अनुसरण मD भारत

सरकार एतदारा बk च से संबंिधत कानून के [ेH मD ?ी यशवंत जैन को दनांक 02.11.2018 (अपराZन) को पद पर

काय-भार Yहण करने क ितिथ से तीन वष- क अविध, या 60 वष- क आयु ाm त करने, अथवा अगले आदेश के होने, इनमD से

जो भी पहले हो, तक राi jीय बाल अिधकार संर[ण आयोग मD सदA य के \प मD िनयुW त करती है।

[सं. 13/100/2015-सीडg  यू-I(ई-12860)]

आA था सW सेना खटवानी, संयुW त सिचव

New Delhi, the 10th December, 2018

S.O. 9.—In pursuance of Section 4 of the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 (4 of 2006), the

Government of India hereby appoint Shri. Yashwant Jain as Member, National Commission for Protection of Child

Rights for the field Laws relating to Children with effect from 02.11.2018 (A/N) for a period of three years from the date

of assumption of charge of the post or till attaining the age of 60 yrs or till further orders, whichever is the earlier.

[No. 13/100/2015-CW-I(e-12860)]

AASTHA SAXENA KHATWANI, Jt. Secy.

6

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

आयुष मंालय

आयुष मंालय

आयुष मंालय

आयुष मंालय

नई द ली, 30 अW तूबर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 10

10

10

10.—कD(ीय सरकार, राजभाषा (संघ के शासकय योजन के िलए योग) िनयम 1976 (यथा संशोिधत

1987) के िनयम 10 के उप-िनयम (4) के अनुसरण मD, आयुष मंHालय के शासिनक िनयंHणाधीन िन निलिखत काया-लय,

िजसके 84.21% ितशत कम-चारीवृ' द ने Kहदी का काय-साधक Fान ाm त कर िलया है, को एतदारा अिधसूिचत करती

ह :—

‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘ेीय

ेीय

ेीय

ेीय आयुव दीय

आयुव दीय

आयुव दीय

आयुव दीय " व

" व

" व

" वकरोग

करोग

करोग

करोग अनुसंधान

अनुसंधान

अनुसंधान

अनुसंधान सं था

सं था

सं था

सं थान, , , , अहमदाबाद

अहमदाबाद

अहमदाबाद

अहमदाबाद’’’’’’’’

[सं. ई-11018/1/2018-आयुष (रा.भा.)]

पी. एन. र6 जीत कुमार, संयुW त सिचव

MINISTRY OF AYUSH

New Delhi, the 30th October, 2018

S.O. 10.—In pursuance of Sub-Rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Language (Use for official purposes of the

Union) Rules, 1976 (as amended in 1987), the Central Government hereby notifies the following office under the

administrative control of the Ministry of AYUSH, wherein 84.21% Officials have acquired the working knowledge of

Hindi:

“Regional Ayurveda Research Institute for Skin Disorders, Ahmedabad”

[No. E-11018/1/2018-AYUSH(O.L.)]

P.N. RANJIT KUMAR, Jt. Secy.

पे$ोिलयम और &ाकृितक गैस मंालय

पे$ोिलयम और &ाकृितक गैस मंालय

पे$ोिलयम और &ाकृितक गैस मंालय

पे$ोिलयम और &ाकृितक गैस मंालय

नई दली, 28 दस बर, 2018

का

का

का

का.आ.

.आ.

.आ.

.आ. 11.—के'(ीय सरकार ने पेjोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइन (भूिम मे उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न)

अिधिनयम, 1962 ( 1962-50) ( िजसे इसमD इसके पnात उ अिधिनयम कहा गया है) क धारा 3 उप धारा (1) के अधीन

जारी क गई, भारत सरकार के पेjोिलयम और ाकृितक गैस मंHालय क अिधसूचना िजसका काशन भारत के राजपH

सं>या 15 दनाक 15-21 अैल 2018 का.आ. 607, 609 दनाक 10.04.2018 भाग II, खंड 3, उपखंड (ii) मD कया गया

है! इस अिधसूचना से सलंq अनुसूची मD िविनद_ महाराr राsय क तहसील- आ_ी, िजला बीड क भूिम मD महाराr राsय मD

कोयली (गुजरात) से अहमदनगर एवं सोलापुर तक पेjोिलयम प+रवहन के िलए इंिडयन ऑइल कॉपuरेशन िलिमटेड ारा

Gयाि'वत कए जा रहे “कोयली-अहमदनगर-सोलापुर प+रयोजना” के स ब'ध मD पाइपलाइन िबछाने के योजन के िलए

उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न करने के िलए अपने आशय क घोषणा क थी :

और उ राजपH अिधसूचनाओ क ितयाँ जनता को तारीख 14 िसत बर 2018 को उपलgध करा दी गई थी।

और उ अिधिनयम क धारा 6 क उपधारा (1) के अनुसरण मD स[म ािधकारी ने के'(ीय सरकार को अपनी +रपोट- दे दी

है।

और के'(ीय सरकार ने उ +रपोट- पर िवचार करने के पnात् और यह समाधान हो जाने पर क उ भूिम मD पाइपलाइन

िबछाने के िलए अपेिछत है, उसमD उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न करने का िविनnय कया है:

अत: अब, के'(ीय सरकार उ अिधिनयम क धारा 6 क उपधारा (1) ारा दत शिय का योग करते %ए एत/ारा

ारा घोषणा करती है क इस अिधसूचना से सलq अनुसूची मD िविनद_ भूिम मD पाइपलाइन िबछाने के उपयोग का अिधकार

अQजत कया जाए:

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

7

और के'(ीय सरकार उ अिधिनयम क धारा 6 क उपधारा (4) ारा दत शिय का योग करते %ए, यह िनदyश देती

है क उ भूिम मD उपयोग का अिधकार इस घोषणा के काशन क तारीख से के'(ीय सरकार मD िनिहत होने के बजाय सभी

िव लंगमो से मु होकर इंिडयन ऑइल कॉपuरेशन िलिमटेड मD िनिहत होगा।

पेjोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइन अिधिनयम, 1962 क धारा 10 के अधीन कसी भी [ितपूQत के िलए इंिडयन

ऑइल कॉपuरेशन िलिमटेड पूण-तया उतरदायी होगी और पाइपलाइन से संबंिधत कसी भी मामले पर के'(ीय सरकार के

िवzद कोई वाद दावा या क़ानूनी काय-वाही नही हो सकेगी।

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

तालुका

तालुका

तालुका

तालुका : आ+ी

आ+ी

आ+ी

आ+ी

िजला

िजला

िजला

िजला : बीड

बीड

बीड

बीड

रा,य

रा,य

रा,य

रा,य : महारा-

महारा-

महारा-

महारा-

गां

गां

गां

गांव का नाम

का नाम

का नाम

का नाम

सव

सव

सव

सव नंनंनंनं.//लॉक नं

//लॉक नं

//लॉक नं

//लॉक नं.

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

हे3टर

हे3टर

हे3टर

हे3टर

आर

आर

आर

आर

वग5

वग5

वग5

वग5 मीटर

मीटर

मीटर

मीटर

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

कोयाल

114

00

55

01

115

00

03

75

120

00

54

10

121

00

33

35

122

00

88

58

129

00

90

48

13

00

48

92

12

00

53

71

06

00

26

94

07

00

05

10

04

00

68

58

05

00

33

75

31

00

53

75

32

00

39

86

खुंटेफल (वाटेफल)

30

00

83

16

29

00

00

03

सुंबेवाडी

41

00

24

34

42

00

63

04

43

00

52

49

8

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

सुंबेवाडी

44

00

59

77

45

00

29

66

46

00

08

67

नांदुर

104

00

25

19

105

00

43

37

107

00

71

76

96

00

55

51

98

00

24

06

97

00

30

97

बालेवाडी

25

00

42

27

26

00

44

86

28

00

44

32

29

00

45

32

32

01

16

45

30

00

02

85

31

00

51

10

53

00

82

61

54

00

22

11

52

00

36

43

55

00

36

50

59

00

25

31

58

00

61

30

57

00

28

68

धानोरा

108

00

15

31

107

00

17

79

105

00

25

32

106

00

28

99

99

00

64

04

98

00

56

72

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

9

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

धानोरा

97

00

42

31

96

00

25

09

90

00

39

73

88

00

20

44

87

00

42

74

86

00

00

02

77

00

11

56

78

00

09

85

81

00

07

16

80

00

07

15

82

00

10

13

67

00

36

10

66

00

05

74

65

00

21

76

64

00

00

15

63

00

29

13

58

00

20

06

57

00

15

36

55

00

18

53

53

00

12

73

52

00

14

69

48

00

13

59

49

00

02

54

46

00

15

46

45

00

45

58

साबलखेड

12

00

10

60

117

00

25

82

118

00

24

60

97

00

91

47

10

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

साबलखेड

115

00

47

04

98

00

27

35

Kचचोली

01

00

51

33

02

00

38

06

03

00

40

88

08

00

10

76

9/4

00

06

76

9/5

00

06

70

10

00

16

71

11/8

00

03

66

11/9

00

04

42

11/10

00

08

64

13/1

00

14

31

13/2

00

05

55

13/3

00

07

66

14

00

36

56

17/4

00

15

31

17/5

00

16

10

18/5

00

57

68

कडा

54

00

42

45

55

00

47

38

48

00

43

47

47

00

36

58

61

00

05

43

38

00

65

48

39

00

40

01

40

00

24

10

36

00

09

85

35

00

44

90

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

11

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

कडा

34

00

34

76

30

00

18

97

29

00

41

73

101

00

25

54

102

00

17

13

103

00

31

71

104

00

48

10

105

00

41

11

124

00

26

91

123

00

29

43

121

00

74

83

119

00

34

41

141

00

37

39

142

00

15

14

143

00

11

86

शेरी खुद-

15

00

34

22

14

00

27

83

13

00

05

91

11

00

14

94

12

00

13

50

09

00

30

53

07

00

30

49

06

00

05

91

05

00

01

54

83

00

67

82

शेरी बु(ुक

84/3

00

09

39

84/4

00

12

00

नीमगाव चोभा

75

00

23

95

76

00

57

98

12

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

नीमगाव चोभा

69

00

09

76

77

00

45

94

80

00

50

83

81

00

53

65

वटणवाडी

58

00

95

63

57

00

00

48

जलगांव

74

00

34

59

72

00

27

63

71/2

00

16

27

69

00

18

07

68

00

45

07

66

00

03

59

47

00

65

76

58

00

31

62

57

00

23

96

56

00

29

95

50

00

13

62

55

00

57

08

Kपी आ_ी

83

00

27

76

84

00

59

40

86

00

56

63

87

00

03

70

88

00

35

91

97

00

45

24

98

00

46

50

05

00

52

10

03

00

29

14

17

00

42

18

16

00

53

37

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

13

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

15

00

40

38

मुश-दपुर

7/1

00

26

39

6/1

00

33

36

6/2

00

28

14

5/1

00

27

46

5/2

00

20

11

11/1/1

00

11

86

11/1/2

00

14

13

11/1/3

00

12

38

12/2

00

04

27

02

00

22

63

19/2

00

35

20

20

00

46

26

42

00

51

50

40/4

00

08

70

40/5

00

16

60

40/9

00

07

19

40/10

00

16

17

44

00

18

50

45/1

00

20

26

46

00

83

00

आ_ी

908

00

00

03

907

00

28

17

906

00

44

22

785

00

98

89

788

01

15

06

790

00

05

65

786

00

00

40

781

00

09

99

14

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

आ_ी

780

00

21

30

703

00

33

06

704

00

39

50

705

00

37

93

706

00

43

09

474

00

50

57

475

00

09

59

476

00

49

15

491

00

26

59

489

00

07

50

490

00

66

96

487

00

63

08

552

00

19

40

554

00

00

20

555

00

11

37

556

00

11

62

564

00

00

67

पोखरी

875

00

04

16

876

00

14

75

877

00

06

31

878

00

05

79

879

00

06

37

880

00

05

70

873

00

46

12

872

00

00

38

871

00

09

79

870

00

08

57

868

00

53

97

844

00

33

68

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

15

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

पोखरी

841

00

01

26

847

00

04

95

840

00

02

80

848

00

04

73

839

00

02

88

838

00

13

45

837

00

37

08

836

00

13

72

824

00

06

57

825

00

08

54

826

00

10

86

827

00

15

18

365

00

00

15

364

00

07

00

362

00

04

60

363

00

15

88

368

00

25

04

371

00

05

97

103

00

02

03

384

00

07

67

385

00

02

21

386

00

01

98

387

00

02

42

388

00

05

59

391

00

00

21

390

00

01

84

389

00

03

07

395

00

03

48

408

00

14

92

16

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

पोखरी

417

00

11

14

356

00

18

40

346

00

06

89

343

00

12

30

310

00

25

15

105

00

14

38

294

00

34

71

161

00

00

01

157

00

00

37

162

00

26

73

156

00

16

04

116

00

15

18

117

00

10

41

119

00

04

14

123

00

19

33

125

00

10

23

128

00

00

78

127

00

13

36

129

00

31

28

132

00

49

96

134

00

15

88

135

00

02

99

136

00

09

00

137

00

23

93

गांधनवाडी

195

00

07

13

196

00

25

52

203

00

06

85

197

00

05

39

204

00

19

88

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

17

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

गांधनवाडी

205

00

10

94

207

00

10

15

208

00

05

94

206

00

01

28

209

00

23

84

222

00

03

93

223

00

24

69

224

00

17

63

225

00

20

13

226

00

03

59

240

00

03

58

Kचचपुर

328

00

21

45

332

00

05

62

325

00

04

63

320

00

02

37

321

00

09

19

322

00

18

83

323

00

05

63

324

00

05

77

306

00

15

63

303

00

13

70

302

00

39

31

301

00

04

05

222

00

38

63

239

00

45

79

241

00

03

26

236

00

36

52

238

00

34

00

237

00

00

02

18

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

Kचचपुर

202

00

09

98

200

00

08

28

199

00

08

90

196

00

09

43

171

00

43

73

195

00

00

16

189

00

66

90

भातोडी

80

00

25

18

82

00

28

60

84

00

01

22

83

00

10

94

86

00

15

01

खाकलवाडी

30/1

00

34

16

30/3

00

17

79

30/4

00

16

54

30/5

00

02

40

29/1

00

10

26

29/2

00

00

98

31/1

00

05

99

31/2

00

25

04

31/3

00

05

69

31/5

00

00

08

31/6

00

04

07

31/12

00

09

65

32/1

00

15

95

32/2

00

24

96

32/4

00

13

24

32/5

00

00

01

33/6

00

14

30

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

19

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

खाकलवाडी

35/1

00

21

15

35/2

00

11

39

35/3

00

08

76

34

00

53

24

22

00

36

94

21

00

45

77

पांढरी

191

00

55

49

192

00

83

09

195

00

47

37

171

00

49

04

196

00

58

03

149

00

81

91

169

00

34

96

154

01

00

52

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)6/2018-ओआर-I /ई-23678]

नोवस क' डो, अवर सिचव

MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS

New Delhi, the 28th December, 2018

S.O. 11.—Whereas by the notification of The Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural

Gas, Published in the Gazette No. 15 date 15-21 April 2018 S.O No. 607, 609 date 10.04.2018 Part-II,Section-3,Sub-

Section (ii) 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), (Hereinafter referred to as the said Act) the Central Government declared

its intention to acquire the right of user in the land situated in Tehsil Ashti, District Beed in Maharashtra State,

specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of

petroleum from Koyali in the State Gujrat to Solapur in the Maharashtra by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited for

implementing the ‘’Koyali-Ahmednagar-Solapur Pipeline Project’’.

And whereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on 12 September

2018.

And whereas the Competent Authority has under sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act, has submitted

his report 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 the 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 of the said land for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in

the Central Government, vests on the date of publication of the declaration, in Indian Oil Corporation Limited, free

from all encumbrances.

20

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

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

pipeline.

SCHEDULE

Taluka : Ashti

District : Beed

State : Maharashtra

Name of Village

Survey No./

Block No.

Area

Hectare

Are

Square Metre

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Koyal

114

00

55

01

115

00

03

75

120

00

54

10

121

00

33

35

122

00

88

58

129

00

90

48

13

00

48

92

12

00

53

71

06

00

26

94

07

00

05

10

04

00

68

58

05

00

33

75

31

00

53

75

32

00

39

86

Khuntephal (Watephal)

30

00

83

16

29

00

00

03

Sumbewadi

41

00

24

34

42

00

63

04

43

00

52

49

44

00

59

77

45

00

29

66

46

00

08

67

Nandur

104

00

25

19

105

00

43

37

107

00

71

76

96

00

55

51

98

00

24

06

97

00

30

97

Balewadi

25

00

42

27

26

00

44

86

28

00

44

32

29

00

45

32

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

21

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Balewadi

32

01

16

45

30

00

02

85

31

00

51

10

53

00

82

61

54

00

22

11

52

00

36

43

55

00

36

50

59

00

25

31

58

00

61

30

57

00

28

68

Dhanora

108

00

15

31

107

00

17

79

105

00

25

32

106

00

28

99

99

00

64

04

98

00

56

72

97

00

42

31

96

00

25

09

90

00

39

73

88

00

20

44

87

00

42

74

86

00

00

02

77

00

11

56

78

00

09

85

81

00

07

16

80

00

07

15

82

00

10

13

67

00

36

10

66

00

05

74

65

00

21

76

64

00

00

15

63

00

29

13

58

00

20

06

57

00

15

36

55

00

18

53

53

00

12

73

52

00

14

69

48

00

13

59

49

00

02

54

46

00

15

46

45

00

45

58

22

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Sabalkhed

12

00

10

60

117

00

25

82

118

00

24

60

97

00

91

47

115

00

47

04

98

00

27

35

Chincholi

01

00

51

33

02

00

38

06

03

00

40

88

08

00

10

76

9/4

00

06

76

9/5

00

06

70

10

00

16

71

11/8

00

03

66

11/9

00

04

42

11/10

00

08

64

13/1

00

14

31

13/2

00

05

55

13/3

00

07

66

14

00

36

56

17/4

00

15

31

17/5

00

16

10

18/5

00

57

68

Kada

54

00

42

45

55

00

47

38

48

00

43

47

47

00

36

58

61

00

05

43

38

00

65

48

39

00

40

01

40

00

24

10

36

00

09

85

35

00

44

90

34

00

34

76

30

00

18

97

29

00

41

73

101

00

25

54

102

00

17

13

103

00

31

71

104

00

48

10

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

23

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Kada

105

00

41

11

124

00

26

91

123

00

29

43

121

00

74

83

119

00

34

41

141

00

37

39

142

00

15

14

143

00

11

86

Sheri Khurd

15

00

34

22

14

00

27

83

13

00

05

91

11

00

14

94

12

00

13

50

09

00

30

53

07

00

30

49

06

00

05

91

05

00

01

54

83

00

67

82

Sheri Budruk

84/3

00

09

39

84/4

00

12

00

Nimgaon Chobha

75

00

23

95

76

00

57

98

69

00

09

76

77

00

45

94

80

00

50

83

81

00

53

65

Watanwadi

58

00

95

63

57

00

00

48

Jalgaon

74

00

34

59

72

00

27

63

71/2

00

16

27

69

00

18

07

68

00

45

07

66

00

03

59

47

00

65

76

58

00

31

62

57

00

23

96

56

00

29

95

50

00

13

62

55

00

57

08

Pimpri Ashti

83

00

27

76

24

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Pimpri Ashti

84

00

59

40

86

00

56

63

87

00

03

70

88

00

35

91

97

00

45

24

98

00

46

50

05

00

52

10

03

00

29

14

17

00

42

18

16

00

53

37

15

00

40

38

Murshadpur

7/1

00

26

39

6/1

00

33

36

6/2

00

28

14

5/1

00

27

46

5/2

00

20

11

11/1/1

00

11

86

11/1/2

00

14

13

11/1/3

00

12

38

12/2

00

04

27

02

00

22

63

19/2

00

35

20

20

00

46

26

42

00

51

50

40/4

00

08

70

40/5

00

16

60

40/9

00

07

19

40/10

00

16

17

44

00

18

50

45/1

00

20

26

46

00

83

00

Ashti

908

00

00

03

907

00

28

17

906

00

44

22

785

00

98

89

788

01

15

06

790

00

05

65

786

00

00

40

781

00

09

99

780

00

21

30

703

00

33

06

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

25

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Ashti

704

00

39

50

705

00

37

93

706

00

43

09

474

00

50

57

475

00

09

59

476

00

49

15

491

00

26

59

489

00

07

50

490

00

66

96

487

00

63

08

552

00

19

40

554

00

00

20

555

00

11

37

556

00

11

62

564

00

00

67

Pokhari

875

00

04

16

876

00

14

75

877

00

06

31

878

00

05

79

879

00

06

37

880

00

05

70

873

00

46

12

872

00

00

38

871

00

09

79

870

00

08

57

868

00

53

97

844

00

33

68

841

00

01

26

847

00

04

95

840

00

02

80

848

00

04

73

839

00

02

88

838

00

13

45

837

00

37

08

836

00

13

72

824

00

06

57

825

00

08

54

826

00

10

86

827

00

15

18

365

00

00

15

364

00

07

00

26

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Pokhari

362

00

04

60

363

00

15

88

368

00

25

04

371

00

05

97

103

00

02

03

384

00

07

67

385

00

02

21

386

00

01

98

387

00

02

42

388

00

05

59

391

00

00

21

390

00

01

84

389

00

03

07

395

00

03

48

408

00

14

92

417

00

11

14

356

00

18

40

346

00

06

89

343

00

12

30

310

00

25

15

105

00

14

38

294

00

34

71

161

00

00

01

157

00

00

37

162

00

26

73

156

00

16

04

116

00

15

18

117

00

10

41

119

00

04

14

123

00

19

33

125

00

10

23

128

00

00

78

127

00

13

36

129

00

31

28

132

00

49

96

134

00

15

88

135

00

02

99

136

00

09

00

137

00

23

93

Gandhanwadi

195

00

07

13

196

00

25

52

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

27

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Gandhanwadi

203

00

06

85

197

00

05

39

204

00

19

88

205

00

10

94

207

00

10

15

208

00

05

94

206

00

01

28

209

00

23

84

222

00

03

93

223

00

24

69

224

00

17

63

225

00

20

13

226

00

03

59

240

00

03

58

Chinchpur

328

00

21

45

332

00

05

62

325

00

04

63

320

00

02

37

321

00

09

19

322

00

18

83

323

00

05

63

324

00

05

77

306

00

15

63

303

00

13

70

302

00

39

31

301

00

04

05

222

00

38

63

239

00

45

79

241

00

03

26

236

00

36

52

238

00

34

00

237

00

00

02

202

00

09

98

200

00

08

28

199

00

08

90

196

00

09

43

171

00

43

73

195

00

00

16

189

00

66

90

Bhatodi

80

00

25

18

82

00

28

60

28

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Bhatodi

84

00

01

22

83

00

10

94

86

00

15

01

Khakalwadi

30/1

00

34

16

30/3

00

17

79

30/4

00

16

54

30/5

00

02

40

29/1

00

10

26

29/2

00

00

98

31/1

00

05

99

31/2

00

25

04

31/3

00

05

69

31/5

00

00

08

31/6

00

04

07

31/12

00

09

65

32/1

00

15

95

32/2

00

24

96

32/4

00

13

24

32/5

00

00

01

33/6

00

14

30

35/1

00

21

15

35/2

00

11

39

35/3

00

08

76

34

00

53

24

22

00

36

94

21

00

45

77

Pandhari

191

00

55

49

192

00

83

09

195

00

47

37

171

00

49

04

196

00

58

03

149

00

81

91

169

00

34

96

154

01

00

52

[F. No. R-11025(11)6/2018-OR-I/E-23678]

NOAS KINDO, Under Secy.

ubZ fnYyh] 28 fnlEcj] 2018

dk- vk- 12-&dsUnzh; ljdkj us isVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbZu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e]

1962 ¼1962 dk 50½ ¼ftls blesa blds i'pkr~ mä vf/kfu;e dgk x;k gS½ dh /kkjk 3 dh mi&/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu tkjh dh

xbZ Hkkjr ljdkj ds isVªksfy;e vkSj izkÑfrd xSl ea=ky; dh vf/klwpuk la[;k dk-vk- 2221 rkjh[k 14 flrEcj] 2017 tks

Hkkjr ds jkti= Øekad 38] rkjh[k 17 flrEcj & 23 flrEcj 2017 ,oa dk-vk- 1103 rkjh[k 17 tqykÃ] 2018 tks Hkkjr ds

jkti= Øekad 29] rkjh[k 22 tqykà & 28 tqykà 2018 esa izdkf'kr dh xbZ Fkh }kjk ml vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

29

fofufnZ"V Hkwfe esa egkjk"Vª jkT; esa ftyk uanqjckj esa rkYkqdk uokiqj dks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj isVªksfy;e ifjogu ds

fy, bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbZu 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/kfu;e dh izfr;ka turk dks rkjh[k 19 flrEcj 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 dsUæh; ljdkj dks fjiksVZ dh gS (

vkSj dsUæh; ljdkj us] mä fjiksVZ ij fopkj djus ds i'pkr~ vkSj ;g lek/kku gks tkus ij fd mä Hkwfe ikbiykbZu fcNkus

ds fy, visf{kr gS] mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu djus dk fofu'p; fd;k gS (

vr% vc] dsUæh; 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 ikbiykbZu fcNkus ds fy, mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu

fd;k tk, (

vkSj ljdkj mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi&/kkjk ¼4½ }kjk izn~Ùk 'kfä;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] ;g funs’k nsrh gS fd mä

Hkwfe esa mi;ksx dk vf/kdkj bl ?kks"k.kk ds izdk'ku dh rkjh[k ls dsUæh; ljdkj esa fufgr gksus ds ctk,] lHkh foYyaxeksa ls

eqä gksdj bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM esa fufgr gksxh A

isVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbZu 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 ikbiykbZu ls lEcfU/kr fdlh Hkh ekeys ij dsUæh; ljdkj ds fo#) dksbZ okn nkok ;k

dkuwuh dk;Zokgh ugha gks ldsxhA

vuqlwPkh

rkyqdk%&

uokiqj

ftyk%& uanqjckj

jkT;%& egkjk"Vª

{ks=Qy

ekSts @xzke

losZ @ Cykd

@

la-

¼IyksV la-½

lc&Mho&la-

gsDVj

vkj

oxZ ehVj

¼1½

¼2½

¼3½

¼4½

¼5½

¼6½

e¨guikMk

38@2

00

00

20

41

00

29

14

40

00

12

94

43@1

00

19

21

43@2

00

00

84

43@3

00

17

45

44

00

11

09

45@1@d

00

18

61

46@1

00

10

23

48@1@v

00

00

57

48@2

00

22

03

50@1

00

15

67

50@2

00

15

51

50@3

00

09

48

51@1

00

16

37

djath cqnzqd

121@1

00

21

80

121@3

00

14

42

121@4

00

09

23

30

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

¼1½

¼2½

¼3½

¼4½

¼5½

¼6½

djath cqnzqd

122@1

00

36

54

127@1

00

05

62

127@2@c

00

05

35

127@2@M

00

14

31

127@3

00

08

99

126@1

00

08

30

126@2

00

07

22

126@3

00

07

17

126@4

00

07

45

126@5

00

09

85

9@1@v

00

18

57

8@1

00

01

68

8@2

00

22

24

13@1@d

00

18

54

13@1@c

00

01

04

13@3

00

04

10

14@1

00

24

46

14@2

00

20

48

7

00

00

68

15

00

00

21

6@1

00

03

21

5

00

02

63

4@2

00

19

24

23@1@v

00

16

23

23@1@c

00

00

37

23@2

00

15

09

33@1@c

00

13

61

32@1

00

09

48

32@2

00

23

62

35

00

17

56

36 iSdh

00

18

01

52@3

00

01

97

53

00

47

35

54@1

00

03

82

54@2

00

10

51

54@3@v

00

09

83

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

31

¼1½

¼2½

¼3½

¼4½

¼5½

¼6½

djath cqnzqd

54@3@c

00

00

22

55@4

00

03

48

55@5

00

10

49

56

00

09

21

59@1@c@1

00

00

11

59@1@d

00

19

61

59@2@c

00

08

63

59@1@c@2

00

06

16

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)6/2018-ओआर-I/ई-23678]

नोवस क' डो, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 28th December, 2018

S. O. 12.—Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural

Gas vide S.O. No. 2221 dated the 14th September, 2017, Gazette of India, No. 38 dated 17 – 23 September, 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, No. 29 dated 22 – 28 July,

2018 S. O. No. 1103 dated 17th July 2018 , 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 Koyali-Ahmednagar-Solapur

Pipeline for the transportation of Petroleum Products in Taluka Navapur in Nandurbar District in the State of

Maharashtra by Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public up to 19th September

2018;

And whereas the competent authority has under sub-section (1) of Section 6 of 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 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

Taluka:- Navapur

District:- Nandurbar

State :- Maharashtra

Mouje / Village

Survey/Block No.

Sub-Div-No.

Area

Hectare

Are

Sq.mtr.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

Mohanpada

38/2

00

00

20

41

00

29

14

40

00

12

94

43/1

00

19

21

32

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

Mohanpada

43/2

00

00

84

43/3

00

17

45

44

00

11

09

45/1/K

00

18

61

46/1

00

10

23

48/1/A

00

00

57

48/2

00

22

03

50/1

00

15

67

50/2

00

15

51

50/3

00

09

48

51/1

00

16

37

Karanji Budruk

121/1

00

21

80

121/3

00

14

42

121/4

00

09

23

122/1

00

36

54

127/1

00

05

62

127/2/B

00

05

35

127/2/D

00

14

31

127/3

00

08

99

126/1

00

08

30

126/2

00

07

22

126/3

00

07

17

126/4

00

07

45

126/5

00

09

85

9/1/A

00

18

57

8/1

00

01

68

8/2

00

22

24

13/1/K

00

18

54

13/1/B

00

01

04

13/3

00

04

10

14/1

00

24

46

14/2

00

20

48

7

00

00

68

15

00

00

21

6/1

00

03

21

5

00

02

63

4/2

00

19

24

23/1/A

00

16

23

23/1/B

00

00

37

23/2

00

15

09

33/1/B

00

13

61

32/1

00

09

48

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

33

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

Karanji Budruk

32/2

00

23

62

35

00

17

56

36 Paiki

00

18

01

52/3

00

01

97

53

00

47

35

54/1

00

03

82

54/2

00

10

51

54/3/A

00

09

83

54/3/B

00

00

22

55/4

00

03

48

55/5

00

10

49

56

00

09

21

59/1/B/1

00

00

11

59/1/K

00

19

61

59/2/B

00

08

63

59/1/B/2

00

06

16

[F. No. R-11025(11)6/2018-OR-I/E-23678]

NOAS KINDO, Under Secy.

नई द ली, 28 दस बर, 2018

का.आ

का.आ

का.आ

का.आ. . . . 13

13

13

13.—के'(ीय सरकार ने पेjोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइ' स (भूिम मD उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न)

अिधिनयम, 1962 ( 1962-50) ( िजसे इसमD इसके पnात उ अिधिनयम कहा गया है) क धारा 3 उप धारा (1) के अधीन

जारी क गई, भारत सरकार के पेjोिलयम और ाकृितक गैस मंHालय क अिधसूचना िजसका काशन भारत के राजपH

सं>या 15 दनाक 15-21 अैल 2018 का.आ. 607 दनाक 10.04.2018 भाग II खंड 3 उपखंड (II) मD कया गया है! इस

अिधसूचना से सलंq अनुसूची मे िविनद_ महाराr राsय क तहसील- नगर, िजला अहमदनगर क भूिम मे महाराr राsय मे

कोयली (गुजरात) से अहमदनगर एव सोलापुर तक पेjोिलयम प+रवहन के िलए इंिडयन ऑइल कॉपuरेशन िलिमटेड ारा

Gयाि'वत कए जा रहे “कोयली-अहमदनगर-सोलापुर प+रयोजना” के स ब'ध मे पाइपलाइन िबछाने के योजन के िलए

उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न करने के िलए अपने आशय क घोषणा क थी :

और उ राजपH अिधसूचनाओ क ितयाँ जनता को तारीख 12 िसत बर 2018 को उपलgध करा दी गई थी।

और उ अिधिनयम क धारा 6 क उपधारा (1) के अनुसरण मे स[म ािधकारी ने के'(ीय सरकार को अपनी +रपोट- दे

दी है।

और के'(ीय सरकार ने उ +रपोट- पर िवचार करने के पnात् और यह समाधान हो जाने पर क उ भूिम पाइपलाइन

िबछाने के िलए अपेिछत है, उसमD उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न करने का िविनnय कया है:

अत: अब, के'(ीय सरकार उ अिधिनयम क धारा 6 क उपधारा (1) ारा पदत शिय का योग करते %ए, एतद्

ारा घोषणा करती है क इस अिधसूचना से सलq अनुसूची मे िविबद_ भूिम मे पाइपलाइन िबछाने के उपयोग का अिधकार

अQजत कया जाए:

और क'(ीय सरकार उ अिधिनयम क धारा 6 क उपधारा (4) ारा पदत शिय का योग करते %ए, यह िनदyश देती

है क उ भूिम मे उपयोग का अिधकार इस घोषणा के काशन क तारीख से के'(ीय सरकार मे िनिहत होने के बजाय सभी

िवगमो से मु होकर इंिडयन ऑइल कॉपuरेशन िलिमटेड मे िनिहत होगा।

पेjोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइन अिधिनयम, 1962 क धारा 10 के अधीन कसी भी [ितपूQत के िलए इंिडयन

ऑइल कॉपuरेशन िलिमटेड पूण-तया उतरदायी होगी और पाइपलाइन से सबिधत कसी भी मामले पर क'(ीय सरकार के

िवzद कोई वाद दावा या क़ानूनी काय-वाही नह< हो सकेगी।

34

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

तालुका

तालुका

तालुका

तालुका : नगर

नगर

नगर

नगर

िजला

िजला

िजला

िजला : : : : अहमदनगर

अहमदनगर

अहमदनगर

अहमदनगर

रा,य

रा,य

रा,य

रा,य : : : : महारा-

महारा-

महारा-

महारा-

गांव का नाम

गांव का नाम

गांव का नाम

गांव का नाम

सव न.

सव न.

सव न.

सव न.\/लॉक

/लॉक

/लॉक

/लॉक न.

न.

न.

न.

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

हेहेहेहे3 टे

3 टे

3 टे

3 टेयर

यर

यर

यर

आर

आर

आर

आर

वग5 मीटर

वग5 मीटर

वग5 मीटर

वग5 मीटर

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

अकोलनेर

358

00

03

59

359

00

34

99

360

00

05

14

340

00

44

77

339

00

34

30

338

00

14

60

300

00

51

48

302

00

13

83

303

00

13

52

334

00

09

53

333

00

04

51

332

00

07

94

330

00

03

57

328

00

11

85

327

00

15

47

326

00

07

29

325

00

09

21

324

00

16

27

323

00

09

09

322

00

09

35

320

00

21

09

318

00

23

76

317

00

14

58

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

35

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

अकोलनेर

316

00

30

62

311

00

20

35

खंडाला

237

00

60

40

244

00

11

70

246

00

36

56

250

00

34

53

251

00

07

48

253

00

13

07

262

00

17

41

263

00

12

61

264

00

26

77

219

00

04

62

218

00

21

74

217

00

03

80

216

00

07

48

214

00

05

65

213

00

07

79

198

00

12

00

196

00

04

02

199

00

03

89

191

00

02

82

190

00

10

65

112

00

05

26

113

00

02

12

114

00

01

91

115

00

03

32

116

00

03

90

110

00

22

07

109

00

06

11

36

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

खंडाला

109p

00

04

60

108

00

04

99

106

00

02

07

105p

00

06

10

123

00

11

00

128

00

61

52

134

00

14

30

133

00

31

47

139

00

09

16

140

00

20

68

141

00

19

94

142

00

12

61

143

00

10

24

130

00

25

21

146

00

41

02

बाबुड| घुमट

266

00

00

90

267

00

10

27

261

00

17

31

262

00

16

89

263

00

15

30

264

00

38

20

260

00

50

57

251

00

10

19

252

00

09

22

253

00

07

50

254

00

08

64

255

00

06

27

247

00

40

97

220

00

05

99

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

37

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

वालक

1265/1

00

52

82

1265/2

00

24

55

1266

00

10

29

1267

00

05

99

1268

00

04

75

1269

00

05

71

1270

00

27

61

1284

00

10

35

1283

00

60

33

1282

00

38

70

1280

00

01

03

1281

00

47

53

1297

00

29

16

1298

00

46

19

02

00

02

56

23

00

39

26

22

00

34

48

21

00

34

05

20/3

00

33

38

43

00

28

66

59

00

06

12

60

00

02

39

62

00

01

92

63

00

09

55

64/2

00

34

76

69

00

11

51

64/3

00

01

20

70

00

15

74

296

00

21

30

38

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

वालक

285

00

06

32

284

00

00

21

288

00

10

69

282

00

06

95

272

00

05

11

271

00

06

15

268

00

03

53

263

00

02

39

265

00

08

72

253

00

01

08

254

00

09

92

256

00

01

06

233

00

02

58

244

00

02

17

230

00

05

09

229

00

01

52

239

00

02

19

231

00

02

79

232

00

02

22

233

00

02

63

222

00

04

79

221

00

03

36

220

00

04

18

216

00

08

96

211

00

02

41

210

00

32

88

209

00

03

97

200

00

10

24

199

00

05

31

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

39

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

वालक

198

00

13

24

193

00

38

10

330

00

57

45

331

00

35

10

353

00

44

77

352

00

38

36

458

00

37

23

457

00

36

31

456

00

25

77

485

00

15

93

486

00

17

46

492

00

06

77

493

00

20

37

504

00

26

93

503

00

32

91

502

00

05

00

495

00

07

51

501

00

15

35

496

00

17

77

497

00

09

05

480

00

13

52

479

00

40

59

478

00

39

80

476

00

78

85

साकत खुद-

95

00

23

19

तांदली वडगांव

109

00

76

15

110

00

32

97

107

00

56

31

40

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

तांदली वडगांव

82

00

11

61

83

00

49

94

85

00

16

53

77

00

20

77

76

00

08

60

73

00

39

06

71

00

43

02

69

00

11

63

68

00

18

37

67

00

16

21

66

00

15

88

वाटेफल

155

00

49

55

132/B

00

51

61

287

00

00

35

132/C

00

51

99

131

00

12

04

130

00

07

47

129

00

05

63

122

00

11

30

124

00

32

90

114

00

07

97

117

00

04

01

118

00

03

79

90

00

17

28

87

00

24

49

84

00

12

07

82

00

12

64

77

00

23

75

76

00

12

97

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

41

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

वाटेफल

75

00

13

34

70

00

11

73

69

00

10

34

68

00

10

78

67

00

11

76

62

00

15

65

60

00

22

67

59

00

31

71

58

00

34

66

57

00

26

92

07

00

12

77

08

00

07

06

09

00

08

68

10

00

04

28

11

00

03

60

12

00

03

38

14

00

03

93

15

00

02

39

16

00

03

86

17

00

07

12

18

00

05

68

19

00

04

54

20

00

07

99

21

00

04

23

24

00

02

17

25

00

05

26

26

00

02

74

27

00

02

60

28

00

04

20

42

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

वाटेफल

30

00

12

26

31

00

09

13

32

00

02

92

35

00

07

71

36

00

03

75

38

00

07

72

39

00

11

87

40

00

39

25

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)6/2018-ओआर-I /ई-23678]

नोवस क' डो, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 28th December, 2018

S.O. 13.—Whereas by the notification of The Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural

Gas, Published in the Gazette No. 15 date 15-21 April 2018 S.O No. 607 date 10.04.2018 Part-II,Section-3,Sub-

Section (ii) 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), (Hereinafter referred to as the said Act) the Central Government declared

its intention to acquire the right of user in the land situated in Tehsil Nagar, District Ahmednagar in Maharashtra

State, specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation

of petroleum from Koyali in the State Gujrat to Solapur in the Maharashtra by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited

for implementing the ‘’Koyali-Ahmednagar-Solapur Pipeline Project’’.

And whereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on 12 September

2018.

And whereas the Competent Authority has under sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act, has submitted

his report 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 the 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 of the said land for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in

the Central Government, vests 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 pipeline.

SCHEDULE

Taluka : Nagar

District : Ahmednagar

State : Maharashtra

Name of Village

Survey No./ Block

No.

Area

Hectare

Are

Square Metre

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Akolner

358

00

03

59

359

00

34

99

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

43

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Akolner

360

00

05

14

340

00

44

77

339

00

34

30

338

00

14

60

300

00

51

48

302

00

13

83

303

00

13

52

334

00

09

53

333

00

04

51

332

00

07

94

330

00

03

57

328

00

11

85

327

00

15

47

326

00

07

29

325

00

09

21

324

00

16

27

323

00

09

09

322

00

09

35

320

00

21

09

318

00

23

76

317

00

14

58

316

00

30

62

311

00

20

35

Khandala

237

00

60

40

244

00

11

70

246

00

36

56

250

00

34

53

251

00

07

48

253

00

13

07

262

00

17

41

263

00

12

61

264

00

26

77

219

00

04

62

218

00

21

74

217

00

03

80

216

00

07

48

214

00

05

65

213

00

07

79

198

00

12

00

196

00

04

02

199

00

03

89

44

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Khandala

191

00

02

82

190

00

10

65

112

00

05

26

113

00

02

12

114

00

01

91

115

00

03

32

116

00

03

90

110

00

22

07

109

00

06

11

109p

00

04

60

108

00

04

99

106

00

02

07

105p

00

06

10

123

00

11

00

128

00

61

52

134

00

14

30

133

00

31

47

139

00

09

16

140

00

20

68

141

00

19

94

142

00

12

61

143

00

10

24

130

00

25

21

146

00

41

02

Baburdi Ghumat

266

00

00

90

267

00

10

27

261

00

17

31

262

00

16

89

263

00

15

30

264

00

38

20

260

00

50

57

251

00

10

19

252

00

09

22

253

00

07

50

254

00

08

64

255

00

06

27

247

00

40

97

220

00

05

99

Walki

1265/1

00

52

82

1265/2

00

24

55

1266

00

10

29

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

45

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Walki

1267

00

05

99

1268

00

04

75

1269

00

05

71

1270

00

27

61

1284

00

10

35

1283

00

60

33

1282

00

38

70

1280

00

01

03

1281

00

47

53

1297

00

29

16

1298

00

46

19

02

00

02

56

23

00

39

26

22

00

34

48

21

00

34

05

20/3

00

33

38

43

00

28

66

59

00

06

12

60

00

02

39

62

00

01

92

63

00

09

55

64/2

00

34

76

69

00

11

51

64/3

00

01

20

70

00

15

74

296

00

21

30

285

00

06

32

284

00

00

21

288

00

10

69

282

00

06

95

272

00

05

11

271

00

06

15

268

00

03

53

263

00

02

39

265

00

08

72

253

00

01

08

254

00

09

92

256

00

01

06

233

00

02

58

244

00

02

17

230

00

05

09

46

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Walki

229

00

01

52

239

00

02

19

231

00

02

79

232

00

02

22

233

00

02

63

222

00

04

79

221

00

03

36

220

00

04

18

216

00

08

96

211

00

02

41

210

00

32

88

209

00

03

97

200

00

10

24

199

00

05

31

198

00

13

24

193

00

38

10

330

00

57

45

331

00

35

10

353

00

44

77

352

00

38

36

458

00

37

23

457

00

36

31

456

00

25

77

485

00

15

93

486

00

17

46

492

00

06

77

493

00

20

37

504

00

26

93

503

00

32

91

502

00

05

00

495

00

07

51

501

00

15

35

496

00

17

77

497

00

09

05

480

00

13

52

479

00

40

59

478

00

39

80

476

00

78

85

Sakat Khurd

95

00

23

19

Tandali Wadgaon

109

00

76

15

110

00

32

97

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

47

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Tandali Wadgaon

107

00

56

31

82

00

11

61

83

00

49

94

85

00

16

53

77

00

20

77

76

00

08

60

73

00

39

06

71

00

43

02

69

00

11

63

68

00

18

37

67

00

16

21

66

00

15

88

Watephal

155

00

49

55

132/B

00

51

61

287

00

00

35

132/C

00

51

99

131

00

12

04

130

00

07

47

129

00

05

63

122

00

11

30

124

00

32

90

114

00

07

97

117

00

04

01

118

00

03

79

90

00

17

28

87

00

24

49

84

00

12

07

82

00

12

64

77

00

23

75

76

00

12

97

75

00

13

34

70

00

11

73

69

00

10

34

68

00

10

78

67

00

11

76

62

00

15

65

60

00

22

67

59

00

31

71

58

00

34

66

57

00

26

92

07

00

12

77

48

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Watephal

08

00

07

06

09

00

08

68

10

00

04

28

11

00

03

60

12

00

03

38

14

00

03

93

15

00

02

39

16

00

03

86

17

00

07

12

18

00

05

68

19

00

04

54

20

00

07

99

21

00

04

23

24

00

02

17

25

00

05

26

26

00

02

74

27

00

02

60

28

00

04

20

30

00

12

26

31

00

09

13

32

00

02

92

35

00

07

71

36

00

03

75

38

00

07

72

39

00

11

87

40

00

39

25

[F. No. R-11025(11)6/2018-OR-I/E-23678]

NOAS KINDO, Under Secy.

नई द ली, 28 दस बर, 2018

का

का

का

का. . . . आ. . . . 14

14

14

14.—के'(ीय सरकार ने पेjोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइन (भूिम मD उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न)

अिधिनयम, 1962 (1962 का 50) (िजसे इसमD इसके पnात उ अिधिनयम कहा गया है) क धारा 3 उप धारा (1) के

अधीन जारी क गई, भारत सरकार के पेjोिलयम और ाकृितक गैस मंHालय क अिधसूचना का.आ. 372 तारीख

16.12.2017 िजसका काशन भारत के राजपH सं>या 9, भाग II, ख6ड 3, उप ख6ड (II) तारीख 25.02.2018 से

30.03.2018 मD कया गया है। इस अिधसूचना मD संलq अनुसूची मD िविन`द_ आं} देश राsय के िजला िवशाखापटनम के

मंडल : सgबावरम, अनकापिल, मुनगापाका, अkयुतापुरम, रामिबिल, यलामंिचिल, एस. रायवरम, न~ापिल, और

पायाकरावुपेटा क भूिम मD, ओडीशा राsय मD पारादीप से तेलंगाना राsय मD हैदराबाद तक पेjोिलयम उIपाद के प+रवहन के

िलए इंिडयन ऑयल कॉपyरेशन िलिमटेड के ारा Gयाि'वत कए जा रहे “पारादीप-हैदराबाद पाइपलाइन प+रयोजना” के

संबंध मD पाइपलाइन िबछाने के योजन के िलए उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न करने के िलए अपने आशय क घोषणा क थी:

और उ राजपH अिधसूचना क ितयाँ जनता को उपलgध करा दी गई थ<।और उ अिधिनयम क धारा 6 क उपधारा (1)

के अनुसरण मD स[म ािधकारी नD के'(ीय सरकार को अपनी +रपोट- दे दी है।

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

49

और के'(ीय सरकार ने उ +रपोट- पर िवचार करने के पnात और यह समाधान हो जाने पर क उ भूिम पाइपलाइन

िबछाने के िलए अपेि[त है, उसमD उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न करने का िविनiचय कया है:

अतः अब, के'(ीय सरकार उ अिधिनयम क धारा 6 क उपधारा (1) ारा द शिय का योग करते %ए एतद् ारा

घोषणा करती है क इस अिधसूचना से संलq अनुसूिच मD िविन`द_ भूिम मD पाइपलाइन िबछाने के उपयोग का अिधकार

अQजत कया जाए:

और के'(ीय सरकार उ अिधिनयम क धारा 6 क उपधारा (4) ारा द शिय का योग करते %ए, यह िनदyश देती है

क उ भूिम मD उपयोग का अिधकार इस घोषणा के काशन क तारीख से के'(ीय सरकार मD िनिहत होने के बजाए सभी

िबलंगम से मु होकर इंिडयन ऑयल कॉपyरेशन िलिमटेड मD िनिहत होगा।

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

िजला:

िजला:

िजला:

िजला: िवशाखापटनम

िवशाखापटनम

िवशाखापटनम

िवशाखापटनम

राय:

राय:

राय:

राय: आं

आं

आं

आं देश

 देश

 देश

 देश

मंडल का नाम

मंडल का नाम

मंडल का नाम

मंडल का नाम

ाम

ाम

ाम

ाम का नाम

का नाम

का नाम

का नाम

सव

सव

सव

सव नबर

नबर

नबर

नबर

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

हेटेयर

हेटेयर

हेटेयर

हेटेयर

एयर

एयर

एयर

एयर

वगमीटर

वगमीटर

वगमीटर

वगमीटर

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(6)

(6)

(6)

(6)

सबावारम

नारपाडू

226

00

90

45

अनकापि ल

तुमपाला

704

00

33

32

13

00

18

11

705

00

16

87

15

00

28

18

`

17

00

13

19

47

00

37

50

मुनगापाका

नागावरम

143

00

39

64

203

00

61

19

202

00

39

11

199

00

38

99

198

00

26

04

196

00

04

61

197

00

31

03

191

00

16

94

190

00

25

37

187

00

18

95

185

00

22

36

183

00

03

82

184

00

05

51

311

00

01

71

302

00

31

63

310

00

03

68

303

00

24

85

304

00

26

89

305

00

14

29

342

00

23

73

341

00

24

06

340

00

26

13

339

00

35

44

50

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(6)

(6)

(6)

(6)

मुनगापाका

नागावरम

347

00

13

7

358

00

13

43

357

00

03

33

354

00

11

53

352

00

06

21

351

00

25

87

अयुतापुरम

मडुतु

477

00

13

76

469

00

00

04

468

00

61

83

460

00

15

30

462

00

14

44

463

00

13

98

464

00

24

54

456

00

01

64

457

00

29

86

424

00

26

30

293

00

12

47

294

00

01

46

296

00

14

87

288

00

18

47

303

00

62

70

305

00

04

11

306

00

00

13

308

00

38

37

309

00

00

01

310

00

23

50

103

00

13

93

104

00

41

12

105

00

08

75

106

00

00

78

102

00

01

99

96

00

07

27

100

00

25

06

62

00

01

04

66

00

24

27

75

00

16

68

74

00

13

70

76

00

08

38

77

00

20

40

78

00

47

80

377

00

21

73

रामिबि ल

दिमिल

265

00

25

84

रामिबि ल

राजाला

28

00

31

34

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

51

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(6)

(6)

(6)

(6)

रामिबि ल

िवजयारामपुरम अहारम

27

00

68

21

26

00

05

28

24

00

06

48

31

00

04

43

25

00

18

14

23

00

04

34

21

00

06

87

19

00

24

39

14

00

23

42

17

00

02

74

16

00

01

13

यलामंिचिल

ृणापुरम

200

00

16

03

यलामंिचिल

पदमानाबाराजुपेटा

144/1E

00

31

35

144/1E-6A

00

31

35

144/1E-6B

00

31

35

एस.रायवरम

पेटासूदपुरम

50-4

00

0

27

322

00

07

42

338

00

26

24

न#ापि ल

गुि लपाडु

100

00

21

25

103

00

21

59

105

00

08

66

107

00

37

34

पायाकरावुपेटा

अरटलाकोटा

143

00

13

64

143/A-1

00

13

64

143/A-2

00

13

64

पायाकरावुपेटा

प टे%

34

00

02

75

33

00

27

90

32

00

37

58

3

00

01

37

4

00

16

7

5

00

04

97

6

00

15

19

7

00

27

51

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)252/2017-ओआर-I/ई-21033]

नोवस क' डो, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 28th December, 2018

S.O. 14.—Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural

Gas, published in the Gazette of India No.9 Part-II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii) dated 25.02.2018 to 03.03.2018 vide

S.O. Number 372 dated 16.12.2017 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), (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) the Central

Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land situated in Mandals: Sabbavaram, Ankapalli,

Munagapaka, Achutapuram, Rambilli, Yelamanchilli, S.Rayavaram, Nakkapalli and Payakaraopeta of Visakhapatnam

District in Andhra Pradesh State, specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline

for the transportation of petroleum products from Paradip in the State of Odisha to Hyderabad in the State of Telangana

by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited for implementing the "Paradip–Hyderabad Pipeline Project".

52

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

And whereas the copies of the Gazette were made available to the public. And whereas the Competent Authority has

under Sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the said Act, has submitted his report of 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 the 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 of the said land for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in the Central

Government, vests on the date of publication of the declaration, in India Oil Corporation Limited, free from all

encumbrances.

SCHEDULE

DISTRICT:VISAKHAPATNAM

STATE: ANDHRA PRADESH

MANDAL

VILLAGE

SURVEY No.

AREA

Hectare

Are

Sq. Mt.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

SABBAVARAM

NAARAPADU

226

00

90

45

ANAKAPALLI

TUMMAPALA

704

00

33

32

13

00

18

11

705

00

16

87

15

00

28

18

`

17

00

13

19

47

00

37

50

MUNAGAPAKA

NAGAVARAM

143

00

39

64

203

00

61

19

202

00

39

11

199

00

38

99

198

00

26

04

196

00

04

61

197

00

31

03

191

00

16

94

190

00

25

37

187

00

18

95

185

00

22

36

183

00

03

82

184

00

05

51

311

00

01

71

302

00

31

63

310

00

03

68

303

00

24

85

304

00

26

89

305

00

14

29

342

00

23

73

341

00

24

06

340

00

26

13

339

00

35

44

347

00

13

7

358

00

13

43

357

00

03

33

354

00

11

53

352

00

06

21

351

00

25

87

ACHUTAPURAM

MADUTURU

477

00

13

76

469

00

00

04

468

00

61

83

460

00

15

30

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

53

ACHUTAPURAM

MADUTURU

462

00

14

44

463

00

13

98

464

00

24

54

456

00

01

64

457

00

29

86

424

00

26

30

293

00

12

47

294

00

01

46

296

00

14

87

288

00

18

47

303

00

62

70

305

00

04

11

306

00

00

13

308

00

38

37

309

00

00

01

310

00

23

50

103

00

13

93

104

00

41

12

105

00

08

75

106

00

00

78

102

00

01

99

96

00

07

27

100

00

25

06

62

00

01

04

66

00

24

27

75

00

16

68

74

00

13

70

76

00

08

38

77

00

20

40

78

00

47

80

377

00

21

73

RAMBILLI

DIMILI

265

00

25

84

RAMBILLI

RAJALA

28

00

31

34

RAMBILLI

VIJAYARAMPURAM

AGRAHARAM

27

00

68

21

26

00

05

28

24

00

06

48

31

00

04

43

25

00

18

14

23

00

04

34

21

00

06

87

19

00

24

39

14

00

23

42

17

00

02

74

16

00

01

13

YELAMANCHILLI

KRISHNAPURAM

200

00

16

03

YELAMANCHILLI

PADMANABHARAJUPETA

144/1E

00

31

35

144/1E-6A

00

31

35

144/1E-6B

00

31

35

S.RAYAVARAM

PETASUDIPURAM

50-4

00

0

27

322

00

07

42

338

00

26

24

NAKKAPALLI

GULLIPADU

100

00

21

25

103

00

21

59

NAKKAPALLI

GULLIPADU

105

00

08

66

107

00

37

34

PAYAKARAOPETA

ARATLAKOTA

143

00

13

64

54

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

PAYAKARAOPETA

ARATLAKOTA

143/A-1

00

13

64

143/A-2

00

13

64

PAYAKARAOPETA

PALTERU

34

00

02

75

33

00

27

90

32

00

37

58

3

00

01

37

4

00

16

7

5

00

04

97

6

00

15

19

7

00

27

51

[F. No. R-11025(11)252/2017-OR-I/E-21033]

NOAS KINDO, Under Secy.

नई द ली, 28 दस बर, 2018

का

का

का

का. . . . आ. . . . 15

15

15

15.—के'(ीय सरकार को लोकिहत मD यह आवCयक तीत होता है क उर देश राsय मD टू6डला टQमनल

से कानपुर टQमनल तक पेjोिलयम उIपाद के प+रवहन के िलये इंिडयन ऑयल कापuरेशन िलिमटेड ारा पाइपलाइन िबछाई

जानी चािहए।

और के'(ीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन िबछाने के योजन के िलये यह आवCयक तीत होता है क ऐसी भूिम मD

जो इस से उपाब अनुसूची मे वQणत है, और िजसमD उ पाइपलाइन िबछाई जाने का Aताव है, उपयोग के अिधकार का

अज-न कया जाए ।

अतः अब, के'(ीय सरकार, पेjोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइन (भूिम मे उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न) अिधिनयम,

1962 (1962 का 50) क धारा 3 क उपधारा (1) ारा द शिय का योग करते %ए उस भूिम मD उपयोग के अिधकार

का अज-न करने के अपने आशय क घोषणा करती है ।

कोई cि, जो उ अनुसूची मD वQणत भूिम मD िहतब है , उस तारीख से, िजसको इस अिधसूचना मD यु भारत

के राजपH क ितयाँ साधारण जनता को उपलgध करा दी जाती ह , इ~स दन के भीतर, भूिम के नीचे पाइपलाइन िबछाए

जाने के िलए उसमD उपयोग के अिधकार के संबंध मD स[म ािधकारी, इंिडयन ऑयल कापuरेशन िलिमटेड पाइपलाइ'स

भाग, िनमा-ण काया-लय, उरी [ेH पाइपलाइ'स, टू6डला - गौ+रया पाइपलाइन प+रयोजना,ई-160, थम व ितीय तल,

कमला नगर, आगरा (यू.पी.) – 282004 को िलिखत \प मD आ[ेप भेज सकेगा।

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

तअसील

तअसील

तअसील

तअसील Ð रसुलाबाद

रसुलाबाद

रसुलाबाद

रसुलाबाद

जला

जला

जला

जला Ð कानपुर

कानपुर

कानपुर

कानपुर देहात

देहात

देहात

देहात

राय

राय

राय

राय Ð उर

उर

उर

उर ूदेश

ूदेश

ूदेश

ूदेश

म

संसंसंसं.

गांव

गांव

गांव

गांव का

का

का

का नाम

नाम

नाम

नाम

ख़सरा

ख़सरा

ख़सरा

ख़सरा संसंसंसं.

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

हेटेयर

हेटेयर

हेटेयर

हेटेयर

एयर

एयर

एयर

एयर

वग

वग

वग

वग मीटर

मीटर

मीटर

मीटर

1

2

3

4

5

6

1.

1.

1.

1.

नार

नार

नार

नार खुद5

खुद5

खुद5

खुद5

460

00

14

26

465

00

05

21

457

00

06

52

456

00

01

01

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

55

1

2

3

4

5

6

नार

नार

नार

नार खुद5

खुद5

खुद5

खुद5

459

00

00

17

436

00

13

90

435

00

18

81

434

00

04

58

433

00

00

10

420

00

14

16

304

00

00

25

311

00

05

80

419

00

15

59

312

00

08

02

418

00

06

47

315

00

01

84

317

00

27

00

316

00

00

10

318

00

13

47

325

00

02

66

324

00

10

32

323

00

05

69

340

00

18

59

337

00

06

54

339

00

16

33

346

00

00

36

347

00

10

20

348

00

18

16

392

00

15

13

393

00

16

10

394

00

00

10

877

00

00

39

878

00

00

87

56

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

नार

नार

नार

नार खुद5

खुद5

खुद5

खुद5

879

00

14

59

880

00

08

37

881

00

08

36

882

00

03

40

892

00

12

66

897

00

15

02

921

00

02

41

1386

00

01

07

1387

00

16

20

1389

00

15

78

1392

00

08

17

1450

00

14

44

1469

00

10

52

1477

00

07

26

1478

00

11

50

1482

00

06

93

1483

00

16

50

1485

00

00

65

1519

00

07

89

1520

00

15

45

1522

00

21

50

1523

00

08

24

2.

2.

2.

2.

नार

नार

नार

नार खास

खास

खास

खास

234

00

06

80

235

00

06

91

236

00

08

46

231

00

12

90

237

00

19

36

240

00

19

13

250

00

21

49

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

57

1

2

3

4

5

6

नार

नार

नार

नार खास

खास

खास

खास

247

00

33

21

246

00

00

10

257

00

30

07

258

00

00

10

259

00

00

37

260

00

10

08

199

00

21

03

266

00

00

36

267

00

00

10

268

00

14

99

269

00

07

56

271

00

07

28

272

00

00

10

273

00

17

17

189

00

03

09

188

00

26

92

3.

3.

3.

3.

भवनपु

भवनपु

भवनपु

भवनपुर

440

00

22

52

434

00

09

20

432

00

04

58

431

00

02

49

430

00

12

67

429

00

04

55

428

00

08

53

419

00

08

36

418

00

12

55

417

00

12

99

415

00

25

08

414

00

03

69

413

00

03

44

58

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

भवनपुर

भवनपुर

भवनपुर

भवनपुर

412

00

10

67

276

00

00

37

411

00

07

11

410

00

18

11

409

00

00

10

281

00

10

11

366

00

05

15

397

00

10

00

396

00

10

40

395

00

06

22

386

00

07

01

384

00

15

02

381

00

14

51

376

00

16

21

335

00

10

09

332

00

05

49

331

00

09

64

330

00

09

70

327

00

04

83

326

00

01

02

325

00

09

67

324

00

01

44

4.

4.

4.

4.

मनक8

मनक8

मनक8

मनक8

48

00

02

34

59

00

00

64

49

00

00

36

58

00

28

72

71

00

01

31

238

00

17

40

239

00

21

52

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

59

1

2

3

4

5

6

मनक8

मनक8

मनक8

मनक8

240

00

14

65

242

00

09

35

246

00

06

03

247

00

01

83

248

00

00

34

251

00

04

74

255

00

00

44

254

00

11

65

253

00

01

79

5.

5.

5.

5.

सलेमपुर

सलेमपुर

सलेमपुर

सलेमपुर महेरा

महेरा

महेरा

महेरा

1056

00

05

57

1061

00

07

04

1060

00

02

85

1059

00

09

71

1065

00

06

37

1066

00

03

20

746

00

01

91

6.

6.

6.

6.

क ठका

क ठका

क ठका

क ठका

98

00

03

35

93

00

10

90

92

00

01

54

94

00

07

10

91

00

04

67

95

00

10

40

97

00

07

28

127

00

15

18

99

00

01

63

107

00

15

57

108

00

16

33

7.

7.

7.

7.

मलगांव

मलगांव

मलगांव

मलगांव

72

00

24

09

73

00

00

99

60

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

मलगांव

मलगांव

मलगांव

मलगांव

74

00

11

14

76

00

10

51

75

00

00

26

78

00

00

73

79

00

17

92

34

00

00

45

33

00

10

98

230

00

07

31

227

00

20

05

150

00

15

23

141

00

34

91

143

00

00

10

139

00

12

97

138

00

00

10

137

00

05

39

135

00

02

68

136

00

03

42

373

00

08

68

372

00

07

46

375

00

00

10

376

00

00

52

377

00

00

24

380

00

01

43

371

00

06

41

381

00

31

50

392

00

17

59

652

00

00

95

703

00

01

73

702

00

02

32

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

61

1

2

3

4

5

6

मलगांव

मलगांव

मलगांव

मलगांव

701

00

08

35

700

00

16

46

695

00

06

98

694

00

00

20

693

00

23

33

881

00

17

77

879

00

00

25

880

00

00

10

871

00

11

15

872

00

00

10

870

00

02

48

867

00

17

76

858

00

10

12

1265

00

06

33

1264

00

01

02

1277

00

09

53

1276

00

21

92

8.

8.

8.

8.

केशीपुर

केशीपुर

केशीपुर

केशीपुर

88

00

17

47

89

00

06

16

90

00

05

12

93

00

22

66

91

00

04

54

92

00

01

35

94

00

17

14

95

00

04

59

100

00

00

34

101

00

02

23

102

00

08

51

152

00

38

43

62

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

केशीपुर

केशीपुर

केशीपुर

केशीपुर

157

00

51

12

85/175

00

21

27

9.

9.

9.

9.

गाऊपुर

गाऊपुर

गाऊपुर

गाऊपुर

155

00

12

46

156

00

17

86

157

00

04

02

158

00

04

06

186

00

01

45

142

00

12

09

188

00

16

14

193

00

06

95

194

00

24

45

192

00

02

97

195

00

01

93

197

00

00

56

198

00

00

48

644

00

13

50

643

00

14

34

652

00

19

02

653

00

00

72

642

00

10

38

595

00

08

83

554

00

11

10

551

00

01

60

550

00

06

83

546

00

13

41

521

00

01

18

565

00

02

52

567

00

08

36

519

00

04

05

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

63

1

2

3

4

5

6

गाऊपुर

गाऊपुर

गाऊपुर

गाऊपुर

518

00

08

18

517

00

08

03

515

00

06

03

514

00

16

02

466

00

01

69

513

00

27

47

474

00

00

69

470

00

00

10

501

00

09

11

500

00

08

68

499

00

21

57

498

00

13

51

497

00

00

72

496

00

11

57

476

00

00

54

495

00

04

94

494

00

08

83

491

00

03

78

489

00

03

71

10.

10.

10.

10.

देवरा

देवरा

देवरा

देवरा

169

00

20

91

170

00

14

63

178

00

16

75

180

00

16

10

185

00

06

88

183

00

00

10

186

00

14

57

184

00

00

10

187

00

08

99

11.

11.

11.

11.

मुलही

मुलही

मुलही

मुलही

202

00

00

26

64

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

मुलही

मुलही

मुलही

मुलही

203

00

01

06

204

00

06

24

207

00

00

10

205

00

20

05

206

00

10

75

217

00

10

50

218

00

05

38

31

00

01

07

32

00

03

98

33

00

05

21

34

00

05

96

35

00

24

88

58

00

05

55

59

00

06

39

60

00

05

97

61

00

06

94

62

00

06

56

63

00

03

92

64

00

19

93

68

00

02

08

65

00

16

00

76

00

09

04

75

00

07

18

77

00

05

93

81

00

02

83

82

00

06

39

83

00

11

24

84

00

11

51

97

00

24

62

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

65

1

2

3

4

5

6

मुलही

मुलही

मुलही

मुलही

98

00

14

13

125

00

16

34

124

00

04

43

128

00

22

69

136

00

00

15

137

00

23

75

152

00

20

03

153

00

12

22

159

00

22

51

166

00

06

43

169

00

05

36

176

00

19

38

177

00

07

31

175

00

13

26

178

00

12

04

181

00

12

63

183

00

00

10

12.

12.

12.

12.

सु:दरपुर

सु:दरपुर

सु:दरपुर

सु:दरपुर गजेन

गजेन

गजेन

गजेन

594

00

12

05

595

00

12

00

596

00

01

46

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)20/2018-ओआर-I/ई-27595]

नोवस क' डो, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 28th December, 2018

S.O. 15.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the

transportation of petroleum products from Tundla Terminal to Kanpur Terminal should be laid by Indian Oil Corporation

Limited. And whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is

necessary to acquire the right of user in the land described in the schedule annexed to this notification;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals

Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in land ) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its

intention to acquire the right of user therein;

Any person interested in the land described in the said schedule may, within twenty–one days from the date on which the

copies of this notification, as published in the Gazette of India, are made available to the General Public, object in writing

to the acquisition of the right of user therein or laying of the pipeline under the land to Competent Authority, Indian Oil

Corporation Limited ( Pipelines Division), Construction Office, Northern Region Pipelines, Tundla-Gawria Pipeline

Project, E-160,1st & 2nd floor, Kamlanagar, Agra(U.P.) – 282 004.

66

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

SCHEDULE

Tehsil:- Rasulabad

District:- Kanpur Dehat

State :- Uttar Pradesh

Sl.

No.

Name of the Village

Khasara No.

Area

Hectare

Are

Sq.mtr.

1

2

3

4

5

6

1.

Nar Khurd

460

00

14

26

465

00

05

21

457

00

06

52

456

00

01

01

459

00

00

17

436

00

13

90

435

00

18

81

434

00

04

58

433

00

00

10

420

00

14

16

304

00

00

25

311

00

05

80

419

00

15

59

312

00

08

02

418

00

06

47

315

00

01

84

317

00

27

00

316

00

00

10

318

00

13

47

325

00

02

66

324

00

10

32

323

00

05

69

340

00

18

59

337

00

06

54

339

00

16

33

346

00

00

36

347

00

10

20

348

00

18

16

392

00

15

13

393

00

16

10

394

00

00

10

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

67

Nar Khurd

877

00

00

39

878

00

00

87

879

00

14

59

880

00

08

37

881

00

08

36

882

00

03

40

892

00

12

66

897

00

15

02

921

00

02

41

1386

00

01

07

1387

00

16

20

1389

00

15

78

1392

00

08

17

1450

00

14

44

1469

00

10

52

1477

00

07

26

1478

00

11

50

1482

00

06

93

1483

00

16

50

1485

00

00

65

1519

00

07

89

1520

00

15

45

1522

00

21

50

1523

00

08

24

2.

Nar Khas

234

00

06

80

235

00

06

91

236

00

08

46

231

00

12

90

237

00

19

36

240

00

19

13

250

00

21

49

247

00

33

21

246

00

00

10

257

00

30

07

258

00

00

10

68

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Nar Khas

259

00

00

37

260

00

10

08

199

00

21

03

266

00

00

36

267

00

00

10

268

00

14

99

269

00

07

56

271

00

07

28

272

00

00

10

273

00

17

17

189

00

03

09

188

00

26

92

3.

Bhavanpur

440

00

22

52

434

00

09

20

432

00

04

58

431

00

02

49

430

00

12

67

429

00

04

55

428

00

08

53

419

00

08

36

418

00

12

55

417

00

12

99

415

00

25

08

414

00

03

69

413

00

03

44

412

00

10

67

276

00

00

37

411

00

07

11

410

00

18

11

409

00

00

10

281

00

10

11

366

00

05

15

397

00

10

00

396

00

10

40

395

00

06

22

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

69

Bhavanpur

386

00

07

01

384

00

15

02

381

00

14

51

376

00

16

21

335

00

10

09

332

00

05

49

331

00

09

64

330

00

09

70

327

00

04

83

326

00

01

02

325

00

09

67

324

00

01

44

4.

Manki

48

00

02

34

59

00

00

64

49

00

00

36

58

00

28

72

71

00

01

31

238

00

17

40

239

00

21

52

240

00

14

65

242

00

09

35

246

00

06

03

247

00

01

83

248

00

00

34

251

00

04

74

255

00

00

44

254

00

11

65

253

00

01

79

5.

Salempur Mahera

1056

00

05

57

1061

00

07

04

1060

00

02

85

1059

00

09

71

1065

00

06

37

1066

00

03

20

746

00

01

91

70

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

6.

Kathika

98

00

03

35

93

00

10

90

92

00

01

54

94

00

07

10

91

00

04

67

95

00

10

40

97

00

07

28

127

00

15

18

99

00

01

63

107

00

15

57

108

00

16

33

7.

Malgaon

72

00

24

09

73

00

00

99

74

00

11

14

76

00

10

51

75

00

00

26

78

00

00

73

79

00

17

92

34

00

00

45

33

00

10

98

230

00

07

31

227

00

20

05

150

00

15

23

141

00

34

91

143

00

00

10

139

00

12

97

138

00

00

10

137

00

05

39

135

00

02

68

136

00

03

42

373

00

08

68

372

00

07

46

375

00

00

10

376

00

00

52

377

00

00

24

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

71

Malgaon

380

00

01

43

371

00

06

41

381

00

31

50

392

00

17

59

652

00

00

95

703

00

01

73

702

00

02

32

701

00

08

35

700

00

16

46

695

00

06

98

694

00

00

20

693

00

23

33

881

00

17

77

879

00

00

25

880

00

00

10

871

00

11

15

872

00

00

10

870

00

02

48

867

00

17

76

858

00

10

12

1265

00

06

33

1264

00

01

02

1277

00

09

53

1276

00

21

92

8.

Keshipur

88

00

17

47

89

00

06

16

90

00

05

12

93

00

22

66

91

00

04

54

92

00

01

35

94

00

17

14

95

00

04

59

100

00

00

34

101

00

02

23

102

00

08

51

72

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Keshipur

152

00

38

43

157

00

51

12

85/175

00

21

27

9.

Gaupur

155

00

12

46

156

00

17

86

157

00

04

02

158

00

04

06

186

00

01

45

142

00

12

09

188

00

16

14

193

00

06

95

194

00

24

45

192

00

02

97

195

00

01

93

197

00

00

56

198

00

00

48

644

00

13

50

643

00

14

34

652

00

19

02

653

00

00

72

642

00

10

38

595

00

08

83

554

00

11

10

551

00

01

60

550

00

06

83

546

00

13

41

521

00

01

18

565

00

02

52

567

00

08

36

519

00

04

05

518

00

08

18

517

00

08

03

515

00

06

03

514

00

16

02

466

00

01

69

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

73

Gaupur

513

00

27

47

474

00

00

69

470

00

00

10

501

00

09

11

500

00

08

68

499

00

21

57

498

00

13

51

497

00

00

72

496

00

11

57

476

00

00

54

495

00

04

94

494

00

08

83

491

00

03

78

489

00

03

71

10.

Devra

169

00

20

91

170

00

14

63

178

00

16

75

180

00

16

10

185

00

06

88

183

00

00

10

186

00

14

57

184

00

00

10

187

00

08

99

11.

Mulhi

202

00

00

26

203

00

01

06

204

00

06

24

207

00

00

10

205

00

20

05

206

00

10

75

217

00

10

50

218

00

05

38

31

00

01

07

32

00

03

98

33

00

05

21

34

00

05

96

74

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Mulhi

35

00

24

88

58

00

05

55

59

00

06

39

60

00

05

97

61

00

06

94

62

00

06

56

63

00

03

92

64

00

19

93

68

00

02

08

65

00

16

00

76

00

09

04

75

00

07

18

77

00

05

93

81

00

02

83

82

00

06

39

83

00

11

24

84

00

11

51

97

00

24

62

98

00

14

13

125

00

16

34

124

00

04

43

128

00

22

69

136

00

00

15

137

00

23

75

152

00

20

03

153

00

12

22

159

00

22

51

166

00

06

43

169

00

05

36

176

00

19

38

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

75

Mulhi

177

00

07

31

175

00

13

26

178

00

12

04

181

00

12

63

183

00

00

10

12.

Sundarpur Gajen

594

00

12

05

595

00

12

00

596

00

01

46

[F. No. R-11025(11)20/2018-OR-I/E-27595]

NOAS KINDO, Under Secy.

नई द ली, 28 दस बर, 2018

का

का

का

का. . . . आ. 16

16

16

16.—के'(ीय सरकार को लोकिहत मD यह आवCयक तीत होता है क उर देश राsय मD टू6डला टQमनल

से कानपुर टQमनल तक पेjोिलयम उIपाद के प+रवहन के िलये इंिडयन ऑयल कापuरेशन िलिमटेड ारा पाइपलाइन िबछाई

जानी चािहए।

और के'(ीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन िबछाने के योजन के िलये यह आवCयक तीत होता है क ऐसी भूिम मD

जो इस से उपाब अनुसूची मD वQणत है, और िजसमD उ पाइपलाइन िबछाई जाने का Aताव है, उपयोग के अिधकार का

अज-न कया जाए ।

अतः अब, के'(ीय सरकार, पेjोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइन (भूिम मD उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न) अिधिनयम,

1962 (1962 का 50) क धारा 3 क उपधारा (1) ारा द शियो का योग करते %ए उस भूिम मD उपयोग के अिधकार

का अज-न करने के अपने आशय क घोषणा करती है ।

कोई cि, जो उ अनुसूची मD वQणत भूिम मD िहतब है , उस तारीख से, िजसको इस अिधसूचना मD यु भारत

के राजपH क ितयाँ साधारण जनता को उपलgध करा दी जाती है, इ~स दन के भीतर, भूिम के नीचे पाइपलाइन िबछाए

जाने के िलए उसमD उपयोग के अिधकार के संबंध मD स[म ािधकारी, इंिडयन ऑयल कापuरेशन िलिमटेड पाइपलाइ'स

भाग, िनमा-ण काया-लय, उरी [ेH पाइपलाइ'स, टू6डला - गौ+रया पाइपलाइन प+रयोजना,ई-160, थम व ितीय तल,

कमला नगर, आगरा (यू.पी.) – 282004 को िलिखत \प मD आ[ेप भेज सकेगा।

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

तहसी

हसी

हसी

हसील – डेरापुर

डेरापुर

डेरापुर

डेरापुर

िजला

िजला

िजला

िजला – कानपुर

कानपुर

कानपुर

कानपुर देहात

देहात

देहात

देहात

रा,य

रा,य

रा,य

रा,य – उर

उर

उर

उर &देश

&देश

&देश

&देश

<म

<म

<म

<म संसंसंसं.

गांव

गांव

गांव

गांव का

का

का

का नाम

नाम

नाम

नाम

ख़सरा

ख़सरा

ख़सरा

ख़सरा संसंसंसं.

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

हे3टेयर

हे3टेयर

हे3टेयर

हे3टेयर

एयर

एयर

एयर

एयर

वग5

वग5

वग5

वग5 मीटर

मीटर

मीटर

मीटर

1

2

3

4

5

6

1.

1.

1.

1.

बचीतपुरवा

बचीतपुरवा

बचीतपुरवा

बचीतपुरवा

542

00

20

58

541

00

23

73

546

00

03

75

76

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

बचीतपु

बचीतपु

बचीतपु

बचीतपुरवा

रवा

रवा

रवा

537

00

11

80

536

00

09

80

517

00

16

52

513

00

01

94

512

00

04

59

510

00

06

48

511

00

01

27

498

00

00

12

500

00

12

58

501

00

00

85

499

00

04

19

504

00

09

79

505

00

13

94

683

00

00

11

682

00

00

10

681

00

00

10

678

00

11

22

676

00

05

72

679

00

30

37

680

00

01

79

674

00

10

55

671

00

33

09

670

00

16

26

670/1351

00

01

58

667

00

00

60

668

00

11

92

666

00

16

36

664

00

08

84

663

00

05

25

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

77

1

2

3

4

5

6

बचीतपुरवा

बचीतपुरवा

बचीतपुरवा

बचीतपुरवा

1145

00

16

33

1146

00

08

30

1147

00

13

00

1168

00

01

17

1176

00

03

20

1215

00

03

39

1214

00

05

51

1177

00

01

26

1213

00

06

81

1212

00

14

99

1209

00

10

19

1208

00

22

81

1206

00

05

28

1205

00

07

45

1204

00

08

38

1203

00

03

63

1201

00

02

98

1202

00

02

38

1197

00

09

91

2.

2.

2.

2.

बनीपारा

बनीपारा

बनीपारा

बनीपारा िजनई

िजनई

िजनई

िजनई

519

00

07

79

518

00

09

41

509

00

26

12

506

00

21

03

501

00

24

75

500

00

27

14

499

00

16

85

577

00

00

44

582

00

08

02

583

00

07

29

78

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

बनीपारा

बनीपारा

बनीपारा

बनीपारा िजनई

िजनई

िजनई

िजनई

584

00

07

20

586

00

34

05

457

00

00

10

587

00

00

14

456

00

03

40

455

00

21

12

610

00

06

77

618

00

00

41

617

00

05

43

619

00

21

66

425

00

02

45

424

00

08

17

423

00

03

51

422

00

06

20

421

00

08

99

420

00

00

69

428

00

01

16

417

00

00

63

415

00

00

95

414

00

03

57

411

00

15

08

410

00

27

20

406

00

00

38

407

00

11

98

3.

3.

3.

3.

बनीपारा

बनीपारा

बनीपारा

बनीपारा महाराज

महाराज

महाराज

महाराज

35

00

05

20

66

00

25

13

67

00

01

65

64

00

23

08

63

00

02

62

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

79

1

2

3

4

5

6

बनीपारा

बनीपारा

बनीपारा

बनीपारा महाराज

महाराज

महाराज

महाराज

492

00

00

41

496

00

03

59

495

00

00

93

493

00

20

90

494

00

07

16

588

00

05

84

544

00

00

36

545

00

14

37

546

00

04

62

547

00

02

28

548

00

00

70

549

00

09

10

551

00

25

53

566

00

00

54

569

00

07

63

570

00

06

42

577

00

09

90

576

00

00

15

580

00

16

86

910

00

05

20

909

00

06

00

908

00

33

31

906

00

12

46

902

00

20

02

897

00

11

34

4.

4.

4.

4.

देवक8

देवक8

देवक8

देवक8 पुपुपुपुरवा

रवा

रवा

रवा

313

00

06

31

312

00

01

68

318

00

00

38

317

00

05

58

80

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

देवक8

देवक8

देवक8

देवक8 पुरवा

पुरवा

पुरवा

पुरवा

316

00

00

21

320

00

05

41

321

00

07

21

322

00

00

93

369

00

09

84

373/380

00

01

46

373

00

08

82

374

00

15

71

5.

5.

5.

5.

बनीपारा

बनीपारा

बनीपारा

बनीपारा जौहर

जौहर

जौहर

जौहर

74

00

10

73

75

00

00

10

62

00

28

76

63

00

14

52

45

00

11

64

43

00

20

66

42

00

04

72

12

00

12

11

9

00

10

29

10

00

07

24

6.

6.

6.

6.

जजमुइया

जजमुइया

जजमुइया

जजमुइया

739

00

09

28

737

00

15

08

751

00

11

73

752

00

17

38

756

00

13

43

892

00

11

83

894

00

44

62

887

00

07

82

888

00

00

10

885

00

00

53

878

00

02

74

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

81

1

2

3

4

5

6

जजमुइया

जजमुइया

जजमुइया

जजमुइया

877

00

00

10

881

00

32

37

880

00

36

17

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)20/2018-ओआर-I/ई-27595]

नोवस क' डो, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 28th December, 2018

S.O. 16.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the

transportation of petroleum products from Tundla Terminal to Kanpur Terminal should be laid by Indian Oil Corporation

Limited. And whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is

necessary to acquire the right of user in the land described in the schedule annexed to this notification;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals

Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in land ) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its

intention to acquire the right of user therein;

Any person interested in the land described in the said schedule may, within twenty–one days from the date on which the

copies of this notification, as published in the Gazette of India, are made available to the General Public, object in writing

to the acquisition of the right of user therein or laying of the pipeline under the land to Competent Authority, Indian Oil

Corporation Limited ( Pipelines Division), Construction Office, Northern Region Pipelines, Tundla-Gawria Pipeline

Project, E-160,1st & 2nd floor, Kamlanagar, Agra(U.P.) – 282 004.

SCHEDULE

Tehsil:- Derapur District:- Kanpur Dehat

State :- Uttar Pradesh

Sl.

No.

Name of the Village

Khasara No.

Area

Hectare

Are

Sq.mtr.

1

2

3

4

5

6

1.

Bacheet Purwa

542

00

20

58

541

00

23

73

546

00

03

75

537

00

11

80

536

00

09

80

517

00

16

52

513

00

01

94

512

00

04

59

510

00

06

48

511

00

01

27

498

00

00

12

500

00

12

58

501

00

00

85

499

00

04

19

504

00

09

79

505

00

13

94

683

00

00

11

682

00

00

10

82

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

Bacheet Purwa

681

00

00

10

678

00

11

22

676

00

05

72

679

00

30

37

680

00

01

79

674

00

10

55

671

00

33

09

670

00

16

26

670/1351

00

01

58

667

00

00

60

668

00

11

92

666

00

16

36

664

00

08

84

663

00

05

25

1145

00

16

33

1146

00

08

30

1147

00

13

00

1168

00

01

17

1176

00

03

20

1215

00

03

39

1214

00

05

51

1177

00

01

26

1213

00

06

81

1212

00

14

99

1209

00

10

19

1208

00

22

81

1206

00

05

28

1205

00

07

45

1204

00

08

38

1203

00

03

63

1201

00

02

98

1202

00

02

38

1197

00

09

91

2.

Banipara Jinai

519

00

07

79

518

00

09

41

509

00

26

12

506

00

21

03

501

00

24

75

500

00

27

14

499

00

16

85

577

00

00

44

582

00

08

02

583

00

07

29

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

83

1

2

3

4

5

6

Banipara Jinai

584

00

07

20

586

00

34

05

457

00

00

10

587

00

00

14

456

00

03

40

455

00

21

12

610

00

06

77

618

00

00

41

617

00

05

43

619

00

21

66

425

00

02

45

424

00

08

17

423

00

03

51

422

00

06

20

421

00

08

99

420

00

00

69

428

00

01

16

417

00

00

63

415

00

00

95

414

00

03

57

411

00

15

08

410

00

27

20

406

00

00

38

407

00

11

98

3.

Banipara Maharaj

35

00

05

20

66

00

25

13

67

00

01

65

64

00

23

08

63

00

02

62

492

00

00

41

496

00

03

59

495

00

00

93

493

00

20

90

494

00

07

16

588

00

05

84

544

00

00

36

545

00

14

37

546

00

04

62

547

00

02

28

548

00

00

70

549

00

09

10

84

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

Banipara Maharaj

551

00

25

53

566

00

00

54

569

00

07

63

570

00

06

42

577

00

09

90

576

00

00

15

580

00

16

86

910

00

05

20

909

00

06

00

908

00

33

31

906

00

12

46

902

00

20

02

897

00

11

34

4.

Devki Purva

313

00

06

31

312

00

01

68

318

00

00

38

317

00

05

58

316

00

00

21

320

00

05

41

321

00

07

21

322

00

00

93

369

00

09

84

373/380

00

01

46

373

00

08

82

374

00

15

71

5.

Banipara Jauhar

74

00

10

73

75

00

00

10

62

00

28

76

63

00

14

52

45

00

11

64

43

00

20

66

42

00

04

72

12

00

12

11

9

00

10

29

10

00

07

24

6.

Jajmuiya

739

00

09

28

737

00

15

08

751

00

11

73

752

00

17

38

756

00

13

43

892

00

11

83

894

00

44

62

887

00

07

82

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

85

1

2

3

4

5

6

Jajmuiya

888

00

00

10

885

00

00

53

878

00

02

74

877

00

00

10

881

00

32

37

880

00

36

17

[F. No. R-11025(11)20/2018-OR-I/E-27595]

NOAS KINDO, Under Secy.

नई द ली, 28 दस बर, 2018

का

का

का

का. . . . आ. . . . 17

17

17

17.—के'(ीय सरकार को लोकिहत मD यह आवCयक तीत होता है क उर देश राsय मD टू6डला टQमनल

से कानपुर टQमनल तक पेjोिलयम उIपाद के प+रवहन के िलये इंिडयन ऑयल कापuरेशन िलिमटेड ारा पाइपलाइन िबछाई

जानी चािहए।

और के'(ीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन िबछाने के योजन के िलये यह आवCयक तीत होता है क ऐसी भूिम मD

जो इस से उपाब अनुसूची मे वQणत है, और िजसमD उ पाइपलाइन िबछाई जाने का Aताव है, उपयोग के अिधकार का

अज-न कया जाए ।

अतः अब, के'(ीय सरकार, पेjोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइन (भूिम मे उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न) अिधिनयम,

1962 (1962 का 50) क धारा 3 क उपधारा (1) ारा द शियो का योग करते %ए उस भूिम मD उपयोग के अिधकार

का अज-न करने के अपने आशय क घोषणा करती है ।

कोई cि, जो उ अनुसूची मD वQणत भूिम मD िहतब है , उस तारीख से, िजसको इस अिधसूचना मD यु भारत के राजपH

क ितयाँ साधारण जनता को उपलgध करा दी जाती ह , इ~स दन के भीतर, भूिम के नीचे पाइपलाइन िबछाए जाने के

िलए उसमD उपयोग के अिधकार के संबंध मD स[म ािधकारी, इंिडयन ऑयल कापuरेशन िलिमटेड पाइपलाइ'स भाग,

िनमा-ण काया-लय, उरी [ेH पाइपलाइ'स, टू6डला - गौ+रया पाइपलाइन प+रयोजना,ई-160, थम व ितीय तल, कमला

नगर, आगरा (यू.पी.) – 282004 को िलिखत \प मD आ[ेप भेज सकेगा।

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

तहसी

हसी

हसी

हसील – िबधुना

िबधुना

िबधुना

िबधुना

िजला

िजला

िजला

िजला – औरैया

औरैया

औरैया

औरैया

रा,य

रा,य

रा,य

रा,य – उर

उर

उर

उर &देश

&देश

&देश

&देश

<म

<म

<म

<म

संसंसंसं.

गांव

गांव

गांव

गांव का

का

का

का नाम

नाम

नाम

नाम

ख़सरा

ख़सरा

ख़सरा

ख़सरा संसंसंसं.

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

हे3टेयर

हे3टेयर

हे3टेयर

हे3टेयर

एयर

एयर

एयर

एयर

वग5

वग5

वग5

वग5 मीटर

मीटर

मीटर

मीटर

1

2

3

4

5

6

1.

गढवाना

गढवाना

गढवाना

गढवाना

7

00

23

81

8

00

05

64

9

00

05

56

11

00

30

70

10

00

00

10

86

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

गढवाना

गढवाना

गढवाना

गढवाना

20

00

29

10

12

00

00

79

13

00

09

76

21

00

04

52

22

00

04

47

25

00

19

81

32

00

07

28

38

00

12

43

37

00

05

41

39

01

01

17

480

00

05

98

477

00

11

23

481

00

10

73

482

00

00

32

490

00

05

06

489

00

17

98

487

00

03

44

493

00

07

39

492

00

00

10

494

00

03

12

491

00

01

50

495

00

06

04

497

00

03

05

496

00

03

74

503

00

07

13

504

00

03

45

505

00

06

70

510

00

04

80

511

00

03

90

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

87

1

2

3

4

5

6

गढवाना

गढवाना

गढवाना

गढवाना

512

00

08

31

513

00

22

23

669

00

61

92

670

00

01

81

2.

इटैली

इटैली

इटैली

इटैली

12

00

00

17

13

00

00

10

11

00

04

23

15

00

14

43

14

00

01

30

18

00

04

00

19

00

00

20

20

00

00

78

21

00

08

84

25

00

03

98

23

00

04

85

293

00

06

08

292

00

08

95

290

00

05

95

354

00

02

48

355

00

13

18

356

00

06

43

287

00

00

10

357

00

03

26

281

00

02

33

360

00

05

59

369

00

15

78

377

00

01

20

375

00

01

16

376

00

01

93

88

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

इटैली

इटैली

इटैली

इटैली

379

00

11

21

382

00

03

70

374

00

02

02

387

00

16

23

383

00

00

89

418

00

15

63

417

00

05

07

416

00

00

13

448

00

15

48

449

00

14

89

399

00

13

75

452

00

06

73

453

00

08

21

454

00

00

13

457

00

00

58

456

00

08

37

928

00

03

75

930

00

19

06

933

00

01

13

926

00

18

53

983

00

19

90

917

00

01

15

984

00

38

58

992

00

03

48

989

00

02

84

991

00

03

55

990

00

02

07

1016

00

09

46

1017

00

00

10

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

89

1

2

3

4

5

6

इटैली

इटैली

इटैली

इटैली

1018

00

10

73

1019

00

00

10

1042

00

13

56

1049

00

00

12

1043

00

15

87

1044

00

10

58

1067

00

08

69

1068

00

00

53

1065

00

16

27

1064

00

02

19

1063

00

15

74

1074

00

06

21

1083

00

19

10

1081

00

02

98

1082

00

09

06

1089

00

01

47

3.

मसूदपुर

मसूदपुर

मसूदपुर

मसूदपुर

764

00

10

48

765

00

01

46

763

00

07

47

766

00

08

77

773

00

06

20

774

00

19

05

4.

न:दपुर

न:दपुर

न:दपुर

न:दपुर

697

00

02

36

694

00

00

10

702

00

00

41

703

00

13

49

704

00

00

10

707

00

10

02

706

00

23

76

90

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

न:दपुर

न:दपुर

न:दपुर

न:दपुर

710

00

19

03

718

00

27

56

780

00

02

80

678

00

01

18

670

00

09

61

719

00

00

98

720

00

04

37

669

00

03

60

732

00

02

45

733

00

10

83

734

00

10

07

735

00

10

21

736

00

11

46

737

00

04

21

738

00

02

89

755

00

00

37

761

00

17

90

762

00

10

50

765

00

15

97

766

00

00

32

767

00

10

42

768

00

11

38

772

00

15

13

793

00

00

17

804

00

36

35

818

00

32

34

831

00

00

92

826

00

26

29

827

00

01

91

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

91

1

2

3

4

5

6

न:दपुर

न:दपुर

न:दपुर

न:दपुर

828

00

01

50

852

00

00

14

830

00

00

24

851

00

00

85

846

00

07

09

850

00

36

31

5.

कुंवरपुर

कुंवरपुर

कुंवरपुर

कुंवरपुर

238

00

29

76

6.

==ख़?द5

==ख़?द5

==ख़?द5

==ख़?द5

2719

00

00

29

2718

00

00

41

2717

00

17

52

2716

00

14

06

2715

00

01

50

2726

00

10

84

2727

00

16

04

2730

00

29

43

2732

00

11

67

2733

00

41

03

2735

00

53

75

2994

00

40

25

2995

00

11

78

3298

01

01

19

3304

00

14

88

3305

00

03

61

3294

00

01

28

3306

00

00

33

3307

00

07

42

3308

00

24

43

3309

00

13

71

3311

00

07

89

92

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

==ख़?द5

==ख़?द5

==ख़?द5

==ख़?द5

3352

00

00

10

3355

00

24

91

3463

00

03

34

3455

00

06

47

3452

00

04

82

3451

00

04

73

3447

00

11

30

3376

00

08

31

3377

00

15

28

3378

00

00

10

3425

00

58

08

3420

00

11

25

3418

00

00

40

7.

बराहार

बराहार

बराहार

बराहार

30

00

07

59

29

00

17

70

3

00

04

98

28

00

03

94

2

00

06

49

26

00

12

18

5

00

00

80

13

00

17

81

12

00

02

82

15

00

06

16

16

00

01

43

130

00

07

64

129

00

16

95

131

00

14

95

133

00

10

23

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

93

1

2

3

4

5

6

8.

ब=आ

ब=आ

ब=आ

ब=आ

62

00

00

31

67

00

12

65

68

00

09

49

69

00

08

80

176

00

08

64

177

00

21

29

178

00

24

73

180

00

00

10

179

00

02

00

305

00

03

05

303

00

01

14

309

00

05

73

308

00

02

20

310

00

14

66

311

00

01

73

317

00

02

41

319

00

06

20

327

00

04

35

328

00

05

70

329

00

10

65

340

00

12

67

343

00

12

54

364

00

00

10

366

00

06

81

365

00

03

20

367

00

07

05

9.

बलख@डपुर

बलख@डपुर

बलख@डपुर

बलख@डपुर

162

00

12

07

161

00

00

82

164

00

13

27

94

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

बलख@डपुर

बलख@डपुर

बलख@डपुर

बलख@डपुर

165

00

22

59

10.

सोहनी

सोहनी

सोहनी

सोहनी

57

00

00

53

56

00

00

63

55

00

06

93

58

00

17

70

61

00

15

73

62

00

05

87

121

00

05

17

122

00

01

06

123

00

06

23

126

00

12

03

125

00

07

59

131

00

00

37

140

00

00

10

141

00

14

30

142

00

03

53

143

00

00

10

144

00

05

60

146

00

06

90

147

00

04

53

148

00

05

17

145

00

04

40

149

00

00

49

150

00

09

14

151

00

10

55

153

00

09

05

154

00

02

94

157

00

00

10

155

00

00

10

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

95

1

2

3

4

5

6

सोहनी

सोहनी

सोहनी

सोहनी

169

00

00

61

180

00

21

95

178

00

19

07

11.

ऐली

ऐली

ऐली

ऐली

158

00

00

62

159

00

05

90

160

00

21

03

162

00

07

40

12.

ितलकपुर सरमेँडी

ितलकपुर सरमेँडी

ितलकपुर सरमेँडी

ितलकपुर सरमेँडी

24

00

05

79

21

00

06

36

30

00

06

10

29

00

01

14

28

00

06

34

32

00

10

04

56

00

25

42

63

00

23

54

68

00

00

32

73

00

15

31

97

00

08

62

98

00

00

10

99

00

07

17

101

00

00

38

102

00

08

69

105

00

07

96

106

00

03

62

13.

Bदवरांव

Bदवरांव

Bदवरांव

Bदवरांव

495

00

16

83

500

00

00

49

496

00

00

10

501

00

10

65

502

00

09

89

96

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

Bदवरांव

Bदवरांव

Bदवरांव

Bदवरांव

507

00

12

15

505

00

01

23

511

00

01

10

513

00

04

59

514

00

07

01

515

00

13

52

429

00

21

04

400

00

08

74

401

00

01

42

397

00

34

05

381

00

02

46

382

00

08

41

383

00

02

31

374

00

00

25

384

00

05

71

373

00

18

02

375

00

00

40

349

00

01

13

348

00

08

30

341

00

01

72

342

00

09

10

343

00

04

49

340

00

06

41

339

00

02

12

337

00

18

67

330

00

02

82

336

00

01

06

335

00

00

61

334

00

01

48

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

97

1

2

3

4

5

6

Bदवरांव

Bदवरांव

Bदवरांव

Bदवरांव

333

00

10

33

332

00

00

90

697

00

02

16

694

00

02

17

695

00

18

53

703

00

06

39

702

00

01

60

704

00

02

49

706

00

02

31

707

00

01

98

919

00

03

87

974

00

35

11

965

00

11

88

964

00

01

76

966

00

02

71

967

00

04

17

949

00

41

89

950

00

00

10

14.

हरचंदपुर

हरचंदपुर

हरचंदपुर

हरचंदपुर

294

00

09

28

299

00

07

65

298

00

17

19

303

00

01

52

304

00

05

51

315

00

16

00

341

00

16

71

317

00

03

59

319

00

04

49

333

00

08

99

332

00

00

45

98

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

हरचंदपुर

हरचंदपुर

हरचंदपुर

हरचंदपुर

331

00

09

84

329

00

04

76

330

00

00

10

328

00

00

79

327

00

12

00

449

00

34

14

450

00

00

16

465

00

21

85

466

00

10

39

467

00

10

45

468

00

07

49

469

00

16

10

514

00

23

50

515

00

05

00

513

00

09

18

516

00

12

32

523

00

02

38

521

00

07

94

654

00

17

26

655

00

11

77

591

00

10

82

593

00

05

32

645

00

02

35

627

00

07

38

626

00

07

60

624

00

10

09

629

00

00

83

630

00

05

84

623

00

08

24

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

99

1

2

3

4

5

6

हरचंदपुर

हरचंदपुर

हरचंदपुर

हरचंदपुर

619

00

02

59

621

00

15

73

620

00

06

44

606

00

06

30

605

00

05

81

607

00

03

04

604

00

00

10

557

00

03

52

2422

00

07

85

2420

00

03

25

2419

00

09

24

2418

00

09

57

2411/3756

00

01

51

2412

00

11

77

2413

00

00

10

2414

00

13

64

2363

00

00

60

2361

00

13

29

3459

00

08

59

2360

00

11

76

3460

00

01

70

2359

00

04

30

3461

00

10

79

3462

00

06

50

3471

00

01

66

3470

00

23

80

3490

00

23

51

3489

00

05

20

3522

00

00

47

100

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

हरचंदपुर

हरचंदपुर

हरचंदपुर

हरचंदपुर

3521

00

00

10

3523

00

05

65

3571

00

02

82

3569

00

01

64

3568

00

03

59

3567

00

09

12

3566

00

07

86

3555

00

04

89

3533

00

02

52

3554

00

22

31

3553

00

15

36

3552

00

13

12

3298

00

17

27

3296

00

15

50

3293

00

12

06

3289

00

13

95

3288

00

00

15

3290

00

05

83

3284

00

06

92

3285

00

04

98

3282

00

24

84

3283

00

03

20

3231

00

15

98

3280

00

00

10

3227

00

09

97

3224

00

03

79

3225

00

08

17

3215

00

03

95

3238

00

00

43

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

101

1

2

3

4

5

6

हरचंदपुर

हरचंदपुर

हरचंदपुर

हरचंदपुर

3214

00

02

80

3239

00

04

27

3213

00

00

38

3212

00

00

10

3204

00

02

88

3205

00

03

21

3206

00

12

40

3210

00

08

44

3208

00

03

73

3207

00

00

25

3209

00

01

74

3190

00

15

01

15.

ढरकन

ढरकन

ढरकन

ढरकन

165

00

14

12

16.

अगहरा

अगहरा

अगहरा

अगहरा

395

00

25

19

403

00

00

10

404

00

16

06

410

00

12

76

453

00

20

51

454

00

10

84

455

00

15

13

438

00

00

10

556

00

07

69

555

00

00

82

558

00

07

96

553

00

01

91

559

00

05

64

560

00

12

45

561

00

00

16

701

00

07

27

102

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

अगहरा

अगहरा

अगहरा

अगहरा

700

00

11

11

699

00

02

43

681

00

01

38

682

00

01

89

683

00

22

56

680

00

16

33

648

00

17

80

646

00

09

06

645

00

31

46

644

00

00

35

734

00

01

07

767

00

11

14

766

00

11

95

765

00

13

53

772

00

18

68

771

00

11

11

779

00

01

85

774

00

13

53

775

00

02

68

17.

अ@डा

अ@डा

अ@डा

अ@डा

94

00

00

19

95

00

00

14

96

00

15

66

93

00

36

17

117

00

06

79

99

00

01

90

100

00

16

06

102

00

04

77

101

00

07

27

111

00

14

94

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

103

1

2

3

4

5

6

18.

बहलोलपुर

बहलोलपुर

बहलोलपुर

बहलोलपुर

25

00

08

65

21

00

38

75

24

00

04

24

23

00

01

23

22

00

07

07

83

00

00

10

20

00

16

13

86

00

29

67

87

00

19

02

88

00

06

09

324

00

08

99

322

00

21

28

323

00

03

84

311

00

15

02

312

00

00

80

309

00

22

49

308

00

08

06

307

00

10

66

398

00

19

86

418

00

06

86

434

00

03

86

436

00

07

11

437

00

00

78

435

00

06

98

465

00

04

32

466

00

00

23

462

00

00

10

467

00

00

82

464

00

04

82

104

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

बहलोलपुर

बहलोलपुर

बहलोलपुर

बहलोलपुर

471

00

21

97

472

00

13

72

475

00

02

14

19.

पुवा5फक8रे

पुवा5फक8रे

पुवा5फक8रे

पुवा5फक8रे

85

00

15

17

86

00

01

58

90

00

30

84

89

00

01

28

88

00

07

62

98

00

05

39

99

00

06

55

101

00

00

25

102

00

06

21

108

00

19

83

110

00

04

92

109

00

00

14

287

00

06

58

20.

ताजपुर छोँक

ताजपुर छोँक

ताजपुर छोँक

ताजपुर छोँक

124

00

08

05

123

00

05

30

122

00

06

62

121

00

03

92

115

00

00

10

120

00

07

85

119

00

09

95

118

00

00

87

117

00

02

91

186

00

34

73

189

00

05

84

223

00

25

70

222

00

23

97

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

105

1

2

3

4

5

6

ताजपुर छोँक

ताजपुर छोँक

ताजपुर छोँक

ताजपुर छोँक

194

00

00

46

198

00

11

21

199

00

05

28

204

00

03

33

205

00

02

38

203

00

05

36

202

00

04

22

265

00

00

13

621

00

14

21

615

00

06

41

616

00

01

71

610

00

04

58

614

00

00

84

609

00

01

35

608

00

00

50

613

00

05

97

612

00

02

21

611

00

02

37

706

00

07

17

599

00

06

30

707

00

93

30

712

00

05

17

708

00

01

46

744

00

00

10

711

00

01

79

709

00

00

56

741

00

00

26

740

00

18

76

739

00

19

42

106

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

ताजपुर छोँक

ताजपुर छोँक

ताजपुर छोँक

ताजपुर छोँक

736

00

07

30

735

00

04

82

21.

सहायल

सहायल

सहायल

सहायल

114

00

15

91

120

00

25

49

119

00

00

10

117

00

10

93

118

00

00

67

166

00

17

06

222

00

16

70

221

00

15

39

220

00

10

45

187

00

03

43

186

00

08

42

185

00

26

62

184

00

00

60

183

00

07

29

410

00

04

16

409

00

10

62

406

00

22

21

414

00

09

27

402

00

23

37

400

00

07

76

424

00

00

90

425

00

03

29

426

00

02

27

427

00

17

40

428

00

10

94

429

00

04

56

430

00

04

12

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

107

1

2

3

4

5

6

सहायल

सहायल

सहायल

सहायल

437

00

09

35

436

00

06

47

435

00

05

64

1103

00

13

68

1102

00

00

10

1101

00

05

44

1112

00

04

30

1113

00

00

48

1114

00

18

35

1115

00

12

39

1116

00

10

95

1119

00

09

15

1120

00

01

81

2035

00

13

39

2033

00

21

34

2028

00

24

66

2030

00

01

01

2024

00

11

67

1125

00

00

16

2023

00

01

18

2022

00

20

63

2094

00

00

33

2093

00

16

71

2212

00

10

83

2214

00

20

32

2216

00

13

10

2081

00

18

12

2078

00

16

72

2079

00

00

44

108

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

सहायल

सहायल

सहायल

सहायल

2076

00

18

03

2326

00

00

10

2327

00

12

46

2328

00

01

82

2329

00

28

31

2330

00

00

69

2427

00

13

24

2359

00

00

53

2425

00

19

09

2546

00

09

78

2545

00

00

10

2548

00

08

10

2553

00

11

24

2623

00

00

10

2555

00

13

95

2620

00

18

12

2624

00

09

87

2621

00

00

50

2636

00

00

81

2638

00

00

80

2641

00

05

52

2618

00

07

91

2642

00

11

08

2644

00

29

28

2646

00

00

27

2651

00

25

47

2648

00

04

22

2650

00

04

45

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

109

1

2

3

4

5

6

22.

मुग रहा

मुग रहा

मुग रहा

मुग रहा

494

00

01

77

645

00

27

60

694

00

03

98

642

00

06

42

641

00

00

89

503

00

13

57

637

00

00

46

636

00

14

00

663

00

00

10

635

00

03

27

664

00

00

14

633

00

10

53

632

00

00

10

631

00

08

27

667

00

08

30

668

00

01

79

669

00

10

93

701

00

08

99

671

00

05

70

672

00

12

20

673

00

10

56

674

00

00

20

699

00

00

36

697

00

11

22

698

00

11

62

692

00

04

04

690

00

04

37

689

00

01

39

684

00

07

13

110

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

मुग रहा

मुग रहा

मुग रहा

मुग रहा

683

00

12

13

682

00

01

51

607

00

01

44

686

00

18

35

606

00

00

82

583

00

01

26

23.

बेDपुर

बेDपुर

बेDपुर

बेDपुर

159

00

46

73

158

00

21

20

155

00

34

33

128

00

08

79

127

00

12

97

122

00

03

16

126

00

04

03

124

00

05

98

125

00

01

23

24.

नवी मोहन

नवी मोहन

नवी मोहन

नवी मोहन

473

00

05

68

471

00

00

53

472

00

11

35

474

00

09

52

463

00

26

09

498

00

09

83

497

00

00

18

517

00

38

15

366

00

00

51

362

00

14

26

364

00

00

20

365

00

20

89

551

00

08

03

610

00

02

67

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

111

1

2

3

4

5

6

नवी मोहन

नवी मोहन

नवी मोहन

नवी मोहन

609

00

09

38

604

00

08

78

563

00

03

01

601

00

01

90

600

00

11

46

601

00

00

13

597

00

11

24

567

00

00

35

596

00

10

34

595

00

13

77

594

00

13

66

593

00

04

02

591

00

00

10

590

00

05

10

587

00

00

10

581

00

00

65

582

00

01

58

588

00

06

03

583

00

00

66

584

00

02

82

577

00

00

19

578

00

15

54

25.

िसखू

िसखू

िसखू

िसखू

187

00

00

26

190

00

07

34

192

00

24

39

192/271

00

00

10

228

00

05

51

226

00

01

03

225

00

19

22

112

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

िसखू

िसखू

िसखू

िसखू

224

00

00

10

26.

Bदवरी

Bदवरी

Bदवरी

Bदवरी

488

00

13

88

487

00

11

53

486

00

00

10

519

00

10

56

521

00

09

41

520

00

00

42

474

00

10

67

473

00

08

82

470

00

02

22

469

00

04

25

468

00

04

37

467

00

10

14

466

00

06

33

465

00

01

96

444

00

00

41

437

00

04

11

438

00

16

49

428

00

09

13

426

00

09

01

420

00

11

88

412

00

10

90

411

00

04

41

410

00

01

52

409

00

06

01

408

00

00

10

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)20/2018-ओआर-I/ई-27595]

नोवस क' डो, अवर सिचव

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

113

New Delhi, the 28th December, 2018

S.O. 17.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the

transportation of petroleum products from Tundla Terminal to Kanpur Terminal should be laid by Indian Oil Corporation

Limited. And whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is

necessary to acquire the right of user in the land described in the schedule annexed to this notification;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals

Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in land ) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its

intention to acquire the right of user therein;

Any person interested in the land described in the said schedule may, within twenty–one days from the date on which the

copies of this notification, as published in the Gazette of India, are made available to the General Public, object in writing

to the acquisition of the right of user therein or laying of the pipeline under the land to Competent Authority, Indian Oil

Corporation Limited ( Pipelines Division), Construction Office, Northern Region Pipelines, Tundla-Gawria Pipeline

Project, E-160,1st & 2nd floor, Kamlanagar, Agra(U.P.) – 282 004.

SCHEDULE

Tehsil:- Bidhuna District:- Auraiya

State :- Uttar Pradesh

Sl.

No.

Name of the Village

Khasara No.

Area

Hectare

Are

Sq.mtr.

1

2

3

4

5

6

1.

Gadhwana

7

00

23

81

8

00

05

64

9

00

05

56

11

00

30

70

10

00

00

10

20

00

29

10

12

00

00

79

13

00

09

76

21

00

04

52

22

00

04

47

25

00

19

81

32

00

07

28

38

00

12

43

37

00

05

41

39

01

01

17

480

00

05

98

477

00

11

23

481

00

10

73

482

00

00

32

490

00

05

06

489

00

17

98

487

00

03

44

493

00

07

39

492

00

00

10

494

00

03

12

491

00

01

50

495

00

06

04

497

00

03

05

114

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

Gadhwana

496

00

03

74

503

00

07

13

504

00

03

45

505

00

06

70

510

00

04

80

511

00

03

90

512

00

08

31

513

00

22

23

669

00

61

92

670

00

01

81

2.

Itaili

12

00

00

17

13

00

00

10

11

00

04

23

15

00

14

43

14

00

01

30

18

00

04

00

19

00

00

20

20

00

00

78

21

00

08

84

25

00

03

98

23

00

04

85

293

00

06

08

292

00

08

95

290

00

05

95

354

00

02

48

355

00

13

18

356

00

06

43

287

00

00

10

357

00

03

26

281

00

02

33

360

00

05

59

369

00

15

78

377

00

01

20

375

00

01

16

376

00

01

93

379

00

11

21

382

00

03

70

374

00

02

02

387

00

16

23

383

00

00

89

418

00

15

63

417

00

05

07

416

00

00

13

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

115

1

2

3

4

5

6

Itaili

448

00

15

48

449

00

14

89

399

00

13

75

452

00

06

73

453

00

08

21

454

00

00

13

457

00

00

58

456

00

08

37

928

00

03

75

930

00

19

06

933

00

01

13

926

00

18

53

983

00

19

90

917

00

01

15

984

00

38

58

992

00

03

48

989

00

02

84

991

00

03

55

990

00

02

07

1016

00

09

46

1017

00

00

10

1018

00

10

73

1019

00

00

10

1042

00

13

56

1049

00

00

12

1043

00

15

87

1044

00

10

58

1067

00

08

69

1068

00

00

53

1065

00

16

27

1064

00

02

19

1063

00

15

74

1074

00

06

21

1083

00

19

10

1081

00

02

98

1082

00

09

06

1089

00

01

47

3.

Masudpur

764

00

10

48

765

00

01

46

763

00

07

47

766

00

08

77

773

00

06

20

774

00

19

05

116

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

4.

Nandpur

697

00

02

36

694

00

00

10

702

00

00

41

703

00

13

49

704

00

00

10

707

00

10

02

706

00

23

76

710

00

19

03

718

00

27

56

780

00

02

80

678

00

01

18

670

00

09

61

719

00

00

98

720

00

04

37

669

00

03

60

732

00

02

45

733

00

10

83

734

00

10

07

735

00

10

21

736

00

11

46

737

00

04

21

738

00

02

89

755

00

00

37

761

00

17

90

762

00

10

50

765

00

15

97

766

00

00

32

767

00

10

42

768

00

11

38

772

00

15

13

793

00

00

17

804

00

36

35

818

00

32

34

831

00

00

92

826

00

26

29

827

00

01

91

828

00

01

50

852

00

00

14

830

00

00

24

851

00

00

85

846

00

07

09

850

00

36

31

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

117

1

2

3

4

5

6

5.

Kunwarpur

238

00

29

76

6.

Ruru Khurd

2719

00

00

29

2718

00

00

41

2717

00

17

52

2716

00

14

06

2715

00

01

50

2726

00

10

84

2727

00

16

04

2730

00

29

43

2732

00

11

67

2733

00

41

03

2735

00

53

75

2994

00

40

25

2995

00

11

78

3298

01

01

19

3304

00

14

88

3305

00

03

61

3294

00

01

28

3306

00

00

33

3307

00

07

42

3308

00

24

43

3309

00

13

71

3311

00

07

89

3352

00

00

10

3355

00

24

91

3463

00

03

34

3455

00

06

47

3452

00

04

82

3451

00

04

73

3447

00

11

30

3376

00

08

31

3377

00

15

28

3378

00

00

10

3425

00

58

08

3420

00

11

25

3418

00

00

40

7.

Barahar

30

00

07

59

29

00

17

70

3

00

04

98

28

00

03

94

2

00

06

49

118

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

Barahar

26

00

12

18

5

00

00

80

13

00

17

81

12

00

02

82

15

00

06

16

16

00

01

43

130

00

07

64

129

00

16

95

131

00

14

95

133

00

10

23

8.

Baruaa

62

00

00

31

67

00

12

65

68

00

09

49

69

00

08

80

176

00

08

64

177

00

21

29

178

00

24

73

180

00

00

10

179

00

02

00

305

00

03

05

303

00

01

14

309

00

05

73

308

00

02

20

310

00

14

66

311

00

01

73

317

00

02

41

319

00

06

20

327

00

04

35

328

00

05

70

329

00

10

65

340

00

12

67

343

00

12

54

364

00

00

10

366

00

06

81

365

00

03

20

367

00

07

05

9.

Balkhandpur

162

00

12

07

161

00

00

82

164

00

13

27

165

00

22

59

10.

Sohni

57

00

00

53

56

00

00

63

55

00

06

93

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

119

1

2

3

4

5

6

Sohni

58

00

17

70

61

00

15

73

62

00

05

87

121

00

05

17

122

00

01

06

123

00

06

23

126

00

12

03

125

00

07

59

131

00

00

37

140

00

00

10

141

00

14

30

142

00

03

53

143

00

00

10

144

00

05

60

146

00

06

90

147

00

04

53

148

00

05

17

145

00

04

40

149

00

00

49

150

00

09

14

151

00

10

55

153

00

09

05

154

00

02

94

157

00

00

10

155

00

00

10

169

00

00

61

180

00

21

95

178

00

19

07

11.

Aili

158

00

00

62

159

00

05

90

160

00

21

03

162

00

07

40

12.

Tilakpur Sarmendi

24

00

05

79

21

00

06

36

30

00

06

10

29

00

01

14

28

00

06

34

32

00

10

04

56

00

25

42

63

00

23

54

68

00

00

32

73

00

15

31

97

00

08

62

120

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

Tilakpur Sarmendi

98

00

00

10

99

00

07

17

101

00

00

38

102

00

08

69

105

00

07

96

106

00

03

62

13.

Divraon

495

00

16

83

500

00

00

49

496

00

00

10

501

00

10

65

502

00

09

89

507

00

12

15

505

00

01

23

511

00

01

10

513

00

04

59

514

00

07

01

515

00

13

52

429

00

21

04

400

00

08

74

401

00

01

42

397

00

34

05

381

00

02

46

382

00

08

41

383

00

02

31

374

00

00

25

384

00

05

71

373

00

18

02

375

00

00

40

349

00

01

13

348

00

08

30

341

00

01

72

342

00

09

10

343

00

04

49

340

00

06

41

339

00

02

12

337

00

18

67

330

00

02

82

336

00

01

06

335

00

00

61

334

00

01

48

333

00

10

33

332

00

00

90

697

00

02

16

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

121

1

2

3

4

5

6

Divraon

694

00

02

17

695

00

18

53

703

00

06

39

702

00

01

60

704

00

02

49

706

00

02

31

707

00

01

98

919

00

03

87

974

00

35

11

965

00

11

88

964

00

01

76

966

00

02

71

967

00

04

17

949

00

41

89

950

00

00

10

14.

Harchandpur

294

00

09

28

299

00

07

65

298

00

17

19

303

00

01

52

304

00

05

51

315

00

16

00

341

00

16

71

317

00

03

59

319

00

04

49

333

00

08

99

332

00

00

45

331

00

09

84

329

00

04

76

330

00

00

10

328

00

00

79

327

00

12

00

449

00

34

14

450

00

00

16

465

00

21

85

466

00

10

39

467

00

10

45

468

00

07

49

469

00

16

10

514

00

23

50

515

00

05

00

513

00

09

18

516

00

12

32

523

00

02

38

122

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

Harchandpur

521

00

07

94

654

00

17

26

655

00

11

77

591

00

10

82

593

00

05

32

645

00

02

35

627

00

07

38

626

00

07

60

624

00

10

09

629

00

00

83

630

00

05

84

623

00

08

24

619

00

02

59

621

00

15

73

620

00

06

44

606

00

06

30

605

00

05

81

607

00

03

04

604

00

00

10

557

00

03

52

2422

00

07

85

2420

00

03

25

2419

00

09

24

2418

00

09

57

2411/3756

00

01

51

2412

00

11

77

2413

00

00

10

2414

00

13

64

2363

00

00

60

2361

00

13

29

3459

00

08

59

2360

00

11

76

3460

00

01

70

2359

00

04

30

3461

00

10

79

3462

00

06

50

3471

00

01

66

3470

00

23

80

3490

00

23

51

3489

00

05

20

3522

00

00

47

3521

00

00

10

3523

00

05

65

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

123

1

2

3

4

5

6

Harchandpur

3571

00

02

82

3569

00

01

64

3568

00

03

59

3567

00

09

12

3566

00

07

86

3555

00

04

89

3533

00

02

52

3554

00

22

31

3553

00

15

36

3552

00

13

12

3298

00

17

27

3296

00

15

50

3293

00

12

06

3289

00

13

95

3288

00

00

15

3290

00

05

83

3284

00

06

92

3285

00

04

98

3282

00

24

84

3283

00

03

20

3231

00

15

98

3280

00

00

10

3227

00

09

97

3224

00

03

79

3225

00

08

17

3215

00

03

95

3238

00

00

43

3214

00

02

80

3239

00

04

27

3213

00

00

38

3212

00

00

10

3204

00

02

88

3205

00

03

21

3206

00

12

40

3210

00

08

44

3208

00

03

73

3207

00

00

25

3209

00

01

74

3190

00

15

01

15.

Dharkan

165

00

14

12

16.

Agahara

395

00

25

19

403

00

00

10

404

00

16

06

124

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

Agahara

410

00

12

76

453

00

20

51

454

00

10

84

455

00

15

13

438

00

00

10

556

00

07

69

555

00

00

82

558

00

07

96

553

00

01

91

559

00

05

64

560

00

12

45

561

00

00

16

701

00

07

27

700

00

11

11

699

00

02

43

681

00

01

38

682

00

01

89

683

00

22

56

680

00

16

33

648

00

17

80

646

00

09

06

645

00

31

46

644

00

00

35

734

00

01

07

767

00

11

14

766

00

11

95

765

00

13

53

772

00

18

68

771

00

11

11

779

00

01

85

774

00

13

53

774

00

11

02

775

00

02

68

17.

Anda

94

00

00

19

95

00

00

14

96

00

15

66

93

00

36

17

117

00

06

79

99

00

01

90

100

00

16

06

102

00

04

77

101

00

07

27

111

00

14

94

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

125

1

2

3

4

5

6

18.

Bahalolpur

25

00

08

65

21

00

38

75

24

00

04

24

23

00

01

23

22

00

07

07

83

00

00

10

20

00

16

13

86

00

29

67

87

00

19

02

88

00

06

09

324

00

08

99

322

00

21

28

323

00

03

84

311

00

15

02

312

00

00

80

309

00

22

49

308

00

08

06

307

00

10

66

398

00

19

86

418

00

06

86

434

00

03

86

436

00

07

11

437

00

00

78

435

00

06

98

465

00

04

32

466

00

00

23

462

00

00

10

467

00

00

82

464

00

04

82

471

00

21

97

472

00

13

72

475

00

02

14

19.

Purva Fakire

85

00

15

17

86

00

01

58

90

00

30

84

89

00

01

28

88

00

07

62

98

00

05

39

99

00

06

55

101

00

00

25

102

00

06

21

108

00

19

83

126

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

Purva Fakire

110

00

04

92

109

00

00

14

287

00

06

58

20.

Tajpur Chhonk

124

00

08

05

123

00

05

30

122

00

06

62

121

00

03

92

115

00

00

10

120

00

07

85

119

00

09

95

118

00

00

87

117

00

02

91

186

00

34

73

189

00

05

84

223

00

25

70

222

00

23

97

194

00

00

46

198

00

11

21

199

00

05

28

204

00

03

33

205

00

02

38

203

00

05

36

202

00

04

22

265

00

00

13

621

00

14

21

615

00

06

41

616

00

01

71

610

00

04

58

614

00

00

84

609

00

01

35

608

00

00

50

613

00

05

97

612

00

02

21

611

00

02

37

706

00

07

17

599

00

06

30

707

00

93

30

712

00

05

17

708

00

01

46

744

00

00

10

711

00

01

79

709

00

00

56

741

00

00

26

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

127

1

2

3

4

5

6

Tajpur Chhonk

740

00

18

76

739

00

19

42

736

00

07

30

735

00

04

82

21.

Sahayal

114

00

15

91

120

00

25

49

119

00

00

10

117

00

10

93

118

00

00

67

166

00

17

06

222

00

16

70

221

00

15

39

220

00

10

45

187

00

03

43

186

00

08

42

185

00

26

62

184

00

00

60

183

00

07

29

410

00

04

16

409

00

10

62

406

00

22

21

414

00

09

27

402

00

23

37

400

00

07

76

424

00

00

90

425

00

03

29

426

00

02

27

427

00

17

40

428

00

10

94

429

00

04

56

430

00

04

12

437

00

09

35

436

00

06

47

435

00

05

64

1103

00

13

68

1102

00

00

10

1101

00

05

44

1112

00

04

30

1113

00

00

48

1114

00

18

35

1115

00

12

39

1116

00

10

95

128

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

Sahayal

1119

00

09

15

1120

00

01

81

2035

00

13

39

2033

00

21

34

2028

00

24

66

2030

00

01

01

2024

00

11

67

1125

00

00

16

2023

00

01

18

2022

00

20

63

2094

00

00

33

2093

00

16

71

2212

00

10

83

2214

00

20

32

2216

00

13

10

2081

00

18

12

2078

00

03

47

2079

00

00

44

2076

00

18

03

2326

00

00

10

2327

00

12

46

2328

00

01

82

2329

00

28

31

2330

00

00

69

2427

00

13

24

2359

00

00

53

2425

00

19

09

2546

00

09

78

2545

00

00

10

2548

00

08

10

2553

00

11

24

2623

00

00

10

2555

00

13

95

2620

00

18

12

2624

00

09

87

2621

00

00

50

2636

00

00

81

2638

00

00

80

2641

00

05

52

2618

00

07

91

2642

00

11

08

2644

00

29

28

2646

00

00

27

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

129

1

2

3

4

5

6

Sahayal

2651

00

25

47

2648

00

04

22

2650

00

04

45

22.

Mugriha

494

00

01

77

645

00

27

60

694

00

03

98

642

00

06

42

641

00

00

89

503

00

13

57

637

00

00

46

636

00

14

00

663

00

00

10

635

00

03

27

664

00

00

14

633

00

10

53

632

00

00

10

631

00

08

27

667

00

08

30

668

00

01

79

669

00

10

93

701

00

08

99

671

00

05

70

672

00

12

20

673

00

10

56

674

00

00

20

699

00

00

36

697

00

11

22

698

00

11

62

692

00

04

04

690

00

04

37

689

00

01

39

684

00

07

13

683

00

12

13

682

00

01

51

607

00

01

44

686

00

18

35

606

00

00

82

583

00

01

26

23.

Belhupur

159

00

46

73

158

00

21

20

155

00

34

33

128

00

08

79

130

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

1

2

3

4

5

6

Belhupur

127

00

12

97

122

00

03

16

126

00

04

03

124

00

05

98

125

00

01

23

24.

Navi Mohan

473

00

05

68

471

00

00

53

472

00

11

35

474

00

09

52

463

00

26

09

498

00

09

83

497

00

00

18

517

00

38

15

366

00

00

51

362

00

14

26

364

00

00

20

365

00

20

89

551

00

08

03

610

00

02

67

609

00

09

38

604

00

08

78

563

00

03

01

601

00

01

90

600

00

11

46

601

00

00

13

597

00

11

24

567

00

00

35

596

00

10

34

595

00

13

77

594

00

13

66

593

00

04

02

591

00

00

10

590

00

05

10

587

00

00

10

581

00

00

65

582

00

01

58

588

00

06

03

583

00

00

66

584

00

02

82

577

00

00

19

578

00

15

54

25.

Sikhoo

187

00

00

26

190

00

07

34

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

131

1

2

3

4

5

6

Sikhoo

192

00

24

39

192/271

00

00

10

228

00

05

51

226

00

01

03

225

00

19

22

224

00

00

10

26.

Divari

488

00

13

88

487

00

11

53

486

00

00

10

519

00

10

56

521

00

09

41

520

00

00

42

474

00

10

67

473

00

08

82

470

00

02

22

469

00

04

25

468

00

04

37

467

00

10

14

466

00

06

33

465

00

01

96

444

00

00

41

437

00

04

11

438

00

16

49

428

00

09

13

426

00

09

01

420

00

11

88

412

00

10

90

411

00

04

41

410

00

01

52

409

00

06

01

408

00

00

10

[F. No. R-11025(11)20/2018-OR-I/E-27595]

NOAS KINDO, Under Secy.

नई द ली, 28 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 18

18

18

18.—कD(ीय सरकार को ऐसा तीत होता है क लोक िहत मD यह आवCयक है क आं} देश राsय मD

पेjोिलयम उIपाद के प+रवहन के िलए पारादीप- हैदराबाद पाइपलाइन प+रयोजना के Gया'वयन हेतु इंिडयन ऑयल

कॉपuरेशन िलिमटेड ारा पाइपलाइन िबछाई जानी चािहए;

132

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

और कD(ीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन िबछाने के योजन के िलए यह आवCयक तीत होता है क ऐसी भूमी मD जो इस से

उपाब अनुसूची मD वQणत है, और िजसमD उ पाइपलाइन िबछाई जाने का Aताव है, उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न कया

जाए;

अतः अब, के'(ीय सरकार, पेjोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइ'स (भूिम मD उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न) अिधिनयम 1962

(1962 का 50) क धारा 3 क उपधारा (1) ारा द शिय का योग करते %ए उस भूिम मD उपयोग के अिधकार का

अज-न करने के अपने आशय क घोषणा करती है;

कोई भी cि, जो उ अनुसूची मD वQणत भूिम मD िहतब है, उस तारीख से, िजसको इस अिधसूचना मD यु भारत के

राजपH क ितयाँ साधारण जनता को उपलgध करा दी जाती ह , इ~स (21) दन के भीतर, भूिम के नीचे पाइपलाइन

िबछाए जाने के िलए उसमD उपयोग के अिधकार के संब'ध मD ?ी एम. आर. आर. शेषु, स[म ािधकारी (आं} देश), इंिडयन

ऑयल कॉपuरेशन िलिमटेड (पाइपलाइ'स भाग), पारादीप-हैदराबाद पाइपलाइन प+रयोजना, चौथी मंिजल, एल.आई.सी.

एनेWसी भवन, िथ~ना (डायमंड पाक-) रोड़, आर.टी.सी. कॉ पलेWस के पास, िवशाखापटनम - 530004, आं} देश राsय को

िलिखत \प से आ[ेप भेज सकेगा।

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

िजला : Gीकाकुलम

िजला : Gीकाकुलम

िजला : Gीकाकुलम

िजला : Gीकाकुलम

रा,य : आंH &देश

रा,य : आंH &देश

रा,य : आंH &देश

रा,य : आंH &देश

मंडल का नाम

मंडल का नाम

मंडल का नाम

मंडल का नाम

Iाम का नाम

Iाम का नाम

Iाम का नाम

Iाम का नाम

सव

सव

सव

सव

नJबर

नJबर

नJबर

नJबर

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

हे3टेयर

हे3टेयर

हे3टेयर

हे3टेयर

एयर

एयर

एयर

एयर

वग5मीटर

वग5मीटर

वग5मीटर

वग5मीटर

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(6)

(6)

(6)

(6)

नंदगाम

नQसपुरम

92

00

00

96

89/3

00

04

91

89/9

00

00

56

76/1

00

03

24

76/4

00

00

48

78/6

00

01

12

78/7

00

00

65

110/6

00

00

10

110/7

00

04

70

110/14

00

01

74

111/7

00

00

72

111/10

00

02

20

111/11

00

00

08

112/15

00

01

92

112/16

00

00

27

114/3

00

00

30

110/12

00

02

13

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

133

नंदगाम

नQसपुरम

110/15

00

01

62

नंदगाम

कोमाटूz

139/2

00

03

86

139/4

00

00

78

164/8

00

00

03

164/9

00

00

11

टे~िल

रािववलासा

179/5

00

02

61

179/2

00

00

35

178/15

00

01

52

178/20

00

02

48

178/18

00

04

37

171/9

00

00

48

171/6

00

01

74

171/5

00

01

22

171/4

00

01

98

172/16

00

00

71

172/13

00

01

03

172/11

00

02

85

172/4

00

01

32

173/11

00

04

96

173/12

00

00

16

173/6

00

02

91

173/15

00

02

94

174/4

00

01

12

174/2

00

01

33

174/6

00

00

04

160/4

00

01

10

160/5

00

03

94

159/1

00

03

82

159/3

00

01

05

158/10

00

00

43

134

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

टेW किल

रािववलासा

158/1

00

08

46

158/9

00

04

04

156/4

00

00

83

145/2

00

02

57

147/5

00

03

83

147/4

00

02

95

147/3

00

00

11

29/1

00

00

06

28/20

00

00

19

28/22

00

00

08

179/6

00

05

87

174/11

00

03

85

171/8

00

02

84

179/4

00

00

21

प दूz

बोƒेपिल

236

00

00

68

239/1

00

00

47

239/2

00

01

42

239/3

00

01

05

239/4

00

00

58

239/5

00

01

88

239/6

00

01

10

240/19

00

00

51

240/20

00

00

71

240/21

00

00

71

240/22

00

00

82

240/23

00

07

09

241/30

00

02

51

241/32

00

03

93

241/36

00

00

94

249/2

00

01

34

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

135

प दूz

बोƒेपिल

249/6

00

02

17

249/8

00

01

39

249/9

00

00

82

247/12

00

00

44

247/7

00

00

25

246/18

00

00

15

246/19

00

00

47

246/20

00

00

24

246/16

00

01

93

240/16

00

00

81

240/1

00

00

21

249/4

00

01

02

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)252/2017-ओआर-I/ई-21033]

नोवस क' डो, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 28th December, 2018

S.O. 18.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for the

transportation of petroleum products in the state of Andhra Pradesh a pipeline should be laid for implementing Paradip-

Hyderabad Pipeline Project under Paradip-Hyderabad Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

And whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to

acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the

Schedule annexed to this notification;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub Section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals

Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its

intention to acquire the right of user therein;

Any person who is interested in the land described in the said schedule, may submit objection in writing to Shri. M. R. R.

Seshu, Competent Authority (Andhra Pradesh) Indian Oil Corporation Limited (Pipelines Division), Paradip Hyderabad

Pipeline Project, 4th floor, LIC Annexe Building, Thikkana (Diamond Park) Road, Near RTC Complex, Visakhapatnam -

530004 within twenty one (21) days from the date on which the copies of this notification issued under Sub-section (1)

of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India, are made available to the general public.

SCHEDULE

DISTRICT : SRIKAKULAM STATE : ANDHRA PRADESH

MANDAL

VILLAGE

SURVEY

NO.

AREA

Hectare

Are

Sq. Mt.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

Nandigam

Narsipuram

92

00

00

96

89/3

00

04

91

89/9

00

00

56

76/1

00

03

24

76/4

00

00

48

78/6

00

01

12

136

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Nandigam

Narsipuram

78/7

00

00

65

110/6

00

00

10

110/7

00

04

70

110/14

00

01

74

111/7

00

00

72

111/10

00

02

20

111/11

00

00

08

112/15

00

01

92

112/16

00

00

27

114/3

00

00

30

110/12

00

02

13

110/15

00

01

62

Nandigam

Komaturu

139/2

00

03

86

139/4

00

00

78

164/8

00

00

03

164/9

00

00

11

Tekkali

Ravivalasa

179/5

00

02

61

179/2

00

00

35

178/15

00

01

52

178/20

00

02

48

178/18

00

04

37

171/9

00

00

48

171/6

00

01

74

171/5

00

01

22

171/4

00

01

98

172/16

00

00

71

172/13

00

01

03

172/11

00

02

85

172/4

00

01

32

173/11

00

04

96

173/12

00

00

16

173/6

00

02

91

173/15

00

02

94

174/4

00

01

12

174/2

00

01

33

174/6

00

00

04

160/4

00

01

10

160/5

00

03

94

159/1

00

03

82

159/3

00

01

05

158/10

00

00

43

158/1

00

08

46

158/9

00

04

04

156/4

00

00

83

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

137

Tekkali

Ravivalasa

145/2

00

02

57

147/5

00

03

83

147/4

00

02

95

147/3

00

00

11

29/1

00

00

06

28/20

00

00

19

28/22

00

00

08

179/6

00

05

87

174/11

00

03

85

171/8

00

02

84

179/4

00

00

21

Ponduru

Boddepalli

236

00

00

68

239/1

00

00

47

239/2

00

01

42

239/3

00

01

05

239/4

00

00

58

239/5

00

01

88

239/6

00

01

10

240/19

00

00

51

240/20

00

00

71

240/21

00

00

71

240/22

00

00

82

240/23

00

07

09

241/30

00

02

51

241/32

00

03

93

241/36

00

00

94

249/2

00

01

34

249/6

00

02

17

249/8

00

01

39

249/9

00

00

82

247/12

00

00

44

247/7

00

00

25

246/18

00

00

15

246/19

00

00

47

246/20

00

00

24

246/16

00

01

93

240/16

00

00

81

240/1

00

00

21

249/4

00

01

02

[F. No. R-11025(11)252/2017-OR-I/E-21033]

NOAS KINDO, Under Secy.

138

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नई द ली, 28 दस बर, 2018

का.आ.

का.आ.

का.आ.

का.आ. 19

19

19

19.—के'(ीय सरकार ने पेjोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइन (भूिम मD उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न)

अिधिनय मD, 1962 ( 1962-50) ( िजसे इसमD इसके पnात उ अिधिनयम कहा गया है) क धारा 3 उप धारा (1) के अधीन

जारी क गई, भारत सरकार के पेjोिलयम और ाकृितक गैस मंHालय क अिधसूचना िजसका काशन भारत के राजपH

सं>या 15 दनाक 15-21 अैल 2018 का.आ. 607 दनाक 10.04.2018 भाग II खंड 3 उपखंड (II) मD कया गया है। इस

अिधसूचना से सलंq अनुसूची मD िविन`द_ महाराr राsय क तहसील- जामखेड, िजला अहमदनगर क भूिम मD महाराr राsय

मD कोयली (गुजरात) से अहमदनगर एवं सोलापुर तक पेjोिलयम प+रवहन के िलए इंिडयन ऑइल कॉपuरेशन िलिमटेड ारा

Gयाि'वत कए जा रहे “कोयली-अहमदनगर-सोलापुर प+रयोजना” के स ब'ध मD पाइपलाइन िबछाने के योजन के िलए

उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न करने के िलए अपने आशय क घोषणा क थी :

और उ राजपH अिधसूचनाb क ितयाँ जनता को तारीख 13 िसत बर 2018 को उपलgध करा दी गई थ<।

और उ अिधिनयम क धारा 6 क उपधारा (1) के अनुसरण मD स[म ािधकारी ने के'(ीय सरकार को अपनी +रपोट- दे

दी है।

और के'(ीय सरकार ने उ +रपोट- पर िवचार करने के पnात् और यह समाधान हो जाने पर क उ भूिम पाइपलाइन

िबछाने के िलए अपेिछत है, उसमD उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न करने का िविनnय कया है:

अत: अब, के'(ीय सरकार उ अिधिनयम क धारा 6 क उपधारा (1) ारा पदत शिय का योग करते %ए! एतद

ारा घोषणा करती है क इस अिधसूचना से सलq अनुसूची मे िवन`दi ट भूिम मे पाइपलाइन िबछाने के उपयोग का अिधकार

अQजत कया जाए:

और क'(ीय सरकार उ अिधिनयम क धारा 6 क उपधारा (4) ारा पद शिय का योग करते %ए, यह िनदyश देती

है क उ भूिम मD उपयोग का अिधकार इस घोषणा के काशन क तारीख से के'(ीय सरकार मD िनिहत होने के बजाय सभी

िवलंगम से मु होकर इंिडयन ऑइल कॉपuरेशन िलिमटेड मD िनिहत होगा।

पेjोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइन अिधिनयम, 1962 क धारा 10 के अधीन कसी भी [ितपूQत के िलए इंिडयन

ऑइल कॉपuरेशन िलिमटेड पूण-तया उरदायी होगी और पाइपलाइन से सबिधत कसी भी मामले पर के'(ीय सरकार के

िव\ कोई वाद दावा या कानूनी काय-वाह< नही हो सकेगी।

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

तालुका

तालुका

तालुका

तालुका : : : : जामखेड़

जामखेड़

जामखेड़

जामखेड़

िजला

िजला

िजला

िजला : अहमदनगर

अहमदनगर

अहमदनगर

अहमदनगर

रा,य

रा,य

रा,य

रा,य : महारा-

महारा-

महारा-

महारा-

गांव का नाम

गांव का नाम

गांव का नाम

गांव का नाम

सव

सव

सव

सव नंनंनंनं.\/लॉक

/लॉक

/लॉक

/लॉक नंनंनंनं.

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

हेहेहेहे3 टे

3 टे

3 टे

3 टेयर

यर

यर

यर

आर

आर

आर

आर

वग5 मीटर

वग5 मीटर

वग5 मीटर

वग5 मीटर

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

जामखेड़

1033

00

18

76

1034

00

38

09

1037

00

08

35

1031

00

20

50

1030

00

11

12

1027

00

31

72

1026

00

17

80

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

139

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

जामखेड़

796

00

28

30

797

00

06

06

798

00

04

57

799

00

10

62

800

00

10

78

801

00

11

65

802

00

07

51

803

00

09

73

804

00

09

35

805

00

03

23

806

00

03

40

807

00

07

85

808

00

05

28

809

00

12

14

812

00

03

35

813

00

07

78

818

00

06

94

819

00

05

57

820

00

05

24

821

00

05

43

825

00

01

49

826

00

09

02

827

00

11

95

829

00

41

92

831

00

06

02

832

00

04

86

833

00

05

58

834

00

05

60

835

00

01

83

140

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

जामखेड़

836

00

01

79

837

00

00

20

838

00

01

21

839

00

02

01

840

00

00

97

841

00

02

34

843

00

24

17

711

00

39

40

694

00

13

26

693

00

15

01

692

00

12

09

691

00

28

59

690

00

02

41

688

00

32

25

673

00

36

80

672

00

25

10

670

00

10

53

669

00

11

33

667

00

11

46

558

00

39

13

262

00

24

36

258

00

00

20

554

00

10

21

555

00

06

74

556

00

08

21

473

00

24

90

470

00

13

83

466

00

13

32

459

00

14

50

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

141

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

जामखेड़

467

00

00

92

458

00

06

63

457

00

16

48

456

00

10

18

419

00

06

44

420

00

05

84

421

00

05

08

422

00

08

87

423

00

02

43

424

00

03

74

425

00

08

23

426

00

05

93

428

00

04

17

430

00

02

79

432

00

01

64

431

00

01

90

433

00

02

31

440

00

14

82

441

00

12

07

442

00

14

04

443

00

20

09

322

00

31

63

323

00

61

11

320

00

04

19

318

00

45

76

319

00

10

75

228

00

20

24

224

00

02

18

142

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

जमादारवाड़ी

179

00

34

80

180

00

05

58

181

00

03

76

182

00

26

95

09

00

14

59

10

00

17

98

11

00

29

77

12

00

35

38

13

00

27

14

15

00

43

30

18

00

05

41

19

00

27

19

23

00

13

45

25

00

11

80

26/1

00

15

62

33/1

00

09

33

34

00

09

09

35

00

11

42

36

00

13

71

37

00

21

04

47

00

00

13

38

00

04

05

46

00

93

93

42

00

15

68

43

00

00

08

56

00

07

28

काटेवाड़ी

182

00

30

82

183

00

13

04

184

00

13

30

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

143

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

काटेवाड़ी

195

00

57

02

196

00

22

09

137

00

20

23

215

00

12

11

216

00

14

67

217

00

13

75

219

00

07

56

218

00

11

68

235

00

47

58

233

00

17

48

232

00

47

78

259

00

24

53

260

00

28

88

264

00

22

25

261

00

06

88

263

00

03

08

सारोला

181

00

20

78

राजुरी

378

00

09

12

377

00

18

78

375

00

08

31

374

00

12

89

373

00

02

38

372

00

02

00

371

00

02

81

370

00

05

82

369

00

05

12

368

00

03

24

367

00

02

91

366

00

10

87

144

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

राजुरी

363

00

07

52

362

00

04

60

361

00

11

15

360

00

24

31

359

00

18

28

358

00

16

04

357

00

07

07

356

00

02

84

352

00

05

87

351

00

07

08

347

00

05

67

344

00

14

66

310

00

10

05

309

00

00

02

307

00

16

57

312

00

00

08

313

00

10

27

314

00

02

22

343

00

07

87

316

00

42

88

296

00

11

96

317

00

90

90

274

00

17

67

206

00

15

43

206

00

55

58

217

00

01

75

195

01

24

97

194

00

14

59

193

00

31

04

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

145

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

राजुरी

191

00

10

63

190

00

27

14

186

00

14

09

188

00

41

92

187

00

21

03

Kपपलगांव आलवा

419

00

09

06

420

00

08

92

421

00

13

15

422

00

08

13

423

00

30

05

424

00

15

06

425

00

16

99

427

00

37

15

428

00

22

46

429

00

14

48

430

00

06

21

नायगांव

682

00

23

46

681

00

14

15

आनंदवाडी

118

00

00

81

119

00

07

84

121

00

15

58

122

00

14

43

131

00

09

44

132

00

11

06

135

00

02

79

143

00

02

27

141

00

02

96

144

00

06

64

145

00

05

46

146

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

आनंदवाडी

142

00

02

96

147

00

18

76

148

00

00

48

166

00

07

57

161

00

12

80

81

00

06

82

80

00

07

50

79

00

05

16

78

00

05

04

61

00

10

70

62

00

07

05

67

00

14

33

34

00

07

05

35

00

06

39

36

00

17

94

64

00

24

95

68

00

07

05

60

00

03

49

46

00

09

65

45

00

31

09

47

00

03

32

09

00

25

39

02

00

30

06

03

00

00

06

08

00

37

69

05

00

25

18

बालग„हाण

46

00

15

11

47

00

44

91

51

00

75

10

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

147

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

बालग„हाण

52

00

15

65

53

00

21

25

54

00

17

74

56

00

00

08

55

00

36

43

68

00

18

65

67

00

12

87

72

00

07

29

73

00

01

95

66

00

28

84

65

00

20

06

64

00

27

16

96

00

41

10

95

00

09

27

101

00

67

52

खडा-

736

00

50

40

662

00

05

30

664

00

67

98

730

00

04

06

731

00

26

31

665

00

35

61

672

00

66

07

671

00

12

29

670

00

57

57

485

00

10

26

483

00

46

83

482

00

02

01

484

00

13

59

465

00

31

71

148

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

(5)

(5)

(5)

खडा-

467

00

11

12

468

00

00

14

466

00

13

09

385

00

04

77

367

00

42

58

386

00

05

86

366

00

19

10

365

00

23

21

351

00

07

42

352

00

16

82

347

00

97

95

348

00

30

54

234

00

56

43

241

00

20

44

255

00

66

85

257

00

13

88

260

00

32

83

266

00

24

01

268

00

18

72

267

00

12

57

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)6/2018-ओआर-I/ई-23678]

नोवस क' डो, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 28th December, 2018

S.O. 19.—Whereas by the notification of The Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural

Gas, Published in the Gazette No. 15 date 15-21 April 2018 S.O No. 607 date 10.04.2018 Part-II,Section-3,Sub-Section

(ii) 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), (Hereinafter referred to as the said Act) the Central Government declared its intention to

acquire the right of user in the land situated in Tehsil Jamkhed, District Ahmednagar in Maharashtra State, specified in

the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of petroleum from

Koyali in the State Gujrat to Solapur in the Maharashtra by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited for implementing the

‘’Koyali-Ahmednagar-Solapur Pipeline Project’’.

And whereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on 12 September

2018.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

149

And whereas the Competent Authority has under sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act, has submitted

his report 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 the 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 of the said land for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in

the Central Government, vests 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 pipeline.

SCHEDULE

Taluka : Jamkhed

District : Ahmednagar

State : Maharashtra

Name of Village

Survey No./ Block

No.

Area

Hectare

Are

Square Metre

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Jamkhed

1033

00

18

76

1034

00

38

09

1037

00

08

35

1031

00

20

50

1030

00

11

12

1027

00

31

72

1026

00

17

80

796

00

28

30

797

00

06

06

798

00

04

57

799

00

10

62

800

00

10

78

801

00

11

65

802

00

07

51

803

00

09

73

804

00

09

35

805

00

03

23

806

00

03

40

807

00

07

85

808

00

05

28

809

00

12

14

812

00

03

35

813

00

07

78

818

00

06

94

819

00

05

57

150

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Jamkhed

820

00

05

24

821

00

05

43

825

00

01

49

826

00

09

02

827

00

11

95

829

00

41

92

831

00

06

02

832

00

04

86

833

00

05

58

834

00

05

60

835

00

01

83

836

00

01

79

837

00

00

20

838

00

01

21

839

00

02

01

840

00

00

97

841

00

02

34

843

00

24

17

711

00

39

40

694

00

13

26

693

00

15

01

692

00

12

09

691

00

28

59

690

00

02

41

688

00

32

25

673

00

36

80

672

00

25

10

670

00

10

53

669

00

11

33

667

00

11

46

558

00

39

13

262

00

24

36

258

00

00

20

554

00

10

21

555

00

06

74

556

00

08

21

473

00

24

90

470

00

13

83

466

00

13

32

459

00

14

50

467

00

00

92

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

151

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Jamkhed

458

00

06

63

457

00

16

48

456

00

10

18

419

00

06

44

420

00

05

84

421

00

05

08

422

00

08

87

423

00

02

43

424

00

03

74

425

00

08

23

426

00

05

93

428

00

04

17

430

00

02

79

432

00

01

64

431

00

01

90

433

00

02

31

440

00

14

82

441

00

12

07

442

00

14

04

443

00

20

09

322

00

31

63

323

00

61

11

320

00

04

19

318

00

45

76

319

00

10

75

228

00

20

24

224

00

02

18

Jamadarwadi

179

00

34

80

180

00

05

58

181

00

03

76

182

00

26

95

09

00

14

59

10

00

17

98

11

00

29

77

12

00

35

38

13

00

27

14

15

00

43

30

18

00

05

41

19

00

27

19

23

00

13

45

25

00

11

80

152

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Jamadarwadi

26/1

00

15

62

33/1

00

09

33

34

00

09

09

35

00

11

42

36

00

13

71

37

00

21

04

47

00

00

13

38

00

04

05

46

00

93

93

42

00

15

68

43

00

00

08

56

00

07

28

Katewadi

182

00

30

82

183

00

13

04

184

00

13

30

195

00

57

02

196

00

22

09

137

00

20

23

215

00

12

11

216

00

14

67

217

00

13

75

219

00

07

56

218

00

11

68

235

00

47

58

233

00

17

48

232

00

47

78

259

00

24

53

260

00

28

88

264

00

22

25

261

00

06

88

263

00

03

08

Sarola

181

00

20

78

Rajuri

378

00

09

12

377

00

18

78

375

00

08

31

374

00

12

89

373

00

02

38

372

00

02

00

371

00

02

81

370

00

05

82

369

00

05

12

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

153

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Rajuri

368

00

03

24

367

00

02

91

366

00

10

87

363

00

07

52

362

00

04

60

361

00

11

15

360

00

24

31

359

00

18

28

358

00

16

04

357

00

07

07

356

00

02

84

352

00

05

87

351

00

07

08

347

00

05

67

344

00

14

66

310

00

10

05

309

00

00

02

307

00

16

57

312

00

00

08

313

00

10

27

314

00

02

22

343

00

07

87

316

00

42

88

296

00

11

96

317

00

90

90

274

00

17

67

206

00

15

43

206

00

55

58

217

00

01

75

195

01

24

97

194

00

14

59

193

00

31

04

191

00

10

63

190

00

27

14

186

00

14

09

188

00

41

92

187

00

21

03

Pimpalgaon Alwa

419

00

09

06

420

00

08

92

421

00

13

15

422

00

08

13

154

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Pimpalgaon Alwa

423

00

30

05

424

00

15

06

425

00

16

99

427

00

37

15

428

00

22

46

429

00

14

48

430

00

06

21

Naigaon

682

00

23

46

681

00

14

15

Anandwadi

118

00

00

81

119

00

07

84

121

00

15

58

122

00

14

43

131

00

09

44

132

00

11

06

135

00

02

79

143

00

02

27

141

00

02

96

144

00

06

64

145

00

05

46

142

00

02

96

147

00

18

76

148

00

00

48

166

00

07

57

161

00

12

80

81

00

06

82

80

00

07

50

79

00

05

16

78

00

05

04

61

00

10

70

62

00

07

05

67

00

14

33

34

00

07

05

35

00

06

39

36

00

17

94

64

00

24

95

68

00

07

05

60

00

03

49

46

00

09

65

45

00

31

09

47

00

03

32

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

155

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Anandwadi

09

00

25

39

02

00

30

06

03

00

00

06

08

00

37

69

05

00

25

18

Balgavhan

46

00

15

11

47

00

44

91

51

00

75

10

52

00

15

65

53

00

21

25

54

00

17

74

56

00

00

08

55

00

36

43

68

00

18

65

67

00

12

87

72

00

07

29

73

00

01

95

66

00

28

84

65

00

20

06

64

00

27

16

96

00

41

10

95

00

09

27

101

00

67

52

Kharda

736

00

50

40

662

00

05

30

664

00

67

98

730

00

04

06

731

00

26

31

665

00

35

61

672

00

66

07

671

00

12

29

670

00

57

57

485

00

10

26

483

00

46

83

482

00

02

01

484

00

13

59

465

00

31

71

467

00

11

12

468

00

00

14

466

00

13

09

385

00

04

77

156

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Kharda

367

00

42

58

386

00

05

86

366

00

19

10

365

00

23

21

351

00

07

42

352

00

16

82

347

00

97

95

348

00

30

54

234

00

56

43

241

00

20

44

255

00

66

85

257

00

13

88

260

00

32

83

266

00

24

01

268

00

18

72

267

00

12

57

[F. No. R-11025(11)6/2018-OR-I/E-23678]

NOAS KINDO, Under Secy.

ubZ fnYyh] 28 fnlEcj] 2018

dk-vk- 20-&dsUnzh; ljdkj us isVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbZu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e]

1962 ¼1962 dk 50½ ¼ftls blesa blds i'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 izkÑfrd xSl ea=ky; dh vf/klwpuk la[;k dk-vk- 1095 rkjh[k 17 tqykÃ] 2018 tks

Hkkjr ds jkti= Øekad 29] rkjh[k 22 tqykà & 28 tqykà 2018 esa izdkf'kr dh xbZ Fkh }kjk ml vf/klwpuk ls layXu

vuqlwph esa fofufnZ"V Hkwfe esa egkjk"Vª jkT; esa ftyk vkSjaxkckn esa rkYkqdk oStkiqj dks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj isVªksfy;e

ifjogu ds fy, bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZj'ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbZu 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/kfu;e dh izfr;ka turk dks rkjh[k 19 flrEcj] 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 dsUæh; ljdkj dks fjiksVZ dh gS (

vkSj dsUæh; ljdkj us] mä fjiksVZ ij fopkj djus ds i'pkr~ vkSj ;g lek/kku gks tkus ij fd mä Hkwfe ikbiykbZu fcNkus

ds fy, visf{kr gS] mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu djus dk fofu'p; fd;k gS (

vr% vc] dsUæh; 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 ikbiykbZu fcNkus ds fy, mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu

fd;k tk, (

vkSj 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 dsUæh; ljdkj esa fufgr gksus ds ctk,] lHkh foYyaxeksa ls

eqä gksdj bafM;u vkW;y dkWiksZjs'ku fyfeVsM esa fufgr gksxh A

isVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbZu 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 ikbiykbZu ls lEcfU/kr fdlh Hkh ekeys ij dsUæh; ljdkj ds fo#) dksbZ okn nkok ;k

dkuwuh dk;Zokgh ugha gks ldsxhA

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

157

vuqlwPkh

rglhy%&oStkiqj

ftyk%& vkSjaxkckn

jkT;%& egkjk"Vª

ekSts @xzke

losZ @ Cykd @ la-

¼IyksV la-½

lc&Mho&la-

{ks=Qy

gsDVj

vkj

oxZ ehVj

¼1½

¼2½

¼3½

¼4½

¼5½

¼6½

lqjkYkk

137

00

25

70

136

00

36

22

146

00

12

79

147

00

11

75

148

00

13

30

149

00

11

90

161

00

11

87

162

00

23

30

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)6/2018-ओआर-I/ई-23678]

नोवस क' डो, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 28th December, 2018

S. O. 20.—Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural

Gas vide S.O. No. 1095 dated the 17th July, 2018, 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), (hereinafter referred to as the said

Act), Published in the Gazette of India, No.29 dated 22 – 28 July, 2018 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

Koyali-Ahmednagar-Solapur Pipeline for the transportation of Petroleum Products in Aurangabad District in the State of

Maharashtra by Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public up to 19th September,

2018;

And whereas the competent authority has under sub-section (1) of Section 6 of 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 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.

158

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

SCHEDULE

Tehsil:- Vaijapur

District:- Aurangabad

State :- Maharashtra

Mouja / Village

Survey/Block No.

Sub-Div-No.

Area

Hectare

Are

Sq.mtr.

1

2

3

4

5

6

Surala

137

00

25

70

136

00

36

22

146

00

12

79

147

00

11

75

148

00

13

30

149

00

11

90

161

00

11

87

162

00

23

30

[F. No. R-11025(11)6/2018-OR-I/E-23678]

NOAS KINDO, Under Secy.

ubZ fnYyh] 28 fnlEcj] 2018

dk-vk- 21-&dsUnzh; ljdkj us isVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbZu ¼Hkwfe esa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk

vtZu½ vf/kfu;e] 1962 ¼1962 dk 50½ ¼ftls blesa blds i'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 izkÑfrd xSl ea=ky; dh

vf/klwpuk la[;k dk-vk- 2219 rkjh[k 14 flrEcj] 2017 tks Hkkjr ds jkti=] rkjh[k 17 flrEcj & 23

flrEcj 2017 esa izdkf’kr dh xbZ Fkh }kjk ml vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa fofufnZ"V Hkwfe esa egkjk"Vª

jkT; esa ftyk ukfld esa rkYkqdk ;soyk dks;yh & vgenuxj & lksykiqj isVªksfy;e ifjogu ds fy,

bafM;u vkW;y dkjiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM }kjk ikbiykbZu 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/kfu;e dh izfr;ka turk dks rkjh[k 4 Qjojh 2018 rd miyC/k djk dh xbZ Fkh (

vkSj l{ke izkf/kdkjh us mä vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6 dh mi&/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu dsUæh; ljdkj dks fjiksVZ dh

gS (

vkSj dsUæh; ljdkj us] mä fjiksVZ ij fopkj djus ds i'pkr~ vkSj ;g lek/kku gks tkus ij fd mä Hkwfe

ikbiykbZu fcNkus ds fy, visf{kr gS] mlesa mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu djus dk fofu’p; fd;k gS (

vr% vc] dsUæh; 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 ikbiykbZu fcNkus ds

fy, mi;ksx ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu fd;k tk, (

vkSj 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 dsUæh; ljdkj esa fufgr

gksus ds ctk,] lHkh foYyaxeksa ls eqä gksdj bafM;u vkW;y dksiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM esa fufgr gksxh A

isVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbZu vf/kfu;e] 1962 dh /kkjk 10 ds v/khu fdlh Hkh {kfriwfrZ ds fy, bafM;u

vkW;y dksiksZjs’ku fyfeVsM iw.kZr;k mÙkjnk;h gksxh vkSj ikbiykbZu ls lEcfU/kr fdlh Hkh ekeys ij dsUæh;

ljdkj ds fo#) dksbZ okn nkok ;k dkuwuh dk;Zokgh ugha gks ldsxhA

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

159

vuqlwPkh

rglhy%&;soyk

ftyk%& ukfld

jkT;%& egkjk"Vª

ekStk @xzke

losZ @ Cykd @ la-

¼लॉट la-½

lc&Mho&la-

{ks=Qy

हेटर

vkj

oxZ ehVj

¼1½

¼2½

¼3½

¼4½

¼5½

¼6½

dqlqj

10

00

39

50

11@1

00

09

58

11@2

00

09

43

12

00

11

92

13

00

11

45

14@1

00

39

10

25@1

00

08

94

25@2

00

02

12

24

00

07

13

34

00

09

63

39

00

01

78

38

00

10

02

35

00

05

14

37

00

22

78

51@2

00

10

40

50

00

12

16

49

00

21

24

48

00

20

50

67

00

18

49

68

00

31

48

69

00

14

51

64

00

15

52

63

00

00

65

102@1

00

09

02

103

00

24

14

111

00

25

86

110

00

35

64

142@2

00

03

76

143

00

07

83

144

00

10

91

145

00

43

90

160

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

¼1½

¼2½

¼3½

¼4½

¼5½

¼6½

146

00

14

38

147

00

06

67

148

00

03

44

149

00

07

36

151

00

02

97

152

00

02

10

153

00

02

58

154

00

00

80

155

00

00

51

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)6/2018-ओआर-I/ई-23678]

नोवस क' डो, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 28th December, 2018

S. O. 21.—Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural

Gas vide S.O. No. 2219 dated the 14th September, 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), (hereinafter referred to as the said

Act), Published in the Gazette of India dated the 17th September-23rd September 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 Koyali-Ahmednagar-Solapur Pipeline for the transportation of Petroleum Products in Taluka Yeola in Nashik

District in the State of Maharashtra by Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public up to 4th February 2018;

And whereas the competent authority has under sub-section (1) of Section 6 of 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 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

Tehsil:- Yeola

District:- Nashik

State :- Maharashtra

Mouja / Village

Survey/Block No.

Sub-Div-No.

Area

Hectare

Are

Sq.mtr.

1

2

3

4

5

6

Kusur

10

00

39

50

11/1

00

09

58

11/2

00

09

43

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

161

1

2

3

4

5

6

12

00

11

92

13

00

11

45

14/1

00

39

10

25/1

00

08

94

25/2

00

02

12

24

00

07

13

34

00

09

63

39

00

01

78

38

00

10

02

35

00

05

14

37

00

22

78

51/2

00

10

40

50

00

12

16

49

00

21

24

48

00

20

50

67

00

18

49

68

00

31

48

69

00

14

51

64

00

15

52

63

00

00

65

102/1

00

09

02

103

00

24

14

111

00

25

86

110

00

35

64

142/2

00

03

76

143

00

07

83

144

00

10

91

145

00

43

90

146

00

14

38

147

00

06

67

148

00

03

44

149

00

07

36

151

00

02

97

152

00

02

10

153

00

02

58

154

00

00

80

155

00

00

51

[F. No. R-11025(11)6/2018-OR-I/E-23678]

NOAS KINDO, Under Secy.

162

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नई द ली, 28 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ. 22

22

22

22.—कD(ीय सरकार को ऐसा तीत होता है क लोक िहत मD यह आवCयक है क आं} देश राsय मD

पेjोिलयम उIपाद के प+रवहन के िलए पारादीप- हैदराबाद पाइपलाइन प+रयोजना के Gया'वयन हेतु इंिडयन ऑयल

कॉपuरेशन िलिमटेड ारा पाइपलाइन िबछाई जानी चािहए;

और कD(ीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन िबछाने के योजन के िलए यह आवCयक तीत होता है क ऐसी भूिम मD जो इस से

ऊपाब अनुसूची मD वQणत है, और िजसमD उ पाइपलाइन िबछाई जाने का Aताव है, उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न कया

जाए;

अतः अब, के'(ीय सरकार, पेjोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइ'स (भूिम मD उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न) अिधिनयम 1962

(1962 का 50) क धारा 3 क उपधारा (1) ारा द शिय का योग करते %ए उस भूिम मD उपयोग के अिधकार का

अज-न करने के अपने आशय क घोषणा करती है;

कोई भी cि, जो उ अनुसूची मD वQणत भूिम मD िहतब है, उस तारीख से, िजसको इस अिधसूचना मD यु भारत के

राजपH क ितयाँ साधारण जनता को उपलgध करा दी जाती ह , इ~स (21) दन के भीतर, भूिम के नीचे पाइपलाइन

िबछाए जाने के िलए उसमD उपयोग के अिधकार के संब'ध मD ?ी एम. आर. आर. शेषु, स[म ािधकारी (आं} देश), इंिडयन

ऑयल कॉपuरेशन िलिमटेड (पाइपलाइ'स भाग), पारादीप-हैदराबाद पाइपलाइन प+रयोजना, चौथी मंिजल, एल.आई.सी.

एनेWसी भवन, िथ~ना (डायमंड पाक-) रोड़, आर.टी.सी. कॉ पलेWस के पास, िवशाखापटनम - 530004, आं} देश राsय को

िलिखत \प से आ[ेप भेज सकेगा।

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

िजला : Gीकाकुलम रा,य : आँH &देश

िजला : Gीकाकुलम रा,य : आँH &देश

िजला : Gीकाकुलम रा,य : आँH &देश

िजला : Gीकाकुलम रा,य : आँH &देश

मंडल का नाम

मंडल का नाम

मंडल का नाम

मंडल का नाम

Iाम का नाम

Iाम का नाम

Iाम का नाम

Iाम का नाम

सव

सव

सव

सव

नJबर

नJबर

नJबर

नJबर

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

हे3टेयर

हे3टेयर

हे3टेयर

हे3टेयर

एयर

एयर

एयर

एयर

वग5मीटर

वग5मीटर

वग5मीटर

वग5मीटर

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

ीकाकुलम

नैरा

234/3

00

01

00

234/2

00

00

71

234/4

00

00

09

233/18

00

01

93

233/20

00

02

31

233/19

00

00

55

233/4

00

01

30

233/3

00

00

15

आमुदालावलासा

दूिस

54/5

00

02

09

54/8

00

02

19

55/3

00

00

75

55/4

00

00

11

55/6

00

00

19

54/4

00

02

84

54/10

00

00

41

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)252/2017-ओआर-I/ई-21033]

नोवस क' डो, अवर सिचव

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

163

New Delhi, the 28th December, 2018

S.O. 22.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for the

transportation of petroleum products in the state of Andhra Pradesh a pipeline should be laid for implementing Paradip-

Hyderabad Pipeline Project under Paradip-Hyderabad Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

And whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to

acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the

Schedule annexed to this notification;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub Section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals

Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its

intention to acquire the right of user therein;

Any person who is interested in the land described in the said schedule, may submit objection in writing to Shri. M. R. R.

Seshu, Competent Authority (Andhra Pradesh) Indian Oil Corporation Limited (Pipelines Division), Paradip Hyderabad

Pipeline Project, 4th floor, LIC Annexe Building, Thikkana (Diamond Park) Road, Near RTC Complex, Visakhapatnam -

530004 within twenty one (21) days from the date on which the copies of this notification issued under Sub-section (1)

of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India, are made available to the general public.

SCHEDULE

DISTRICT : SRIKAKULAM STATE : ANDHRA PRADESH

MANDAL

VILLAGE

SURVEY No.

AREA

Hectare

Are

Sq. Mt.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

SRIKAKULAM

NAIRA

234/3

00

01

00

234/2

00

00

71

234/4

00

00

09

233/18

00

01

93

233/20

00

02

31

233/19

00

00

55

233/4

00

01

30

233/3

00

00

15

AMUDALAVALASA

DUSI

54/5

00

02

09

54/8

00

02

19

55/3

00

00

75

55/4

00

00

11

55/6

00

00

19

54/4

00

02

84

54/10

00

00

41

[F. No. R-11025(11)252/2017-OR-I/E-21033]

NOAS KINDO, Under Secy.

नई द ली, 28 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ. 23

23

23

23.—कD(ीय सरकार को ऐसा तीत होता है क लोक िहत मD यह आवCयक है क आं} देश राsय मD

पेjोिलयम उIपाद के प+रवहन के िलए पारादीप- हैदराबाद पाइपलाइन प+रयोजना के Gया'वयन हेतु इंिडयन ऑयल

कॉपuरेशन िलिमटेड ारा पाइपलाइन िबछाई जानी चािहए;

164

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

और कD(ीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन िबछाने के योजन के िलए यह आवCयक तीत होता है क ऐसी भूिम मD जो इस से

ऊपाब अनुसूची मD वQणत है, और िजसमD उ पाइपलाइन िबछाई जाने का Aताव है, उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न कया

जाए;

अतः अब, के'(ीय सरकार, पेjोिलयम और खिनज पाइपलाइ'स (भूिम मD उपयोग के अिधकार का अज-न) अिधिनयम 1962

(1962 का 50) क धारा 3 क उपधारा (1) ारा द शिय का योग करते %ए उस भूिम मD उपयोग के अिधकार का

अज-न करने के अपने आशय क घोषणा करती है;

कोई भी cि, जो उ अनुसूची मD वQणत भूिम मD िहतब है, उस तारीख से, िजसको इस अिधसूचना मD यु भारत के

राजपH क ितयाँ साधारण जनता को उपलgध करा दी जाती ह , इ~स (21) दन के भीतर, भूिम के नीचे पाइपलाइन

िबछाए जाने के िलए उसमD उपयोग के अिधकार के संब'ध मD ?ी एम. आर. आर. शेषु, स[म ािधकारी (आं} देश), इंिडयन

ऑयल कॉपuरेशन िलिमटेड (पाइपलाइ'स भाग), पारादीप-हैदराबाद पाइपलाइन प+रयोजना, चौथी मंिजल, एल.आई.सी.

एनेWसी भवन, िथ~ना (डायमंड पाक-) रोड़, आर.टी.सी. कॉ पलेWस के पास, िवशाखापटनम - 530004, आं} देश राsय को

िलिखत \प से आ[ेप भेज सकेगा।

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

अनुसूची

िजला : Gीकाकुलम रा,य :

िजला : Gीकाकुलम रा,य :

िजला : Gीकाकुलम रा,य :

िजला : Gीकाकुलम रा,य : आं

आं

आं

आंH &देश

H &देश

H &देश

H &देश

मंडल का नाम

मंडल का नाम

मंडल का नाम

मंडल का नाम

Iाम का नाम

Iाम का नाम

Iाम का नाम

Iाम का नाम

सव

सव

सव

सव

नJबर

नJबर

नJबर

नJबर

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

ेफल

हे3टेयर

हे3टेयर

हे3टेयर

हे3टेयर

एयर

एयर

एयर

एयर

वग5मीटर

वग5मीटर

वग5मीटर

वग5मीटर

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

5)

5)

5)

(6)

(6)

(6)

(6)

संताबो मािल

अ+रकावलासा

83/3

00

01

51

81/2C

00

04

72

80/4

00

00

35

80/1

00

00

47

80/7

00

00

94

67/13

00

01

86

67/11

00

00

05

68/4

00

00

47

69/2

00

04

50

70/14

00

03

97

70/5

00

00

10

70/4

00

00

30

43/7A

00

00

11

43/4

00

01

27

43/1

00

01

25

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

165

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

5)

5)

5)

(6)

(6)

(6)

(6)

संताबो मािल

अ+रकावलासा

30/9D

00

01

58

30/7

00

01

00

30/5

00

01

88

29/3

00

00

39

16/8

00

00

72

16/7

00

00

86

16/9

00

00

73

16/5

00

01

80

5/6

00

00

48

5/4

00

00

68

5/3

00

00

11

16/13

00

09

21

17/7P

00

01

22

16/14

00

02

23

83/4

00

16

19

नरासdापेटा

लुकालाम

290/6

00

03

89

290/5

00

00

16

288/9

00

00

12

288/3

00

00

45

286/13

00

02

34

326/2

00

01

16

326/1

00

01

15

329/2

00

02

17

329/3

00

03

08

329/4

00

05

53

343/10

00

02

54

166

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(4)

(5)

5)

5)

5)

(6)

(6)

(6)

(6)

नरासdापेटा

लुकालाम

343/12

00

01

03

343/6

00

00

64

344/3

00

00

24

352/18

00

00

21

352/17

00

00

15

353/18

00

02

27

353/16

00

00

60

353/17

00

00

80

355/25

00

00

32

355/24

00

00

33

355/16

00

01

40

344/1

00

02

23

343/5

00

02

03

355/18

00

00

41

[फा. सं. आर-11025(11)252/2017-ओआर-I/ई-21033]

नोवस क' डो, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 28th December, 2018

S.O. 23.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for the

transportation of petroleum products in the state of Andhra Pradesh a pipeline should be laid for implementing Paradip-

Hyderabad Pipeline Project under Paradip-Hyderabad Pipeline by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

And whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to

acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the

Schedule annexed to this notification;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub Section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals

Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its

intention to acquire the right of user therein;

Any person who is interested in the land described in the said schedule, may submit objection in writing to Shri. M. R. R.

Seshu, Competent Authority (Andhra Pradesh) Indian Oil Corporation Limited (Pipelines Division), Paradip Hyderabad

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

167

Pipeline Project, 4th floor, LIC Annexe Building, Thikkana (Diamond Park) Road, Near RTC Complex, Visakhapatnam -

530004 within twenty one (21) days from the date on which the copies of this notification issued under Sub-section (1)

of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India, are made available to the general public.

SCHEDULE

DISTRICT : SRIKAKULAM STATE : ANDHRA PRADESH

MANDAL

VILLAGE

SURVEY No.

AREA

Hectare

Are

Sq. Mt.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

Santa Bommali

Arikavalasa

83/3

00

01

51

81/2C

00

04

72

80/4

00

00

35

80/1

00

00

47

80/7

00

00

94

67/13

00

01

86

67/11

00

00

05

68/4

00

00

47

69/2

00

04

50

70/14

00

03

97

70/5

00

00

10

70/4

00

00

30

43/7A

00

00

11

43/4

00

01

27

43/1

00

01

25

30/9D

00

01

58

30/7

00

01

00

30/5

00

01

88

29/3

00

00

39

16/8

00

00

72

16/7

00

00

86

16/9

00

00

73

16/5

00

01

80

5/6

00

00

48

5/4

00

00

68

5/3

00

00

11

168

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

Santa Bommali

Arikavalasa

16/13

00

09

21

17/7P

00

01

22

16/14

00

02

23

83/4

00

16

19

Narasannapeta

Lukalam

290/6

00

03

89

290/5

00

00

16

288/9

00

00

12

288/3

00

00

45

286/13

00

02

34

326/2

00

01

16

326/1

00

01

15

329/2

00

02

17

329/3

00

03

08

329/4

00

05

53

343/10

00

02

54

343/12

00

01

03

343/6

00

00

64

344/3

00

00

24

352/18

00

00

21

352/17

00

00

15

353/18

00

02

27

353/16

00

00

60

353/17

00

00

80

355/25

00

00

32

355/24

00

00

33

355/16

00

01

40

344/1

00

02

23

343/5

00

02

03

355/18

00

00

41

[F. No. R-11025(11)252/2017-OR-I/E-21033]

NOAS KINDO, Under Secy.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

169

म एवं रोजगार मं ालय

म एवं रोजगार मं ालय

म एवं रोजगार मं ालय

म एवं रोजगार मं ालय

नई दली, 18 दस बर, 2018

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ. 24

24

24

24.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस उप महा$बंधक, & टेट ब(क ऑफ इंिडया नई द ली और अ य एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2

और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म

यायालय, नई दली -1 के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 213/2018) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को

29/11/2018 को $ा; <ए थे ।

[सं. एल-12011/05/2018-आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2018

S.O. 24.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 213/2018) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum-Labour Court-1,

New Delhi, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Deputy General

Manager, State Bank of India New Delhi, and others, and their workmen which were received by the Central

Government on 29.11.2018.

[No. L-12011/05/2018-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

BEFORE PRESIDING OFFICER: CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL-TRIBUNAL-CUM LABOUR

COURT No.1: ROOM No.511, DWARKA COURT COMPLEX, SECTOR 10, DWARKA, DELHI – 110 075

ID No. 213/2018

Shri Kanchan Walia,

B-82, 1st Floor, Ganesh Nagar,

Pandav Nagar Complex,

Delhi – 110 092

…Workman

Versus

1. The Deputy General Manager,

State Bank of India,

DAO -1, 1st Floor,

Delhi Administrative Office-1,

11 Parliament Street,

New Delhi – 110001

2. The Regional Manager,

State Bank of India,

RBO-3, 3rd Floor,

Block A, Delhi Zonal Office,

11 Parliament Street,

New Delhi – 110 001

…Management

170

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

AWARD

In the present case, a reference was received vide letter No.L-12011/05/2018-IR(B-I) dated 10.07.2018 under

clause (d) of sub-section (1) and Section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the Act) for

adjudication of an industrial disputes, terms of which are as under:

“Whether the action of the management of SBI, regarding punishment of ‘removal from service’ awarded on

Smt. Kanchan Walia, Special Assistant, State Bank of India, Ghonda Branch, Delhi is just, fair and proper? If

not, whether she is entitled for reinstatement with back wages and continuity of service ? ’’

2.

In the reference order, the appropriate Government commanded the party/ies raising the dispute to file statement

of claim, complete with relevant documents, list of reliance and witnesses with this Tribunal within 15 days of receipt of

the reference order and to forward a copy of such statement of claim to the opposite parties involved in the dispute.

Despite directions so given, Smt. Kanchan Walia, the workman, opted not to file her claim statement with the Tribunal.

3.

Further, on receipt of the above reference, notice was also sent to the workman as well as the management.

Neither the postal article, referred above, was received back undelivered nor was it observed by the Tribunal that postal

services remained affected during the period, referred above. Therefore, every presumption lies in favour of the fact that

the above notice was served upon the workman. Despite service of the notice, the workman opted to abstain from the

proceedings. No claim statement was filed on her behalf. Thus, it is clear that the workman is not interested in

adjudication of the reference on merits.

4.

Since the workman has neither put in her appearance nor has she led any evidence so as to prove her cause

against the management, as such, this Tribunal is left with no choice, except to pass a ‘No Dispute/Claim’ award.

However, it will not debar the claimant from seeking relief afresh as there is no adjudication of the reference on merits.

An award is, accordingly, passed. Let this award be sent to the appropriate Government, as required under Section 17 of

the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for publication.

Dated : November 28, 2018

A.C. DOGRA, Presiding Officer

नई द ली, 18 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 25

25

25

25.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस महािनदेशक, सीपीड>यूडी काया लय नई दली, और अय एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और

उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय,

नई दली -1 के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 122/2013) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 17.12.18 को $ा; <ए थे ।

[सं. एल-42011/85/2013-आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2018

S.O. 25.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.122/2013) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court -1,

New Delhi as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Director General,

CPWD Office New Delhi , & Others, and their workmen which were received by the Central Government on 17.12.18.

[No. L-42011/85/2013-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

171

ANNEXURE

BEFORE PRESIDING OFFICER: CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR

COURT No. 1: ROOM No. 511, DWARKA COURT COMPLEX, SECTOR 10, DWARKA, DELHI – 110 075

ID No.122/2013

Smt. Tara Devi W/o Late Shri Prem Nath Manjhi, through

All India Central PWD (MRM) Karamchari Sangathan (Regd.),

House No.4823, Gali No.13,

Balbir Nagar Extension, Shahdara,

Delhi – 110 032

…Workman

Versus

The Director General (Works),

Central Public Works Department,

Nirman Bhawan,

New Delhi – 110 001

The Executive Engineer,

CD – IV, CPWD, IARI, Pusa,

New Delhi

…Management

AWARD

A reference was received from Ministry of Labour and Employment vide Order No.L-42011/85/2013-IR(DU)

dated 04.09.2013/06.09.2013 under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947(in short the Act) for adjudication of an industrial dispute, terms of which are as under:

‘Whether the demand of the union to regularize the services of the deceased workman late Shri Prem Nath

Manjhi from the same date from which his juniors have been granted regularization and release of consequential

benefits including, pension and other retirement benefits as per the rules applicable to regular workmen is legal

and unjustified? To what relief the widow/legal heir of the deceased workman are entitled to and what

directions are necessary in this respect?’

2.

Claim statement was filed by Ms. Tara Devi, W/o late Shri Prem Nath Manjhi (in short the claimant ) wherein it

is averred that late Shri Prem Nath Manjhi (in short the late workman) was initially appointed as beldar on 16.08.1988 on

muster roll. He expired on 27.04.2008 after have put in 19 years and 8 months of regular service on muster roll.

Management had granted temporary status to the late workman with effect from 01.09.1993. As per the temporary status

scheme 50% service on muster roll is to be counted for pensionary benefits after regularization. As per the provisions of

CPWD manual and scheme of temporary status, the late workman was entitled for regularization of service after

completion of 2 years continuous service from date of his initial date of appointment on hand receipt. In spite of having

sufficient sanctioned vacant posts of beldars during the service of the late claimant, the late workman was not regularized

against the said post though juniors to him were regularized with effect from 27.11.2001 and 05.08.2002. Services of the

claimant were regularized on 11.12.2006 under one time relaxation scheme framed by the Department and which was

available to those workmen who have completed more than 10 years of regular service in the Department on the

directions of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. Though the management has made payment of gratuity to the wife of the

late workman on account of his death yet she has not been granted pensionary benefits. Denial of regularization to the

late workman from the date when junior to him were regularized, amounts to unfair labour practice and discrimination.

The late workman was a member of the Sangathan and the claimant, his widow, has consented for taking up the case of

her late husband. Finally, it has been prayed that the late workman may be regularized from the date when his juniors

were regularized and for grant of terminal and pensionary benefits to the claimant.

3.

Claim was demurred by the management by taking various preliminary objections, inter alia of the absence of

an industrial dispute, concealment of material facts etc. On merits, it has been stated that the juniors to the late

workman, i.e. Shri Randhir Singh, Shri Ram Prasad Tiwari and Shri Kalu Ram were regularized as per directions of

CAT, Principal bench, New Delhi. The management has denied the other material averments contained in the statement

of claim. Finally, it has been prayed that the claim may be dismissed.

4.

Against this factual background, my learned predecessor on the basis of pleadings of the parties, vide order

dated 16.01.2014, noted that no other issue than the one referred or adjudication by the appropriate Government is made

out. Thereafter, the case was listed for evidence of the claimant. The claimant, in order to prove her case against the

management, examined herself as WW1 and tendered in evidence her affidavit Ex.WW1/A. She also relied on

documents Ex.WW1/1 to Ex.WW1/5. However, during the course of her cross examination, settlement was tried

between the parties and finally it was stated by the management that a new order of DOPT regarding grant of pension has

been issued and the case of the claimant was stated to be duly covered under said order. Management also filed letter

dated 06.01.2018 Ex.P-1 wherein the services of the claimant have been regularized on the post of beldar in the scale of

Rs.5200-20200 with grade pay of Rs.1600 with effect from 11.12.2006 vide order No.10 (1)/SE-Circle (Electrical)/E-

4/2038 dated 11.09.2011.

172

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

5.

As a sequel to my above discussions, it is held that since late Shri Prem Nath Manjhi has been regularized with

effect from 11.12.2006, the same date from which his juniors have been granted regularization, management is directed

to release all consequential benefits including pension and other retirement benefits as per the rules applicable to regular

workmen. It is further held that widow/legal heirs is entitled to the retirral benefits of her late husband. An award is

accordingly passed. Let this award be sent to the appropriate Government, as required under Section 17 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947, for publication.

A.C. DOGRA, Presiding Officer

नई द ली, 18 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 26

26

26

26.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मैसस भारती एयरटेल स@वसेज िलिमटेड और अय एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के

बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय, 1 नई दली के पंचाट

(संदभ सं8या 63/2016) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 31.10.2018 को $ा; <ए थे ।

[सं. एल-40011/47/2015-आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2018

S.O. 26.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 63/2016) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-1,

New Delhi as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to M/s. Bharti Airtal

Services Ltd. , and others, and their workmen which were received by the Central Government on 31.10.2018.

[No. L-40011/47/2015-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

BEFORE PRESIDING OFFICER: CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR

COURT No. 1: ROOM No. 511, DWARKA COURT COMPLEX, SECTOR 10, DWARKA, DELHI – 110 075

ID No.63/2016

Shri Ramesh Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Ganga Prasad Yadav, through

Samast Delhi Karamchari Union (Regd.),

Affiliated to Bhartiya Mazdoor Sangh,

52C, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase 3,

New Delhi - 110 020

…Workman

Versus

1. M/s. Bharti Airtel Services Ltd.,

234, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase 3,

New Delhi 110020

2. The Managing Director,

M/s. Johnsons Control (I) Pvt. Ltd.

Ground Floor, Plot No.A4 & A5,

Logix Soft Tel Pvt. Ltd. Building,

Sector 16, NOIDA,

Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh

3. The Managing Director,

M/s. ACE Facility Management Pvt. Ltd.,

HR/36/2, 60 Ft. Road, Pul Prahaladpur,

New Delhi – 110 044

…Managements

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

173

AWARD

A reference was received from Ministry of Labour and Employment vide Order No.L-40011/47/2015-IR(DU)

dated 07.01.2016/13.01.2016 under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947(in short the Act) for adjudication of an industrial dispute, terms of which are as under:

‘Whether the claim of the workman Shri Ramesh Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Ganga Prasad Yadav for regularization

of his service with the managements of Bharti Airtel Limited alongwith the payment of all legal dues is legal

and justified and if so, what directions are necessary in this respect?’

2.

Shri Ramesh Kumar Yadav filed his statement of claim stating that he was employed by M/s Bharti Airtel

Limited in their parking as Driver/Parking Boy on 01.12.2006 where he worked with dedication and sincerity. He was

working under the direct control and supervision of M/s Bharti Airtel Limited continuously till 2011. Later on, without

any notice to the claimant he was placed on pay rolls of various contractors. On objecting to this practice, the claimant

was threatened to be thrown out and also informed that only his salary would be paid through contractor. M/s ACE

Facility management Pvt. Ltd. took 12 hours of job at a monthly wage of Rs.10,081.00 deprived his of various leaves,

bonus etc. which clearly amounts to unfair labour practice. A complaint was also filed before this Tribunal for payment

of the dues etc. Initially, the principal employer, M/s Bharti Airtel Ltd. was paying salary, overtime, yearly leaves, bonus

etc. In 2011, without the notice of the claimant, he was being paid his salary through the contractor. Demand notice was

also sent to the management in this regard on 16.04.2014 and 15.07.2014. However, no response was received from the

management. Finally, it has been prayed that the claimant may be regularized with all consequential benefits.

2.

Claim was resisted by M/s Bharti Airtel Ltd. taking various preliminary objections, inter alia of approaching the

court with unclean hands, facts being distorted, non-espousal, concealment of facts etc. On merits, it is admitted that the

management had engaged the services of M/s CBRE South Asia Private Ltd. (earlier known as M/s Johnsons Controls

India Pvt. Ltd. ) for certain permissible services rendered by it and have no nexus with the workforce of CBRE South

Asia Pvt. Ltd. M/s Bharti Airtel has denied the material averments contained in the statement of claim.

3.

No reply was filed by M/s Johnsons Control (I) Pvt. Ltd. and M/s ACE Facility Management Pvt. Ltd., who

were proceeded ex-parte on 05.01.2017.

4.

From the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by this Tribunal on 04.07.2017 :

(i) Whether there is no relationship of employer and employee between the claimant and M/s. Bharti Airtel Limited

management No.1?

(ii) Where is no espousal of the case, as alleged by the management?

(iii) In terms of reference

5.

Thereafter, the case was listed for evidence of the claimant and the case was listed on 24.10.2018. In the

meanwhile, parties stated that they have settled the matter amicably and there remains no occasion to adjudicate the

issues referred above.

7.

Claimant made a statement to the effect that he is willing to accept Rs.2,40,000.00 from M/s ACE Facility

Management Pvt. Ltd. towards full and final settlement of his claim for reinstatement in service, other benefits etc., if

any. Now, the claimant does not have any surviving dispute with any of the managements and the matter has been

disposed of amicably between the parties. Statement of the claimant has been separately recorded. The receipt of full

and final settlement, Ex.C-I, shall form integral part of the award. An award is, accordingly, passed. It be sent to the

appropriate Government for publication.

Dated : October 29, 2018

A.C. DOGRA, Presiding Officer

नई द ली, 18 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 27

27

27

27.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मैसस भारती एयरटेल स@वसेज िलिमटेड और अय एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के

बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय 1, नई दली के पंचाट

(संदभ सं8या 268/2017) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 31.10.2018 को $ा; <ए थे ।

[सं. एल-42025/03/2018-आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

174

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2018

S.O. 27.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.268/2017) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-1,

New Delhi as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the M/s. Bharti Airtal

Services Ltd., and others, and their workmen which were received by the Central Government on 31.10.2018.

[No. L-42025/03/2018-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

BEFORE PRESIDING OFFICER: CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR

COURT No. 1: ROOM No . 511, DWARKA COURT COMPLEX, SECTOR 10, DWARKA, DELHI – 110 075

ID No.268/2017

Shri Nagendra Kumar, through

General Mazdoor Union,

B-89, Gulmohar Park,

New Delhi – 110049

…Workman

Versus

Bharti Airtel Services Ltd.,

Through,

The Director,

Plot No.234, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase III,

New Delhi 110020

…Management

AWARD

Present dispute has been raised by Shri Nagendra Prasad (in short the workman) under the provisions of sub-

section (2) of section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the Act). A period of 45 days stood expired from

the date of making his application before the Conciliation Officer. Sub-section (2) of section 2-A of the Act empowers

him to file a dispute before this Tribunal, without being referred by the appropriate Government. His contention stands

substantiated by the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 2-A of the Act. Workman has been given a right by the Act

to approach this Tribunal in case of discharge, dismissal, retrenchment or otherwise termination of her service, without a

dispute being referred by the appropriate Government under sub-section (1) of section 10 of the Act. Since dispute was

within the period of limitation, as enacted by sub section (3), and answered requirements of sub-section (2) of section 2-

A of the Act, it was registered as an industrial dispute, even without being referred for adjudication by the appropriate

Government, under section 10(1) (d) of the Act.

2.

Claim was filed by the claimant that he was working as Technician with M/s Bharti Airtel Services Limited

since 01.05.2008. His last drawn wages was Rs.24,535.00 per month. He was given a glorified designation of Officer S-

4 though he has not powers of officer, to sign cheques, to appoint or remove anyone. Prior to appointing the claimant,

management took trade test as well as interview. During the interview, it was specifically informed to the claimant that

he would be placed in Delhi. Management was adopting unfair labour practice such as changing service conditions like

changing permanent employees to contact employee status, forcing permanent employees to resign from job etc. In July

2016, management pressurized the claimant to resign. Since he refused to do so, management threatened to post him to a

faraway place, though his appointment letter does not contain any transfer clause. However, with intention to harass the

claimant, transfer order was sent to him through e-mail. On 09.08.2016 when the claimant reported for duties he was

given a transfer letter with instructions to report at Dimapur. Demand notice was sent to the management on 10.08.2016

to allow him to continue his duties at Delhi but the management did not heed to his request. On 16.08.2016, the claimant

performed his duties at Delhi. On 17.08.2016 when the claimant reported for duties, he was informed by the Security

Guard that there is an order from the management to not to allow him to enter the company premises. On contacting the

management personnel, the claimant was informed that his name has been struck off from the rolls of the company at

Delhi and that he should report at Dimapur. The above acts of the management is illegal, malafide and amounts to

victimization. Finally, it has been prayed that the transfer order be termed illegal and direct the management to take the

claimant back at Delhi.

3.

Written statement was filed by the management wherein various preliminary objections, inter alia that the relief

sought is beyond the jurisdiction of this Tribunal, transfer of an employee being inherent right of an employer, non

espousal etc. The management has denied the material averments contained in the statement of claim

4.

From the records, it emerged that in fact the case of the claimant it that of his transfer from Delhi to Dimapur.

The case has been wrongly registered under 2-A of the Act as it is not a case of discharge, dismissal, retrenchment of

otherwise termination of the service of the claimant. Concededly, provisions of Section 2-A can be pressed into service

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

175

only when the service of a workman is terminated or he is discharged/dismissed or retrenched from service. Section 2-A

cannot be availed in case of transfer of a workman. Statement of Shri Mohan Nair, A/R for the claimant has been

recorded separately that he neither wants to prosecute his claim nor does he want to lead any evidence in support of his

claim. Hence, the claim petition is, hereby, dismissed. An award is, accordingly, passed. Let it be sent for publication

as required under section 17 of the Act.

Dated : October 29, 2018

A.C. DOGRA, Presiding Officer

नई दली, 18 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 28

28

28

28.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

$शासिनक अिधकारी, अिखल भारतीय आयु@वCान सं&थान एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके

कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय, 1

नई दली के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 76/2016) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 29.11.2018 को $ा; <ए थे ।

[सं. एल-42012/221/2015- आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2018

S.O. 28.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.76/2016) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-1,

New Delhi as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Administrative

Officer, All India Institute Of Medical Sciences, and others, and their workmen which were received by the Central

Government on 29.11.2018.

[No. L-42012/221/2015-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

BEFORE PRESIDING OFFICER: CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR

COURT No. 1: ROOM No. 511, DWARKA COURT COMPLEX, SECTOR 10, DWARKA, DELHI – 110 075

ID No.76/2016

Shri Vidya Nand Sharma S/o late Shri Uday Narain Sharma,

R/o F-48, Lado Sarai,

New Delhi 110 030

…Workman

Versus

(i)

The Administrative Officer,

All India Institute of Medical Sciences

Ansari Nagar,

New Delhi 110 029

(ii)

M/s. Sulabh International Social Service Organization,

Sulabh Bhawan, Mahavir Enclave, RZ-83,

Palam – Dabri Road,

New Delhi – 110 045

…Managements

AWARD

A reference was received from Central Government under Clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A)

of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(in short the Act), by this Tribunal, vide letter No.L-42012/221/2015-

IR(DU) dated 04.01.2016, for adjudication of an industrial dispute, terms of which are as under:

“Whether the claim of the workman Shri Vidya Nand Sharma S/o late Uday Narain Sharma to be reinstated in

service on the roll of AIIMS with effect from 20.09.2009 with consequential benefits i.e. DA, HRA, etc. as

176

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

admissible to the regular employees of cafeteria in AIIMS is legal and justified and if so what relief the

workman is entitled to and what directions are necessary in this respect?’’

2.

Shri Vidya Nand Sharma, the claimant, filed his statement of claim wherein it is averred that he was orally

appointed by the General Manager, Cafeteria All India Institute of Medical Sciences, alongwith various other employees.

No appointment letter was issued by the management. All of a sudden, without any notice or memorandum claimant was

removed from service. Nature of the duty of the claimant is on regular basis with effect from 25.01.2008 as an Assistant

Manager cum Storekeeper continuously without any technical break. Hence, the claimant is entitled for the regular pay

scale as the work carried/performed is regular nature, which is being performed by other cafeteria employees of All India

Institute of Medical Sciences, i.e. pay scale of Rs.5200 + 20,200 + 2400 with grade pay of Rs.2400. Claimant has

averred that he is also entitled for dearness allowance, house rent, CCA, patient care allowance, leave benefits etc. equal

to the similarly placed employees with effect from February’08. Finally it has been prayed that the claimant may be

extended the above benefits as holding the post of Assistant Manager.

3.

Reply was filed on behalf of M/s Sulabh International Social Service Organization averring that the complaint is

not maintainable nor fit to be taken cognizance of. Initially complaint was against All India Institute of Medical Sciences

but subsequently M/s Sulabh International Social Service Organization was added as one of the contesting management.

During the conciliation, it was specifically conceded by the claimant before the Ld. Assistant Labour

Commissioner(Central) that he has no grievance or dispute against M/s Sulabh International Social Service Organization.

Hence, the instant complaint is fit to be rejected.

3.

Initially despite affording of several opportunities, All India Institute of Medical Sciences failed to file their

written statement and hence were proceeded ex-parte, which was later on recalled on an application filed by them.

Written statement was filed on behalf of All India Institute of Medical Sciences, taking various preliminary objections of

the claim being illegal, invalid and unsustainable, the claimant never being appointed by AIIMS. Earlier the claimant had

approached the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi and the matter was compromised between the parties by payment of

Rs. 6 lakh. Thereafter the claimant filed an application under Section 20(i) of Minimum Wages Act in which a claim of

Rs.3,70,590.00 was made and the said application was disposed of by the Ld. Judge Evening Court No.2, Patiala House

Court vide order dated 21.08.2015. Hence the case is hit by principle of res-judicata, estoppel and laches. Finally, it is

prayed that the claim petition may be dismissed.

4.

Thereafter, case was listed for filing of rejoinder. In the meanwhile, it was brought to the notice of this Tribunal

that the claimant has since expired. It is pertinent to mention here that the claimant was fighting the case himself and no

legal heir has come forward to pursue the case. In such circumstances, this Tribunal is left with no alternative but to pass

a ‘no dispute’ award. An award is, accordingly, passed. Let this award be sent to the appropriate Government, as

required under Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for publication.

Dated : November 26, 2018

A.C. DOGRA, Presiding Officer

नई दली, 18 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 29

29

29

29.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

$बंधन, कीय बोड ऑफ Dसचाई और पावर का $बंधन एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके

कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय 1,

नई दली के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 101/2015) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 29.11.2018 को $ा; <ए थे ।

[सं. एल-42012/07/2015-आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2018

S.O. 29.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.101/2015) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-1,

New Delhi as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Managrment of

Central Board Of Irrigation & Power, & Others, and their workmen which were received by the Central Government on

29.11.2018.

[No. L-42012/07/2015-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

177

ANNEXURE

IN THE COURT OF SHRI AVTAR CHAND DOGRA : PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT No. 1, DWARKA COURTS COMPLEX : NEW DELHI

ID No. 101/2015

Shri Mohan Lal,

S/o. Late Shri Prabhu Dayal,

through Shri Vinay Kumar

Chamber No.B-93, BGS Block,

Tis Hazari Courts,

Delhi 110054

…Workman/Claiman

Versus

1. The Management of Central Board of Irrigation & Power,

Through its Secretary, Malcha Marg,

Chankyapuri, New Delhi.

2. Ministry of Water Resoures,

New Delhi -110001.

…….Management

AWARD

This Award shall dispose of a reference which was made to this Tribunal by the appropriate Government vide

letter No. L-42012/07/2015-IR(DU) dated 05.03.2015 under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section

10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(in short the Act) for adjudication of an industrial dispute, terms of which are as

under:—

‘Whether the termination of Shri Mohan Lal s/o. Shri Prabhu Dayal, who was appointed by the management of

Central Board of Irrigation & Power as Mali (attendant) on 23.3.2006 after the death of his father considering

the request of appointment on compassionate grounds w.e.f. 1.5.2007 is illegal and unjustified and if so, what

relief is the claimant to and what directions are necessary in this respect ?’

2.

Both parties were put to notice and the claimant. The claimant Mohan Lal filed his statement of claim, with the

averments that his father Shri Prabhu Lal was appointed by the Management on the post of Mali vide appointment letter

dated 10/2/1982 and was a permanent employee. His father expired on 24/1/2005 due to heart-attack while on duty.

After the death of Shri Prabhu Dayal, his son Mohan Lal through his mother Smt. Ram Pyari moved an application dated

12/4/2005 for appointment on compassionate grounds. The Management duly considered the said application & the

claimant Mohan Lal was appointed as Attendant/Maali vide office order dated 12/10/2006 on temporary basis, initially

for six months which period was extended time and again. It has been pleaded that the claimant had uninterrupted and

unblemished service record to his credit. In the month of March,2007 instead of confirming the workman/claimant or

giving him further extension, the Management started compelling him to work through contractor and when he refused to

mark his attendance through the contractor, he was not being allowed by the Management to enter into the premises and

even his salary for the month of April, 2007 was withheld. Ultimately services of the workman were terminated illegally

by the Management w.e.f. 1/5/2007 without following the principle of natural justice, though he was working on a job of

regular and permanent nature, which is continuing with the Management. A civil suit bearing CS No.786/13 was filed by

the workman wherein liberty was granted to the workman vide order dated 10/9/2013 to approach the Labour Court

against illegal termination. The workman is totally unemployed since his termination. As such action of the

management in terminating the services of the workman amounts to unfair labour practice inasmuch as no notice or

notice pay was given to him at the time of termination of his services. Prayer has been made for reinstatement of the

workman into service with full back wages alongwith all consequential benefits.

3.

The claim petition has been resisted by the Management No.1 who filed its written statement and took

preliminary objections that the claim petition before this Tribunal is not maintainable as the Management No.1 is not an

instrumentality of State or Central Government. There never existed any employer-employee relationship between the

parties and that the claimant has not worked for 240 days in a calendar year and as such the claimant has no locus standi

to file the present claim petition.. While denying the allegations of the claimant that his father Shri Prabhu Dayal was

permanent employee of the Management, it has been alleged that father of the claimant was appointed we..f. 10/2/1983

only for six months but date of his death is not in the knowledge of the Management. It has been denied that the father of

claimant namely Shri Prabhu Dayal was a permanent employee of the Management and that claimant could never be

appointed against the permanent post. There was no permanent post of Maali in the establishment of the Management

and accordingly, the claimant was engaged only on temporary basis for six months at a consolidated salary of Rs.4000/-

per month. It has been denied that the salary for the month of April, 2017 has not been given to the claimant. Since the

claimant was never a regular employee, as such question of termination of his services on any date did not arise. Prayer

has been made for dismissal of the claim petition.

4.

The claimant/workman filed rejoinder wherein he denied all the allegations made by the Management and

reiterated his own case as set up in the claim petition.

178

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

5.

On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed on 10/3/2016 :-

i) Whether this Tribunal does not have jurisdiction/authority to decide the matter as alleged ?

ii) As in terms of reference ?

6. The Claimant in support of his case examined himself as W.W.1 and tendered his affidavit Ex.WW1/A alongwith

documents Ex.WW1/1 to WW1/14.

7.

On the other hand, the Management in order to rebut the case of the claimant examined one Shri P.P. Wahi,

Director (IT) as MW1 who tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.MW1/A alongwith documents Ex.MW1/1.

8.

I have carefully gone through the evidence adduced on record by both the parties and have give my thoughtful

consideration to rival contentions of the parties counsel.

Issue No.1 :—

9.

Learned A/R for the Management No.1 vehementally argued that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain

the claim petition since the Management No.1 -Board viz. Central Board of Irrigation & Power is not an instrumentality

of State or Central Government rather it is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act. She submitted that

Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 18/9/2013 in W.P.() No.334/1998 and others writ petitions filed by the workers of

the Management has held that the Board/Management No.1 is not an instrumentality of State under Article 12 of the

Constitution of India, as the said Board is not performing public functions/public duties. As such, the reference is not

legally maintainable.

10.

Per-contra, learned A/R for the workman submitted that this Tribunal has all powers to adjudicate and decide

the Reference which has been made by the Appropriate Government under the provisions of the Act and moreso the

Management –Board being a registered Society is an “industry” as defined under Section 2(j) of the Act.

11.

The workman/claimant was admittedly engaged by the Management No.1 – may be on temporary basis, on the

job of Maali (Attendant) and this fact is also borne out from the documents Ex. Ex.WW1/6 (offer of appointment) and

Ex.WW1/7 (letter of appointment) issued by the Management No.1. As such, the claimant is a workman, within the

meaning of Section 2(s) of the Act. It is noteable that the definition of “workman does” not make any distinction

between full time and part time employee or a person appointed on contract basis. There is nothing in the plain language

of Section 2(s) from which it can be inferred that only person employed on regular basis or a person employed for doing

whole time job is a workman and the one employed on temporary, part time or contract basis on fixed wages or as a

casual employee or for doing duty for fixed hours in not a workman. Reference may be made to the decision of Hon’ble

Supreme Court in the case of Davinder Singh Vs. Municipal Council Sanaur, AIR 2011 (SC 2532).

12.

Just because the Management No.1-Board is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, it will

be improper to say that it is not an “industry”. I may mention that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Bangalore

Water Supply & Sewage Board Vs. A. Rajappa AIR 1978 SC 548 dealt at length with the ambit and scope of

expression “industry” as defined under Section 2(j) of the Act and held as under :—

“(a) Where a complex of activities, some of which qualify for exemption, other not involves employees on the

total undertaking some of whom are not “workman” as in the University of Delhi case (supra) or some

departments are not productive of goods and services, if isolated, even then the predominant nature of the

services and integrated nature of the departments as explained in the Corporation of Nagpur (supra) will be the

true test. The whole undertaking will be “industry” although those who are not “workmen” by definition may

not benefit by the statue.

(b)

Notwithstanding the previous clauses, sovereign functions strictly understood (alone) qualify for

exemption, not the welfare activities or economic adventures undertaken by the Government or Statutory

bodies.

( c)

Even in departments discharging sovereign functions, if there are units which are industries and they are

substantially severable, they can be considered to come within Section 2(j).

(d)

Constitutional and competently enacted legislative provisions may well remove from the scope of the

Act, categories which otherwise may be covered thereby

(e)

We overrule Safdarjung (supra), Solicitors’ case(supra),Gymkhana (supra, Delhi University (supra)

Dhanrajgiri Hospital (supra) and other ruling whose ratio run counter to the principles enunciated above

and Hospital Mazdoor Sabha (supra) is hereby rehabilitated.’’

13.

In view of the law enunciated by the Apex Court, as discussed above, I am of the considered view that

Management No.1-Board is an “industry” within the definition of Section 2(j) of the Act qua the claimant/workman who

was simply working as Maali (Attendant).

14.

I may mention that since Delhi is a Union Territory, the reference for adjudication of Industrial Dispute can be

made either by the Central Government or by the State Government in terms of Rule 2(f) of the Industrial Disputes

(Central) Rules, 1957. To this view I am fortified with the decision in the case of Kanhaiya Lal Vs. Union of India,

2007 (113) FLR 770. Furthermore, the nomenclature of the Management No.1 viz. Central Board of Irrigation & Power

(CBIP) is such that even a prudent man may think it is an institution of the Government. A “workman” doing a mineal

job is not expected to exactly know the intracacies about the constitution of the Management Board or to exactly know as

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

179

to whether it is simply a Society under the Societies Registration Act or the department/establishment of the Government.

It is a matter of record that in the civil suit filed by the claimant herein, the Management had taken a preliminary

objection about the maintainability of the civil suit and the said suit was disposed by learned Civil Judge, granting liberty

to the claimant to approach the Labour Court. Thereafter the claimant had approached the Conciliation Officer and the

proceedings before the said forum culminated into the present reference. Law is well settled that when a reference has

been received by the Industrial Tribunal from the Appropriate Government, it has to decide such a reference on merits.

The Tribunal can not go into the validity of the reference. Furthermore, in the instant case, the Management No.2 viz.

Ministry of Water Resources, Govt. of India, New Delhi has also been impleaded as a party to the claim petition and the

said Ministry is functioning under Government of India.

15.

In view of the aforesaid discussion coupled with the fact that the claimant is “workman” & the Management is

an “industry” within the definitions as provided in the Act, this Tribunal is of the considered view that the present

reference having been made to this Tribunal by the appropriate Government is legally maintainable and that this Tribunal

has got jurisdiction to decide the matter in accordance with law. This issue is accordingly decided in favour of the

claimant and against the Management No.1.

Issue No.2 :—

16.

From the pleading of the parties and evidence adduced on record, particularly the documents Ex.WW1/6 (offer

of appointment) and Ex.WW1/7 (letter of appointment) issued by the Management No.1, it is evident that the claimant

Miohan Lal was appointed by Management No.1 purely on temporary basis as Attendant (Mali) for a period of six

months w.e.f. 29/9/2006 to 28/3/2017 on a consolidated salary of Rs.4000/- per month, with reference to his application

dated 22/3/2006 for employment on compassionate grounds after the death of his father Shri Prabhu Dayal. It was

stipulated in the said Offer of appointment (Ex.WW1/6) that the appointment is on purely temporary basis for a period

of 6 months initially. Further extension may be considered subject to satisfactory performance and pursuant thereto,

appointment letter Ex. WW1/7 was issued. Ex.WW1/8 is the copy of the identity card of Shri Prabhu Dayal showing

that he was working as Head Mali with the Management No.1 prior to his death. The said identity card has been issued

on 1/4/2004 and was valid upto 31/8/2017. Ex.WW1/10 is the copy of pay slip of the said Shri Prabhu Dayal for the

month of November, 2004. In the light of documents Ex.WW1/8 & Ex.WW1/0, it does not lie in the mouth of the

Management No.1 to allege that Shri Prabhu Dayal – father of the claimant was not its permanent employee and that the

claimant could never be appointed on compassionate ground. Factum of death of Shri Prabhu Dayal on 24/1/2005 is

proved from the death certificate Ex.WW1/9. Undisputedly the claimant started working with the Management w.e.f.

29/9/2016 though appointment letter Ex.WW1/7 was issued on 12/10/2006 for a period of six months upto 28/3/2017.

MW1 PP Wahi – witness of the Management stated in his cross examination that the claimant worked with the

Management from 12/10/2006 to March, 2007. The claimant has specifically pleaded and deposed in his affidavit

Ex.WW1/ A that in the month of March, 2007 instead of confirming or giving him further extension, the Management

started compelling him to work through contractor and the Management also did not allow him to mark his attendance

and even his salary for the month of April, 2007 was withheld. Ultimately his services were terminated illegally by the

Management w.e.f. 1/5/2007 without following the principle of natural justice, though he was working on a job of regular

and permanent nature, which is continuing with the Management.

17.

Even if version of the claimant is accepted in toto, it can be summerised that the workman/claimant worked

with the Management only for a limited period i.e. from 29/9/2006 to 30/4/2007. Thus, it is very much evident that the

claimant had not at all rendered continuous service of 240 days in any calendar year or in preceding 12 months from the

date of his disengagement/ alleged illegal termination/retrenchment on 1/5/2007 As such, provisions of Section 25-F of

the Act are at all not attracted in this case.

18.

It is undisputed fact that the workman was working as Attendant/Maali with the Management. MW1 Shri PP

Wahi has admitted in his cross examination that at present they have engaged an attendant through Private Contractor

which shows that the job of the claimant to which was working was/is of a regular and perennial nature. The

Management has not adduced any evidence on record to show that his services were discontinued either as a punishment

inflicted upon him or due to unsatisfactory performance of the claimant. As such, this Tribunal has no hesitation to hold

that non-engagement of the claimant with effect from 1/5/2007 amounts to retrenchment.

19.

Although the workman was working on daily wage basis and had not completed 240 days in any calendar year

prior to his disengagement/ retrenchment on 1/5/2007, yet it was imperative upon the Management to comply with the

provisions of Section 25-G of the Act i.e. to say to apply the principle of “last in, first out/go” (LIFO method) while

retrenching/terminating the services of the workmen concerned. For the purpose of applying the aforesaid principle as

required under Section 25-G of the Act, the Management was required to maintain a list of all such workers whether

employed on a daily wage basis or otherwise for short periods of time, so as to ascertain as to who (workman) was/is

required to be retrenched first and so on if circumstances so warrant. It is evident from the testimony of MW1 PP Wahi

that at present the Management has engaged an attendant through Private Contractor. This shows that the Management

retrenched the services of the workman/claimant in violation of the provisions of Section 25-G of the Act. As such, the

action of the Management in terminating/retrenching the services of workman w.e.f. 1/5/2007 can not held to be legal

and justified.

20.

Now the crucial question for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled to any incidental relief of payment

of back wages and/or reinstatement of service. The claimant in the pleading as well as in his testimony has stated that he

is unemployed since after his termination. The Management has not adduced any evidence to show that the claimant is

gainfully employed somewhere else or that he is in a position to make his both ends meet by doing any work. Even if it

180

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

is assumed that the claimant is doing some intermittent or adhoc work to make his both ends meet, that would not itself

amount to gainful employment. But at the same time this Tribunal can not ignore the fact that the workman was

just working on casual/temporary basis as Attendant/Maali and has worked with the Management only for about

six months or so. Latest trend itself discernable from the various pronouncements made by the Hon’ble Apex

Court is that when a person has been engaged on daily wage basis or for doing temporary kinds of work, in that

situation full back wages are not to be awarded. There are number of factors which are required to be

considered by the Tribunal while considering the question of reinstatement with back wages.

21.

Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter reported as Jaipur Development Authority Versus Ramasahai, (2006) 11

SCC 684 observed as under :-

“However, even assuming that there had been a violation of Section 25-G and 25-H of the Act, but the same by

itself, in our opinion, would not mean that the Labour Court should have passed an award of reinstatement with

entire back wages. This Court time and again has held that the jurisdiction under Section 11-A must be

exercised judiciously. The workman must be employed by State within the meaning of Article 12 of the

Constitution of India, having regard to the doctrine of public employment. It is also required to recruit

employees in terms of the provisions of the rules for recruitment framed by it. The respondent had not regularly

served the appellant. The job was not of perennial nature. There was nothing to show that he, when his services

were terminated, any person who was junior to him in the same category, had been retained. His services were

dispensed with as early as in 1987. It would not be proper to direct his reinstatement with back wages We,

therefore, are of the opinion that interest of justice would be subserved if instead and in place of reinstatement of

his services, a sum of Rs. 75,000/- is awarded to be respondent by way of compensation as has been done by

this Court in a number of its judgements..”……

22.

It has been held in the case of Hari Nandan Prasad Vs. Food Corporation of India (2014) 7 Supreme Court cases

190 as under :-

“ Relief by way of reinstatement with back wages is not automatic and may be wholly inappropriate in a given

fact situation even though the termination of an employee is in contravention of the prescribed procedure.

Compensation instead of reinstatement has been held to meet the ends of justice. An order of retrenchment

passed in violation of Section 25-F although may be set aside but an award of reinstatement should not,

however, automatically passed. The award of reinstatement with full back wages in a case where the workman

has completed 240 days of work in a year preceding the date of termination, particularly daily wages has not

been found to be proper by the Supreme Court and instead compensation has been awarded. The Supreme

Court has distinguished between a daily wager who does not hold a post and a permanent employee. The

reasons for denying the relief of reinstatement in such cases are obvious. It is trite law that when the termination

is found to be illegal, because of non payment of retrenchment compensation and notice pay as mandatorily

required under Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, even after reinstatement, it is always open to the

management to terminate the services of that employee by paying him the retrenchment compensation.’’

23. Having regard to the recent judicial trends and duration of service rendered by the claimant, an amount of

Rs.1 lakh (Rupees One Lakh) appears to be just and reasonable, and the same is payable to the claimant herein by the

Management. In case this compensation amount is not paid within two months from the date of publication of this

Award, then the claimant will be entitled to recover the same alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of award

till realization. Award is passed accordingly.

Dated :28.11.2018

AVTAR CHAND DOGRA, Presiding Officer

नई दली, 18 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 30

30

30

30.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

$बंधन, मैसस एडीईसीसीओ इंिडया $ाइवेट िलिमटेड और अय एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके

कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय, 1

नई दली के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 144/2015) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 29/11/2018 को $ा; <ए थे।

[सं. एल-42012/118/2015-आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

181

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2018

S.O. 30.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.144/2015) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-1,

New Delhi as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Managrment,

M/s. ADECCO Indian Pvt. Ltd., and others, and their workmen which were received by the Central Government on

29.11.2018.

[No. L-42012/118/2015-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

IN THE COURT OF SHRI AVTAR CHAND DOGRA : PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT No.1, DWARKA COURTS COMPLEX : NEW DELHI

ID No. 144/2015

Shri Vishwa Mohan Das

S/o. Shri Vishwa Nandan Das,

A-92, Okha Phase II,

New Delhi 110020.

… Workman/Claimant

Versus

1. The Management

M/s. ADECCO Indian Pvt. Ltd.

Plot No.11, G Block, Hauz Khas Market, 3rd Floor,

New Delhi 110016.

2. The Management,

M/s. Sistema Shyam Teleservices Ltd. (MTS),

A-194, Oklhla Phase-I,

New Delhi 110020.

…Management

AWARD

This award shall dispose of a reference which was made to this Tribunal vide letter No. L-42012/118/2015-

IR(DU) dated 17.06.2015 under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947(in short the Act) for adjudication of an industrial dispute, terms of which are as under :—

‘Whether the services of the workman Shri Vishwa Mohan Das s/o. Shri Vishwa Nandan Das has been

terminated illegally and.or unjustifiably by the management and if so, to what relief is the workman entitled and

what directions are necessary in this respect ?’

2.

Parties to the dispute were put to notice and the claimant/workman, Vishwa Mohan Das filed his statement of

claim, with the averments that the workman was working as Marketing Boy with the Management w.e.f. 15/11/2013 and

his last drawn wages were Rs.10500/-. He was working with honesty and sincerity, He was appointed for one year as

per agreement but his services without any notice or charge-sheet were terminated illegally by the Management on

18/1/2014. Claimant is entitled for wages of 10 months as per agreement. A demand letter dated 20/3/2014 was sent by

him to the Management but to no response. Then he approached the Conciliation Officer but to no avail. It has been

alleged that the Management had got his signatures on blank papers in illegal manner. It has been stated that the

workman is unemployed and has no source of income since the date of his illegal termination, though he made efforts to

find out the job. Prayer has been made for reinstatement into service with full back wages and all facilities w.e.f.

18/1/2014.

3.

Management No.1 M/s Adecco India Pvt. Ltd. resisted the claim of the claimant and filed written statement

mainly on the grounds that workman was selected for the post of Enterprise-DST on fixed term contract and he was

deputed with the Management No.2 and after joining on 15/11/2013, the workman worked till16/1/2014, though contract

period was one year only. The Management No.1 issued a letter dated 22/1/2014 to the workman for not attending his

duties and abandonment of job. Services of the workman were never terminated and he had not worked for 240 days and

as such he had not attained the status of a regular employee nor had derived any status or lien to the said post. The

Management No.1 had paid amount of Rs.5027/- through ECS transfer is his bank account for the period of services

rendered by the claimant. This is a case of abandonment of services by the claimant himself and as such the claim

petition is not maintainable. Prayer has been made for dismissal of claim petition.

4.

Management No.2 also resisted the claim of the claimant and it has stated in the written statement that there was

no relationship of employer and employee between the Management No.2 and the claimant, as he was the employee of

Management No.1 with whom there was a contact by Management No.2 for deploying the employees at the

182

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

establishment of Management No.2 The claim petition is wrong and false and liable to be dismissed being devoid of any

merits

5.

The claimant filed rejoinder wherein he denied all the allegations as made in the written statements and

reiterated his own case as set up in the claim petition.

6.

On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed on 30/5/2016 :-

1. Whether the claim petition /reference is not maintainable against Management No.2 and there is no

relationship of employer & employee between the Management and the workman ?

2. As in terms of reference ?

7.

The Claimant/workman in support of his case examined himself as W.W.1 and tendered his affidavit

Ex.WW1/A alongwith documents Ex.WW1/1 to WW1/5. On the other hand, Management No.2 examined one Shri

P.L.Saini as M2W1 who tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.M2W1/A and relied on documents Ex.M2W1/1 to

Ex.M2W1/6. However, Management No.1 did not examine any witness and the case was proceeded ex parte against it

vide order dated 16/5/2018.

8.

I have heard authorised representatives of the claimant as well as of Management No.2 and have gone through

the records carefully. My findings on the above issues are as follows

Issue No. 1.:

9

The testimony of the workman vide his affidavit Ex.WW1/A is in line and in conformity with the averments

made in the claim petition. Neither in his pleadings nor in the affidavit Ex.WW1/A, the claimant has clearly mentioned

as to who was his employer. He has vaguely stated that he was working as Marketing Boy with the Management w.e.f.

15/11/2013 and his services were illegally terminated by the Management on 18/1/2014. However, he admitted in his

cross examination that he was appointed by M/s Adecco Flexion Workforce Solutions Pvt.Ltd. and he never protested

against the terms & conditions of his letter of appointment Ex.WW1/1. He was paid an amount of Rs.9382/- per month

by M/s. Adecco Flexion Workforce Solutions Pvt.Ltd. as wages. Ex.WW1/M-2 and M-3 are the salary slips issued by

Adecco Flexion Workforce Solutions Pvt.Ltd.. He also admitted that there was no relationship of employer and

employee between Management No.2 and himself.

10.

It is worthwhile to mention here that there can not be two employers of a workman. Since the appointing

authority as well as paying authority of the workman/claimant was Management No.1 - M/s Adecco Flexion Workforce

Solutions Pvt. Ltd., it stands proved on record that there was no relationship of employer and employee between

Management No.2 and the workman./claimant. As such, the claim petition against Management No.2 is not

maintainable. Accordingly, this issue is decided against the claimant.

Issue No.2 :

11.

Now the crucial question arises for consideration is whether the services of the claimant were illegally

terminated by the Management No.1 as alleged by the claimant,, or whether the claimant had himself abandoned the

services, as alleged by the Management No.1. WW1/1 is the letter of appointment dated 15/11/20113 issued by

Management No.1 wherein it has been stipulated that the term of employment of the workman/claimant was for a period

of twelve months from the date of his joining and that the contract was terminable by either party giving 15 (fifteen)

days’ notice in writing or salary in lieu of notice to the other party. The claimant has specifically stated that his

services were illegally terminated by the Management on 18/01/2014 without any notice or charge-sheet. In cross

examination he denied the suggestion that he was issued a letter dated 22/1/2014 by Management No.1 that he was

absconding from duties.

12.

The Management No.1 has not led any evidence to show that it was the claimant who himself had absconded

from duties. Though it has been alleged in the pleadings that the Management NO.1 had duly issued a letter dated

22/1/2014 to the workman for not attending his duties and abandonment of job, however no such letter has been filed or

proved on record by the Management No.1. Even no witness has been examined by the Management No.1 to prove its

case. As such, the version of the claimant that his services were illegally terminated by the Management on 18/1/2014

without any notice or charge-sheet is accepted. There is nothing on record to suggest that Management No.1 had paid

retrenchment benefits to the claimant in terms of the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act.

13.

There is long line of decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court as well as of various High Courts that provisions of

Section 25-F of the Act are mandatory in nature and termination of the workman from services in derogation of the

provisions of Section 25-F of the Act will render action of the Management Bank to be illegal and void under the law.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

183

14.

Since there is no evidence on record that any valid notice was issued by the Management to the workman at the

time of termination or in lieu of such notice, any compensation was paid to him, as such action of the Management No.1

in terminating the services of the workman is held to be illegal and void.

RELIEF :

15. Now the residual question arises for consideration is as to what relief the claimant is entitled to. As discussed

above, It has been proved on record that claimant worked with the Management No.1 only for two months ie. from

15/11/2013 to 16/1/2014. There is no show cause notice or memo issued to the claimant/workman by the Management

No.1 though it was also stipulated in the letter of appointment Ex.WW1/1 issued by Management No.1 and was binding

on it. There is nothing on record to suggest that job of the claimant was on permanent basis or that he was given any

regular post by the Management No.1. There are number of factors which are required to be considered by the Tribunal

while considering the question of reinstatement with back wages. It has been held in the case of Hari Nandan Prasad Vs.

Food Corporation of India (2014) 7 Supreme Court cases 190 as under :-

“Relief by way of reinstatement with back wages is not automatic and may be wholly inappropriate in a

given fact situation even though the termination of an employee is in contravention of the prescribed

procedure. Compensation instead of reinstatement has been held to meet the ends of justice. An order

of retrenchment passed in violation of Section 25-F although may be set aside but an award of

reinstatement should not, however, be automatically passed. The award of reinstatement with full back

wages in a case where the workman has completed 240 days of work in a year preceding the date of

termination, particularly daily wages has not been found to be proper by the Supreme Court and instead

compensation has been awarded. The Supreme Court has distinguished between a daily wager who

does not hold a post and a permanent employee. The reasons for denying the relief of reinstatement in

such cases are obvious. It is trite law that when the termination is found to be illegal, because of non

payment of retrenchment compensation and notice pay as mandatorily required under Section 25-F of

the Industrial Disputes Act, even after reinstatement, it is always open to the management to terminate

the services of that employee by paying him the retrenchment compensation.’’

15. Having regard to the recent judicial trends and duration of service rendered by the claimant, an amount of Rs.1 lakh

(Rupees One Lakh) appear to be just and reasonable, and the same is payable to the claimant herein by the Management

No.1. Award is passed accordingly.

Date : 28.11.2018

AVTAR CHAND DOGRA, Presiding Officer

नई दली, 18 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 31

31

31

31.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947(1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस आयुE, नगर िनगम दली और अय एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के बीच

अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय, 1 नई दली के पंचाट

(संदभ सं8या 182/2012) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 19.11.2018 को $ा; <ए थे ।

[सं. एल-42012/11/2012-आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2018

S.O. 31.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.182/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-1,

New Delhi as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Commissioner,

Municipal Corporation Delhi, and others, and their workmen which were received by the Central Government on

19.11.2018.

[No. L-42012/11/2012-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

184

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE PRESIDING OFFICER: CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR

COURT No. 1: ROOM No.511, DWARKA COURT COMPLEX, SECTOR 10, DWARKA, DELHI – 110 075

ID No.182/2012

The General Secretary,

Municipal Employees Union,

Aggarwal Bhawan, G.T. Road,

Tis Hazari, Delhi – 110 054

…Workman

Versus

The Commissioner,

Municipal Corporation of Delhi,

Town Hall, Chandni Chowk,

Delhi – 110 006

…Management

AWARD

A reference was received by this Tribunal under section 10(2)(a) read with clause 1(d) of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 from the appropriate Government vide letter No.L-42012/11/2012-IR(DU) dated 09.12.2012 with

following terms of reference:

‘Whether the action of the management of Municipal Corporation of Delhi, in not regularizing the services of

Shri Anil Kumar & 6 other workmen working for last 14-15 years is fair and justified ? If not, what relief the

workmen are entitled to?’

2.

It is clear from the statement of claim that four workmen, as per details given hereunder, were appointed by

Municipal Corporation of Delhi (management ):

Sl.

No.

Name

and

Father’s

Name

(S/Shri)

Desig-nation

Date

of

Appointment

Present place of posting

1

Anil Kumar S/o Shri Jagi Ram

Safai Karamchari

12.02.1996

DEMS, Rohini Zone, Zonal Office

2

Rajesh Kumar S/o Shri Jai

Kishan

Safai Karamchari

01.02.1996

DEMS, Rohini Zone, Zonal Office

3

Rajender

Kumar

S/o

Shri

Dharam Pal

Safai Karamchari

28.09.1995

DEMS, Rohini Zone, Zonal Office

4

Ashu S/o Shri Prem Chand

Safai Karamchari

15.04.1994

DEMS, Rohini Zone, Zonal Office

5.

Sanjeev S/o Shri Brahmu Ram

Safai Karamchari

23.09.1994

DEMS, Rohini Zone, Zonal Office

6.

Jagbir

Singh

S/o

Shri

Mahender Singh

Safai Karamchari

16.09.1994

DEMS, Rohini Zone, Zonal Office

7.

Joginder

Kumar

S/o

Shri

Kanwar Singh

Safai Karamchari

01.12.1997

DEMS, Rohini Zone, Zonal Office

3.

Averments, as contained in the statement of claim, are that the workmen were taken on the job as daily

rated/muster roll workers and their wages were also revised from time to time under the Minimum Wages Act, while

their counterparts doing the identical work, were treated as regular employees. Workmen herein were discharging their

services with the management with unblemished and uninterrupted record of service. Workmen herein were supposed to

have been regularized in service from the date of initial date of joining but the management has only regularized them

since the dates mentioned in para 2 above.

4.

Non regularization of services of the workman from the date of joining on the basis of on the post of safai

karamchari in proper pay scale alongwith allowances and non payment of salary to which the workmen are entitled on

the principle of equal pay for equal work is totally unjust and malafide and amounts to unfair labour practice. The action

of the management is in violation of Article 14, 16 and 39(d) of the Constitution of India.

5.

It is alleged that the management has not framed any rules or regulation nor got it passed by UPSC nor noticed

in the official gazette for governing conditions of muster roll workers/part time seasonal workmen. Model Standing

Orders under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 are applicable to the workmen herein. Workmen

herein have not acquired status of a permanent employee from the initial date of their respective joining into the

employment after completing 90 days of continuous days of employment as provided under Model Standing Orders.

Even otherwise, claimants have acquired status of permanent employee after completing 240 days of continuous

employment on regular basis as has been held by the High Court of Delhi in the case of Harish Kumar Vs. Registrar,

Delhi High Court.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

185

6.

The workman also served demand notice upon the management vide communication dated 18.11.2009, which

was duly received management and it is presumed that the same was rejected due to adamant and non-cooperative

attitude of the management. Finally, prayer has been made for regularization of services of the workmen on the post of

driver with retrospective effect from the date of their initial joining with the management .

7.

Case was contested by the management, who filed written statement thereto, taking various preliminary

objections, inter alia that the dispute has not been espoused, no demand notice has been served and reference has been

made in a mechanical manner without due application of mind. On merits, it has been denied that the workmen herein

are supposed to be regularized since their initial dates of joining. Management has its own policy of regularization , i.e.

subject to availability of post and funds. Management has regularized services of the workmen in a phased manner

policy of regularization adopted by the management. As such, the workmen herein are not entitled for regularization

from the date of their initial engagement.

8.

Against this factual background, this Tribunal vide order dated 19.07.2013 framed the following issues on the

basis of pleadings of the parties:

(i)

Whether the dispute has not acquired status of industrial dispute for want of espousal?

(ii)

Whether dispute is bad for want of service of demand notice on the management?

(iii)

Whether regularization of S/Shri Anil Kumar, Rajesh Kumar, Rajender Kumar, Ashu, Sanju and Jagbir

Singh from respective dates mentioned in para 6 of the written statement frustrates their claim?

(iv)

As in terms of reference

9.

Claimant, in support of its case, examined S/Shri Anil Kumar, whose affidavit is Ex.WW1/A and he also

tendered in evidence documents Ex.WW1/1 to Ex.WW1/8. The claimants also examined S/Shri Ashu, Jagbir Singh,

Joginder Singh, Sanjeev, Rajender Kumar, Rajesh Kumar and Surender Bhardwaj as WW2 to WW8 and also tendered in

evidence Ex.ww2/1, Ex.WW3/1 to Ex.WW3/4, Ex.WW4/1 to Ex.WW4/4, Ex.WW5/1, Ex.WW6/1 to Ex.WW6/3 and

Ex.WW7/1 to Ex.WW7/3 respectively. WW2 to WW7 also relied on documents Ex.WW1/1 to WW1/8. WW8 relied on

document Ex.WW1/5. I shall be adverting to them in the subsequent paras while drawing my conclusion.

10.

Management, was given several opportunities to adduce evidence to rebut the case of the claimant. However,

management failed to adduce any evidence. Vide order dated 12.04.2018, evidence of the management was closed by

the orders of this Tribunal.

11.

I have heard Shri Abhinav Kumar, A/R for the claimant and Shri Madan Sagar, A/R for the management. I have

given my careful considerations to the arguments advanced at the bar and cautiously perused the record. My findings on

issues involved in the controversy are as follows

Issue No.1 & 2

12.

It is clear from the preliminary objections taken in the written statement by the management that the

management has raised objection that no demand notice has been served upon the management nor the MCD General

Mazdoor Union has any locus standi to raise the present dispute as the union is not a recognized union of the

management. To my mind, there is no requirement of law that a dispute can be raised only by a recognized union. In

this regard, it is appropriate to refer to the judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Bihar Vs. Kripa

Shankar Jaiswal (AIR 1961 (2) SC Report 1) wherein also objection was taken on behalf of the management that the

union was not a registered under the Trade Union Act on the date of the settlement and said plea was rejected by

observing as under:

‘Held, that for a dispute to constitute an industrial dispute it is not a requisite condition that it should be

sponsored by a recognized union or that all the workmen of an industrial establishment should be

parties to it. A settlement arrived at in course of conciliation proceedings falls within Section 18(3)(a) and (d) of

the Industrial Disputes Act and as such binds all the workmen though an unregistered union or only some of

workmen may have raised the dispute. The absence of notice under Section 11(2) by the Conciliation Officer

does not affect the jurisdiction of the conciliation officer and its only purpose is to apprise the establishment that

the person who is coming is the conciliation officer and not a stranger. Any contravention of Section 12(6) in

not submitting the report within 14 days may be a breach of duty on the part of the conciliation officer ; it does

not affect the legality of the proceedings which terminated as provided in Section 20(2) of the Act.’

13.

Equally merit-less is the plea taken by the management that the present dispute is not sponsored or espoused by

substantial number of workmen. It is fairly settled position in law that even non-espousal of a case by the union would

not deprive the workman of the relief to which the workman is otherwise entitled under the law. Such view appears to

have been taken in the case of Nazrul Hassan Siddiqui vs. Presiding Officer, Industrial cum Labour Court Bombay

(1997) Lab.I.C. 1807. In the above cited case also contention was raised by the management that the dispute dies not

fall within the definition of ‘industrial dispute’ and the same has not been referred or supported by substantial section of

workmen. High Court rejected the plea of the management by placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in the case of Associated Cement Companies Ltd. (AIR 1960 SC 777), which it was observed as under:

‘We have already noticed that an industrial dispute can be raised by a group of workmen or by a union even

though neither of them represent the majority of the workmen concerned; in other words, the majority rule on

which the appellant’s construction of Section 19(6) is based is inapplicable in the matter of the reference under

186

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Section 10 of the Act. Even a minority group of workmen can make a demand and thereby raise an industrial

dispute which in a proper case would be referred or adjudication under Section 20.’

14.

It is further clear that from the affidavit filed by Shri Surender Bhardwaj, Ex.WW8/A that workmen herein had

approached their union for redresssal of their grievance as is clear from para 2 of the affidavit. Consequently, a resolution

was passed in the meeting of the union held on 04.11.2009, copy of which is Ex.WW1/5, which clearly shows that the

case of the workman was espoused by the Municipal Employees Union. There is no cross examination of any of the

witness examined by the workmen herein on the point of espousal by the management nor the management has

whispered even a single word in their affidavit Ex.MW1/A regarding non-espousal of the case. It is, thus, clear from

recital contained in the affidavit as well as Ex.WW1/11 that the case of the workman herein was espoused by the union.

It has been held by the Hon’ble High Court in the cases of Management of M/s Hotel Samrat Vs. Government of NCT of

Delhi (2007 (136) DLT 290) that the workman are simply to allege and prove that they have raised their grievance

through their union and the expression espousal simply means that the dispute of the workman is adopted by the union as

its own dispute or a large number of workmen have given their support to the case of the individual workman so

involved in such dispute.

15.

In view of the ratio of the judgement discussed above, it is clear that espousal of a dispute by majority members

of the union is not sine qua non for adjudication of such dispute in terms of Section 10 of the Act. Accordingly, it is

held that issue No.(i) and (ii) is decided in favour of the workman and against the management.

Issue No.(iii) and (iv)

16.

Now, the next question is whether the workmen herein are entitled for regularization with retrospective effect,

i.e. from the date of their initial appointment as per model standing orders. In this regard., it is appropriate to refer to the

statements of WW1 to WW7 and affidavits of the workmen herein are on the same lines as the averments contained in

the claim statement and it clearly shows that the workmen, WW1 to WW7 are continuously discharging their duties with

the management since the date of their respective dates of joining of services with the management. Management has

regularized services of the workmen, as stated in para 2 above, whereas regularization of services of the workman was to

be from the date of their initial engagement or joining. It was strongly urged on behalf of the workmen that they are

performing the same duties which their regular counterparts are performing and there is substantial difference in their

salary of such daily rated workers vis-à-vis regular safai karamcharis employed by the management.

17.

It is clear from perusal of Ex.WW1/1 that the workmen have approached the management against the non-

regularization of their services and non-payment of difference in their salary. There is specific reference in the above

letter to the case of Harish Kumar Vs. Registrar, Delhi High Court which deals with disparity in the salary of workmen.

Further Ex.WW1/3 is acknowledgement of the said letter. Ex.WW1/M2, Ex.WW2/M2 and Ex.WW3/M2 are the letter of

regularization of Shri Anil Kumar, Shri Ashu and Shri Jagbir Singh.

18.

Now, question which arises for consideration is whether the workmen herein are entitled for regularization of

their services from the dates of their initial date of appointment or whether they are entitled for entitled for equal pay

which their regular counterparts are getting in the management . Reliance was placed upon the case titled ‘Umrala

Gram Panchayat Vs. The Secretary, Municipal Employees Union (MANU/SC/0354/2015). In this case also, workmen

were appointed initially as casual/daily wage workers and later on their services were regularized from different dates in

an arbitrary manner without following any policy. Claim of the workman was upheld by the Hon’ble High Court by

observing as under:

‘It is an admitted fact that the work which was being done by the concerned workmen was the same as

that of the permanent workmen of the appellant- Panchayat. They have also been working for similar

number of hours, however, the discrepancy in the payment of wages/salary between the permanent and the

non-permanent workmen is alarming and the same has to be construed as being an unfair labour practice as

defined under Section 2(ra) of the ID Act r/w Entry No.10 of the Fifth Schedule to the ID Act, which is

prohibited under Section 25(T) of the ID Act. Further, there is no documentary evidence produced on

record before the Labour Court which shows that the present workmen are working less

or for lesser number of hours than the permanent employees of the appellant-Panchayat. Thus, on the face

of it, the work being done by the concerned workmen has been permanent in nature and the Labour Court as

well

as

the

High

Court

have

come

to

the

right

conclusion

on

the

points

of

dispute and have rightly rejected the contention of the appellant-Panchayat as the same amounts

to unfair labour practice by the appellant-Panchayat which is prohibited under Section 25(T) of the ID Act and

it also amounts to statutory offence on the part of the appellant under Section 25(U) of the ID Act for which

it is liable to be prosecuted.

Further, Section 25(T) of the ID Act clearly states that unfair labour practice should not be encouraged and

the same should be discontinued. In the present case, the principle "equal work, equal pay" has been violated

by the appellant-Panchayat as they have been treating the concerned workmen unfairly and therefore, the

demand raised by the respondent-Union needs to be accepted. The High Court has thus, rightly not interfered

with the Award of the Labour Court as the same is legal and supported with cogent and valid reasons.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

187

In view of the reasons stated supra and in the light of the facts and circumstances of

the present case, we hold that the services of the concerned workmen are permanent in nature, since they

have worked for more than 240 days in a calendar year from the date of their initial appointment.’

19.

Similarly, in Union of India vs. Dineshan K.K. (MANU/SC/0395/2008)where the question of equal pay for

equal work was considered and similar view was taken by holding that having due regard to the constitutional mandate

of equality and inhibition against discrimination in Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution. AS such, workmen are entitled

for equal pay when they were performing similar kind of work.

20.

Yet again in the case of Union of India Vs. Rajesh Kumar Gond (MANU/SC/0769/2013), MCD vs. Ram Milan

(MANU/DE/3969/2015) and MCD Vs. Smt. Krishna (MCD/DE/3966/2009) consistent view has been taken by the

Hon’ble Apex Court and High Court on the principle of equal pay for equal work which have been applied in a catena of

decisions, workmen were held to entitled to the same pay and allowances with their counterparts performing similar

duties 19. There is no merit in the contention of the management that the workmen herein are not entitled for

regularization with retrospective date on the grounds that as and when post falls vacant, workmen are regularized.

Regularization is not done till seniority list of such workmen is prepared. Learned A/R for the management could not cite

any policy of regularization so as to support his submission. Hon’ble High Court in the case of MCD Vs. Ram

Milan(Manu/DE/3979/2015) has dealt with the question of regularization wherein workman was working as chowkidar

since 1987. Plea of the management that the workman was only employed on casual basis when there was no regular

workman, as such, he was not entitled for salary of regular workman as well as regularization was turned down by the

Hon’ble High Court by placing reliance on a number of cases. It was also observed that the workman in that case was

performing same duties which permanent workmen were performing. He was also working for similar number of hours.

However, there was discrepancy in the payment of wages/salary between the permanent and non-permanent workmen,

which was quite alarming. Accordingly, it was held that the workmen have worked for 240 days in a calendar year from

the date of their initial appointment, which is clear from the evidence on record, as such the management was legally

required to make services of such workers permanent.

21.

In view of the ratio of the law discussed above in the various rulings relied upon by the workmen, it is held that

the workmen herein are entitled for regularization of their services like their other counterparts whose services have been

regularized by the management. Action of the management in not regularizing services of Shri Anil Kumar and 6 other

workmen is held to be neither legal nor justified. It is, further, held that the workmen herein, S/Shri S/Shri Anil Kumar,

Ashu, Jagbir Singh, Joginder Singh, Sanjeev, Rajender Kumar, Rajesh Kumar are entitled for entire difference of salary

on the principles of equal pay for equal pay, alongwith all consequential benefits from the date of their initial

appointment. An award is accordingly passed. It be sent to the appropriate Government, as required under Section 17 of

the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for publication.

Date : 15.11.2018

A.C. DOGRA, Presiding Officer

नई दली, 18 दस बर, 2018

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ. 32

32

32

32.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस आयुE, नगर िनगम दली एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म

िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय, 1 नई दली के पंचाट

(संदभ सं8या 195/2012) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 22.10.2018 को $ा; <ए थे ।

[सं. एल-42012/109/2012-आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2018

S.O. 32.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.195/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-1,

New Delhi as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Commissioner,

Municipal Corporation Delhi & Others, and their workmen which were received by the Central Government on

22.10.2018.

[No. L-42012/109/2012-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

188

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE PRESIDING OFFICER: CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR

COURT No. 1: ROOM No. 511, DWARKA COURT COMPLEX, SECTOR 10, DWARKA, DELHI – 110 075

ID No.195/2012

S/Shri Ramesh Chand Meena S/o Shri R.S. Meena & 7 others, through

Delhi Udhiyan Karamchari Union,

B-5, Ram Gali, North Ghonda,

New Delhi - 110 053

…Workman

Versus

The Commissioner,

Municipal Corporation of Delhi,

Town Hall, Chandni Chowk,

Delhi – 110 006

…Management

AWARD

In the present case, an order was received from Ministry of Labour and Employment vide letter

No. L-42012/109/2012-IR(DU) dated 07.12.2012 under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and Section (2A) of Section 10 of

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(in short the Act) for adjudication of an industrial dispute, terms of which are as under:

Whether the action of the management of MCD in regularizing the workmen S/Shri Ramesh Chand Meena

S/o Shri R.S. Meena and 7 others (list enclosed) on the post of ‘Nala Beldar’ instead of ‘Beldar’ is legal &

justified? If not, what relief the workmen are entitled to?

2.

Claim statement was filed on behalf of Shri Ramesh Chand Meena S/o Shri R.S. Meena, Shri Gulam Asgar

S/o Shri Haider Abbas, Shri Dharam Pal Singh S/o shri Manvir Singh, Shri Shiv Kumar S/o Shri Promod Kumar, Shri

Praveen Kumar S/o Shri Sohan Lal, Shri Pardeep Kumar S/o Shri Manvir singh, Shri Javed Ahmed S/o Shri Liak Ahmed

and Shri Sukh Lal S/o Ramji Lal (hereinafter referred to as the claimants), averring that they joined MCD (hereinafter

referred to as the management) as Beldar in the years 2001/2002/2003 and worked continuously on the said post till their

regularization in September 2008 with retrospective effect from 01.04.2006 with usual allowance as admissible under the

rules. The claimants had unblemished and uninterrupted record to their credit. The management submitted working

report for daily wagers report at the time of their regularization by terming as beldars whereas the letter of regularization

issued to them depicted them as beldar/nala beldar. This action of the management tantmounts to exploitation of labour,

illegal, bad, unjust, malafide and is in violation of Article 14, 16 and 30 of the Constitution of India. . Finally, it has

been prayed that the claimants are entitled to the post of beldars in place of nala Behdar from the date of regularization

alongwith all consequential benefits.

3.

No written statement was filed by the management despite affording of several opportunities. Vide order dated

11.10.2013, defence of the management was struck off by my learned predecessor and the case was listed for evidence of

the claimants.

4.

S/Shri Ramesh Chand Meena, Gulam Asgar, Dharam Pal Singh, Shiv Kumar, Praveen and Javed Ahmed, were

examined on behalf of the claimants whose affidavits are Ex.WW1/A to Ex.WW6/A and they relied on documents

Ex.WW1/1 to Ex.WW1/10, Ex.WW2/1 to Ex.WW2/3, Ex.WW3/1 to Ex.WW3/4, Ex.WW4/1 to Ex.WW4/2,

Ex.WW5/1 to Ex.WW5/3, Ex.WW6/1 to Ex.WW6/4, respectively. Witnesses WW2 to WW6 also relied on documents

Ex.WW1/1 to Ex.WW1/7. Since defence of the management was struck off and no written statement was filed, hence,

management was not granted any opportunity to adduce evidence.

5.

I have heard Shri B.K. Prasad, A/R for the claimant and Shri Madan Sagar, A/R for the management. My

findings on the issues involved in the controversy are as follows:

6.

The only issue which requires determination in the case in hand is whether the workman herein is entitled to the

designation of Beldar (instead of Nala Beldar) from the date of their regularization. Perusal of letter Ex.WW1/4 issued

by the management, depicts the designation of the claimants as beldar. Ex.WW2/1, Ex.WW3/1, Ex.WW4/1,

Ex.WW5/1 and Ex.WW6/1 being the number of days worked in the years 2001 to 2006, depicts the designation of the

claimant as beldar and the said document is signed by the Junior Engineer, Assistant Engineer as well as the Executive

Engineer. Thus, it apparent that initially that the claimants were designated as beldars and at the time of regularization,

their designation was mentioned as ‘nala beldars/beldars’.

7.

As a sequel to above discussion, it is held that the claimants herein have been wrongly regularized as nala

beldars instead of beldars. Hence, the action of the management of MCD in denying the designation of ‘beldar’; (instead

of nala beldar) at the time of regularization of services of the workmen Shri Ramesh Chand Meena S/o Shri R.S. Meena

and 07 others (total 08) as named in the ID by the management of MCD with effect from 01.04.2006 in the pay scale of

Rs.2500-3200 is totally unjust and unfair. Hence, the management is liable to redesignate the claimants Shri Ramesh

Chand Meena S/o Shri R.S. Meena, Shri Gulam Asgar S/o Shri Haider Abbas, Shri Dharam Pal Singh S/o Shri Manvir

Singh, Shri Shiv Kumar S/o Shri Promod Kumar, Shri Praveen Kumar S/o Shri Sohan Lal, Shri Pardeep Kumar

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

189

S/o Shri Manvir singh, Shri Javed Ahmed S/o Shri Liak Ahmed and Shri Sukh Lal S/o Ramji Lal as beldars instead of

Nala beldars with effect from 01.04.2006, i.e. the date of their regularization. An award is accordingly passed. Let this

award be sent to the appropriate Government, as required under Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for

publication.

Dated : October 16, 2018

A.C. DOGRA, Presiding Officer

नई दली, 18 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 33

33

33

33.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

$बंधन, कीय बोड ऑफ Dसचाई और पावर का $बंधन और अय एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और

उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय,

नई दली -1 के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 66/2015) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 29/11/2018 को $ा; <ए थे।

[सं. एल-42012/202/2014-आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2018

S.O. 33.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.66/2015) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court-1, New

delhi as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Managrment of Central

Board of Irrigation and Power Lt., and others, and their workmen which were received by the Central Government on

29.11.2018.

[No. L-42012/202/2014-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

IN THE COURT OF SHRI AVTAR CHAND DOGRA : PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT No. 1, DWARKA COURTS COMPLEX : NEW DELHI

ID No. 66/2015

Shri Ajeet Singh

S/o. late Shri Veer Singh,

through Shri Vinay Kumar

Chamber No.B-93, BGS Block,

Tis Hazari Courts,

Delhi 110054

…Workman/Claimant

Versus

The Management of Central Board of Irrigation & Power,

Through its Secretary, Malcha Marg,

Chankyapuri, New Delhi.

…Management

AWARD

This Award shall dispose of a reference which was made to this Tribunal by the appropriate Government vide

letter No. L-42012/202/2014-IR(DU) dated 14.08.2015 under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of

Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(in short the Act) for adjudication of an industrial dispute, terms of which

are as under:

‘Whether the termination of Shri Ajeet Singh appointed on compassionate ground after the death of his father Is

illegal and unjustified ? If so, what relief the claimant is entitled to and what directions are necessary in this

regard ?’

2.

Both parties were put to notice and the claimant. The claimant Ajeet Singh filed his statement of claim, with

the averments that his father Shri Veer Singh was appointed by the Management on the post of Helper-cum-Plumber

vide appointment letter dated 24/4/1986 and was a permanent employee. His father expired on 30/5/2005, leaving

behind his widow, two sons and two daughters. After the death of Shri Veer Singh, his son Ajeet Singh moved an

application dated 26/9/2005 for appointment on compassionate grounds, in place of his deceased father. The

190

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Management duly considered the said application & the claimant Ajeet Singh was appointed as Attendant on temporary

basis, vide office order dated 9/1/2006 initially for three months which period was extended time and again. It has been

pleaded that the claimant had uninterrupted and unblemished service record to his credit. In the month of March,2007

instead of confirming the workman/claimant or giving him further extension, the Management started compelling him to

work through contractor and the Management also did not allow him to mark his attendance and even his salary for the

month of April, 2007 was withheld. Ultimately services of the workman were terminated illegally by the Management

w.e.f. 1/5/2007 without following the principle of natural justice, though he was working on a job of regular and

permanent nature, which is continuing with the Management. A civil suit bearing CS No.787/13 was filed by the

workman wherein liberty was granted to the workman vide order dated 10/9/2013 to approach the Labour Court against

illegal termination. The workman is totally unemployed since his termination. As such action of the management in

terminating the services of the workman amounts to unfair labour practice inasmuch as no notice or notice pay was given

to him at the time of termination of his services and termination is in violation of Section 25-F, G & H of the Act. Prayer

has been made for reinstatement of the workman into service with full back wages alongwith all consequential benefits.

3.

The claim petition has been resisted by the Management who filed its written statement and took preliminary

objections that the claim petition before this Tribunal is not maintainable as the Management No.1 is not an

instrumentality of State or Central Government. There never existed any employer-employee relationship between the

parties and that the claimant has not worked for 240 days in a calendar year and as such the claimant has no locus standi

to file the present claim petition.. While denying the allegations of the claimant that father of the claimant was

permanent employee of the Management, it has been alleged that father of the claimant was appointed vide appointment

letter dated dated 24/4/1986 for three months and therefore question of any permanent appointment does not arise. only

for six months but date of his death is not in the knowledge of the Management It has been alleged that the claimant was

engaged only on temporary basis for three months at a consolidated salary of Rs.4000/- per month vide office order dated

9/1/2006. It has also been alleged that the salary of the claimant for the month of April, 2017 has not withheld Since the

claimant was never a regular employee, as such question of termination of his services on any date did not arise. It has

further been alleged that civil suit filed by the claimant was for regularization in service deeming that he is in

employment and now a new story has been cooked up that it is a case of termination to invoke the jurisdiction of this

Tribunal. Prayer has been made for dismissal of the claim petition.

4.

The claimant/workman filed rejoinder wherein he denied all the allegations made by the Management and

reiterated his own case as set up in the claim petition.

5.

On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed on 3/10/2016 :-

i) Whether reference is not legally maintainable in view of the varius preliminary objections ?

ii) In terms of reference ?

iii) Relief.

6. The Claimant in support of his case examined himself as W.W.1 and tendered his affidavit Ex.WW1/A alongwith

documents Ex.WW1/1 to WW1/12.

7.

On the other hand, the Management in order to rebut the case of the claimant examined one Shri P.P. Wahi,

Director (IT) as MW1 who tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.MW1/A alongwith documents Ex.MW1/1.

8.

I have carefully gone through the evidence adduced on record by both the parties and have give my thoughtful

consideration to rival contentions of the parties counsel.

Issue No.1 :

9.

Learned A/R for the Management No.1 vehementally argued that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain

the claim petition since the Management No.1 -Board viz. Central Board of Irrigation & Power is not an instrumentality

of State or Central Government rather it is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act. She submitted that

Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 18/9/2013 in W.P.() No.334/1998 and others writ petitions filed by the workers of

the Management has held that the Board/Management No.1 is not an instrumentality of State under Article 12 of the

Constitution of India, as the said Board is not performing public functions/public duties. As such, the reference is not

legally maintainable.

10.

Per-contra, learned A/R for the workman submitted that this Tribunal has all powers to adjudicate and decide

the Reference which has been made by the Appropriate Government under the provisions of the Act and moreso the

Management –Board being a registered Society is an “industry” as defined under Section 2(j) of the Act.

11.

Since the workman/claimant was admittedly engaged by the Management No.1 – may be on temporary basis, on

the job of Attendant, he is a workman, within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Act. The definition of workman does

not make any distinction between full time and part time employee or a person appointed on contract basis. There is

nothing in the plain language of Section 2(s) from which it can be inferred that only person employed on regular basis or

a person employed for doing whole time job is a workman and the one employed on temporary, part time or contract

basis on fixed wages or as a casual employee or for doing duty for fixed hours in not a workman. Reference may be

made to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Davinder Singh Vs. Municipal Council Sanaur, AIR 2011

(SC 2532).

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

191

12.

Just because the Management No.1-Board is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, it will

be improper to say that it is not an “industry”. I may mention that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Bangalore

Water Supply & Sewage Board Vs. A. Rajappa AIR 1978 SC 548 dealt at length with the ambit and scope of

expression “industry” as defined under Section 2(j) of the Act and held as under :-

“(a) Where a complex of activities, some of which qualify for exemption, other not involves employees on the

total undertaking some of whom are not “workman” as in the University of Delhi case (supra) or some

departments are not productive of goods and services, if isolated, even then the predominant nature of the

services and integrated nature of the departments as explained in the Corporation of Nagpur (supra) will

be the true test. The whole undertaking will be “industry” although those who are not “workmen” by

definition may not benefit by the statue.

(b)

Notwithstanding the previous clauses, sovereign functions strictly understood (alone) qualify for

exemption, not the welfare activities or economic adventures undertaken by the Government or Statutory

bodies.

( c)

Even in departments discharging sovereign functions, if there are units which are industries and they are

substantially severable, they can be considered to come within Section 2(j).

(d)

Constitutional and competently enacted legislative provisions may well remove from the scope of the

Act, categories which otherwise may be covered thereby

(e)

We overrule Safdarjung (supra), Solicitors’ case(supra),Gymkhana (supra, Delhi University (supra)

Dhanrajgiri Hospital (supra) and other ruling whose ratio run counter to the principles enunciated above

and Hospital Mazdor Sabha (supra) is hereby rehabilitated.

13.

In view of the law enunciated by the Apex Court, as discussed above, I am of the considered view that

Management No.1-Board is an “industry” within the definition of Section 2(j) of the Act

14.

Since Delhi is a Union Territory, the reference made to this Tribunal for adjudication of Industrial Dispute can

be made either by the Central Government or by the State Government in terms of Rule 2(f) of the Industrial Disputes

(Central) Rules, 1957. To this view I am fortified with the decision in the case of Kanhaiya Lal Vs. Union of India,

2007 (113) FLR 770. Furthermore, the nomenclature of the Management No.1 viz. Central Board of Irrigation & Power

(CBIP) is such that even a prudent man may think it is an institution of the Government. A “workman” doing a mineal

job is not expected to exactly know the intracacies about the constitution of the Management Board or to exactly know as

to whether it is simply a Society under the Societies Registration Act or the department/establishment of the Government.

It is a matter of record that in the civil suit filed by the claimant herein, the Management had taken a preliminary

objection about the maintainability of the civil suit and the said suit was disposed by learned Civil Judge, granting liberty

to the claimant to approach the Labour Court. Thereafter the claimant had approached the Conciliation Officer and the

proceedings before the said forum culminated into the present reference. Law is well settled that when a reference has

been received by the Industrial Tribunal from the Appropriate Government, it has to decide such a reference on merits.

The Tribunal can not go into the validity of the reference.

15.

In view of the aforesaid discussion coupled with the fact that the claimant is “workman” & the Mangement is an

“industry” within the definitions as provided in the Act, this Tribunal is of the considered view that the present

reference having been made to this Tribunal by the appropriate Government is legally maintainable. This issue is

accordingly decided in favour of the claimant and against the Management No.1.

Issue No.2 :

16.

From the pleading of the parties and evidence adduced on record, particularly the documents Ex.WW1/2 (offer

of appointment) and Ex.WW1/3 to Ex.WW1/7 (letters of appointment/extension of service of the claimant ) issued by the

Management No.1, it is evident that the claimant Ajeet Singh was appointed by Management No.1 purely on temporary

basis as Attendant/Helper for the work relating to plumbering w.e.f. 2/1/2006 on a consolidated salary of Rs.4000/- per

month, with reference to his application dated 2/8/2005 for employment on compassionate grounds after the death of his

father . Vide order dated 24/4/1986 (Ex.WW1/8), Shri Veer Singh – father of the claimant herein was appointed by the

Management for the post of Helper on adhoc basis pursuant to his interview. Ex.WW1/9 is the copy of pay slip of the

said Shri Veer Singh for the month of October, 2004. Ex.WW1/10 is the copy of the identity card issued to Shri Veer

Singh, Helper by the Management which was issued on 1/4/2004 and was valid upto 31/10/2016. In the light of

documents Ex.WW1/8 to Ex.WW1/0, it does not lie in the mouth of the Management to allege that Shri Veer Singh –

father of the claimant was not a permanent employee. The plea of the Management that the claimant has not worked for

240 days in a calendar year also falsifies inasmuch as MW1 PP Wahi –witness of the Management admitted in his cross

examination that the claimant worked with the Management from 9/1/2006 to March, 2007. This witness also admitted

that the claimant was the only employee alongwith Shri Mohan Lal who were appointed on compassionate grounds. He

further admitted that the work of attendant is regular in nature.

17.

As discussed above, it is proved that the claimant/workman was in continuous service of the Management from

9/1/2006 till his termination. There is nothing on record to suggest that retrenchment benefits have been paid to the

claimant by the Management at the time of his termination from services. MW1 PP Wahi has clarified in his cross

examination that no show cause notice or memo was given to the claimant, but volunteered that same was not required.

Once the claimant had worked with the Management for 240 days in a calendar year, it was obligatory on the part of the

Management to comply with the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act.

192

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

18.

There is long line of decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court as well as of various High Courts that provisions of

Section 25-F of the Act are mandatory in nature and termination of the workman from services in derogation of the

provisions of Section 25-F of the Act will render action of the Management to be illegal and void under the law.

19.

Since there is no evidence on record that any valid notice was issued by the Management to the workman at the

time of termination or in lieu of such notice, any compensation was paid to him, as such action of the Management in

terminating the services of the workman is held to be illegal and void. There is also nothing on record to prove that

wages for the month of April, 2007 was paid to the workman. The Management should have produced documents in this

regard.

20.

Now the residual question is whether the claimant/work is entitled to any incidental relief of payment of back

wages and/or reinstatement of service with full back wages. It is proved on record that claimant was continuously in the

employment of the Management w.e.f. 9/1/2006 to March, 2007. There is no show cause notice or memo issued to the

claimant/workman by the Management. Moreover, the job of the Attendant is of perennial and regular nature which fact

has been admitted by MW1 Shri PP Wahi, Director (IT) of the Management Board. The claimant WW1 has reiterated in

his cross examination that he is unemployed since 2007 though he tried for a job but could not get.

21.

The Hon’ble Apex Court in case “Deepali Gundu Surwase v. Kranti Junior Adhyapak Mahavidyalaya”

reported as (2013) 10 SCC 324 has held as under :

“The propositions which can be culled out from the aforementioned judgments are :

In cases of wrongful termination of service, reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages is the

normal rule. Ordinarily, an employee or workman whose services are terminated and who is desirous of getting

back wages is required to either plead or at least make a statement before the adjudicating authority or the Court

of first instance that he/she was not gainfully employed or was employed on lesser wages. If the employer wants

to avoid payment of full back wages, then I has to plead and also lead cogent evidence to prove that the

employee/workman wads gainfully employed and was getting wages equal to the wages he/she wads drawing

prior to the termination of service. This is so because it is settled law that the burden of proof of the existence of

a particular fact lies on the person who makes a positive averments about its existence. It is always easier to

prove a positive fact than to prove a negative fact. Therefore, once the employee shows that he was employed,

the onus lies on the employer to specifically plead and prove that the employee was gainfully employed and was

getting the same or substantially similar emoluments.”

22.

The Hon’ble Apex Court also held that different expressions are used for describing the consequence of

termination of a workman’s service/employment/engagement by way of retrenchment without complying with the

mandate of Section 25F of the Act. Sometimes it has been termed as ab initio void, sometimes as illegal per se, sometime

as nullity and sometimes as non est. Leaving aside the legal semantics, we have no hesitation to hold that termination of

service of an employee by way of retrenchment without complying with the requirement of giving one month’s notice or

pay in lieu thereof and compensation in terms of Section 25F (a) and (b) has the effect of rendering the action of the

employer and nullity and the employee is entitled to continue in employment as if his service was not terminated. (Anoop

Sharma Vs. Executive Engineer, Public Health Division No.1 Panipat (2010) 5 SCC 497).

23.

A Bench of three Judges of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Tin Works Private Limited v.

Employees of Hindustan Tin Works Private Limited (1979) 2 SCC 80 held that relief of reinstatement with continuity of

service can be granted where termination of service is found to be invalid. It would mean that the employer has taken

away illegally the right to work of the workman contrary to the relevant law or in breach of contract and simultaneously

deprived the workman of his earnings. If thus the act of employer is found to be totally illegal and arbitrary, in that

eventuality the workman is required to be reinstated, with full back wages. Plain common sense also dictates that the

removal of an order terminating the services of workmen must ordinarily lead to the reinstatement of the services of the

workmen alongwith payment of back wages.

24.

However, Hon’ble Apex Court in the case General Manager, Haryana Roadways Vs. Rudan Singh, reported as

2005 SCC (L&S) 716 observed as under :-

“8. There is no rule of thumb that in every case where the Industrial Tribunal gives a finding that the termination

of service was in violation of Section 25-F of the Act, entire back wages should be awarded. A host of factors

like the manner and method of selection and appointment i.e. whether after proper advertisement of the vacancy

or inviting applications from the employment exchange, nature of appointment namely, whether ad hoc, short

term, daily wage, temporary or permanent in character, any special qualification required for the job and the like

should be weighed and balanced in taking a decision regarding award of back wages. One of the important

factors which has to be taken into consideration is the length of service, which the workman had rendered

with the employer. If the workman has rendered a considerable period of service and his services are

wrongfully terminated, he may be awarded full or partial back wages keeping in view the fact that at this age

and the qualification possessed by him he may not be in a position to get another employment. However,

where the total length of service rendered by a workman is very small, the award of back wages for the

complete period i.e. from the date of termination till the date of the award, which our experience shows is

often quite large, would be wholly inappropriate. A regular service of permanent character cannot be

compared to short or intermittent daily wage employment though it may be for 240 days in a calander year.”

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

193

25.

Yet in another latest case of Bholanath Lal and others Vs. Shree Om Enterprises (P) Ltd.,

Manu/DE/1922/2018 (decided on 10/5/2018), Hon’ble High Court of Delhi while considering the question of illegal

termination and reinstatement held as under :-

“The cases in which the competent court or tribunal finds that the employer has acted in gross violation of the

statutory provisions and/or the principles of natural justice or is guilty of victimizing the employee or workman,

then the court or tribunal concerned will be fully justified in directing payment of full back wages. In such

cases, the superior courts should not exercise power under Article 226 or 136 of the Constitution and interfere

with the award passed by the Labour Court, etc. merely because there is a possibility of forming a different

opinion on the entitlement of the employee/workman to get full back wages or the employer’s obligation to pay

the same The courts must always keep in view that that in the cases of wrongful/illegal termination of service,

the wrongdoer is the employer and the sufferer is the employee./workman and there is no justification to give a

premium to the employer of his wrongdoings by relieving him of the burden to pay to the employee/ workman

his dues in the form of full back wages.”

A similar view has been taken in the case of Delhi Jal Board Vs. Vimal Kumar (decided on 5-4-2018)

MANU/de/1322/2018 wherein service of a casual driver was terminated without any notice or payment of one month’s

salary in lieu of such notice. The Industrial Tribunal answering the reference held the action of the management to be

illegal and in violation of Section 25-F of the Act. The Award was upheld by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi by observing

as under :-

“In view of the above discussion, I am unable to discern any illegality or infirmity in the impugned Award,

dated 29th May, 2003, of the Labour Court, to the extent that it holds the termination of the services of the

respondent, by the petitioner, to be illegal and unlawful. I am entirely in agreement with the finding, of the

Labour Court, that the services of the respondent were retrenched in violation of Section 25-F of the ID Act and

that, therefore, he was entitled to be reinstated in service with all consequential benefits. In view of the fact that

going by the age of the respondent as disclosed in the counter affidavit filed before this Court, he would, today,

be only 50 years of age, and also in view of the fact that the termination of his services as SCM Driver was not

on account of any deficiency or shortcoming detected in the manner of discharge by the respondent, of his duties

as such, I am of the opinion, that the facts of the present case, do not warrant any interference with the direction,

of the Labour Court, to the petitioner to reinstate the respondent in service with the benefit of continuity of

service. The petitioner is, therefore, directed to reinstate the respondent in service forthwith. Inasmuch as the

respondent has not been rendering any service to the petitioner since the date of his termination, however, the

back wages payable to the respondent would be limited to 50 per cent of the wages which he would have drawn

he had continued to serve the petitioner…..”

26.

Having regard to the legal position as discussed above and the fact that the claimant was performing duty to a

post of regular and perennial nature, this Tribunal is of the firm view that the claimant herein is entitled for

reinstatement into service on the same post, with 50 per cent back wages, iinasmuch as termination of the

claimant/workman is per-se illegal, particularly when the job is of regular and perennial nature and the

claimant/workman is not gainfully employed anywhere since after his termination by the Management. Award is passed

accordingly.

Date : 28.11.2018

AVTAR CHAND DOGRA, Presiding Officer

नई दली, 18 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 34

34

34

34.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

सेHशन ऑफसर, ओवरसीज इंिडयन अफेयस िमिन&Jी नई दली और अय एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0

िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म

यायालय, नई दली-1 के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 1/2016) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 06.12.2018 को

$ा; <ए थे ।

[सं. एल-42025/03/2018- आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

194

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2018

S.O. 34.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No 1/2016) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-1, New

Delhi as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Section Officer,

Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs New Delhi, and others, and their workmen which were received by the Central

Government on 06.12.2018.

[No. L-42025/03/2018-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

IN THE COURT OF SHRI AVTAR CHAND DOGRA : PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT No. 1, DWARKA COURTS COMPLEX : NEW DELHI

ID No. 01/2016

Sudhri Kumar S/o. Shri Rameshwar Dayal,

Delhi General Udyog Karamchari Sangh (Regd.),

Chamber No.75, Civil Wing,

Tis Hazari Courts,

Delhi 110054.

… Workman

Versus

1. Section Officer,

Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs,

Akbar Bhawan,

New Delhi 110021

2. M/s. Stander Trading Company,

428/A Kewal Industrial Estate,

Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel West,

Mumbai 400013.

3. M/s. Stander Trading Company,

Akbar Bhawan, 9th Floor, OCI Room No.912,

Chankayapuri

New Delhi 110021

…Management

AWARD

This is a claim directly filed by the Workman/claimant Shri Sudhir Kumar under Section 2(A) of the Industrial

Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), with the averments that workman had been working in the office of

the Management No.1 through the contractor –Management No.2 & 3 for the post of Printer Operator and was getting

wages of Rs.8500/- per month. He was doing his work sincerely and honestly. Supervision and control over his work

was that of principal employer viz Management No.1. The workman was not given any appointment letter, casual leave,

minimum wages, overtime etc. despite oral demands made. Though ESI and EPF contributions used to be deducted from

his wages/salary, however neither any ESI card nor PF receipt/statement was issued to him. It is alleged that the

Management had obtained his signatures and thumb impression on blank papers and used to threat him to terminate from

services Wages for the month of May, 2015 was not paid to him and he was terminated from services illegally on

29/5/2015 by the Management, without issuing any notice or charge sheet and without payment of compensation in lieu

of notice period. The workman sent a demand letter dated 8/6/2015 to the Management but to no response. It is also

alleged that the workman is unemployed since after his termination and he has no source of his livelihood. Prayer has

been made for his reinstatement into service with full back wages and with all consequential benefits.

2.

The claim petition has been resisted by the Managements No.2 & 3 who filed joint written statement and took

preliminary objections that before the Conciliation Officer on 14/12/2015, the Management had offered the workman to

join duty at his earlier working place and had already paid him advance salary for the month of June, 2015. It was the

workman who himself left his services on 29/5/2015 without giving any prior notice or information and the workman did

not join his duty despite repeated requests and phone calls of the Maagement. If the intention of the Management was to

terminate the services of the workman, there was no reason for the Management to pay him salary for the month of June,

2015. In nut-shell, case of the Management is that the workman himself abandon the job and failed to join duty despite

requests. The allegations of the workman regarding his illegal termination or about his unemployment have been denied.

Since the workman has been absenting himself from duty unauthorisedly and not reporting for duty despite repeated

requests, it is stated that the claimant is not entitled to any relief. Prayer has been made for rejection of the claim petition.

3.

Management No.1 did not participate in the proceedings and was proceeded ex parte vide order dated 6/3/2017

when following issues were framed on the pleadings of the parties:-

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

195

1)

Whether termination of the claimant on 29/5/2015 is illegal and against provisions of Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 as alleged?

2)

Whether the claimant has abandoned his services as alleged ?

3)

Whether the claimant is entitled for reinstatement with full back wages and continuity of service ?

4. The Claimant in support of his case examined herself as W.W.1 and tendered her affidavit Ex.WW1/A alongwith

documents Ex.WW1/1 to WW1/3.

5.

On the other hand, the Management in order to rebut the case of the claimant examined Shri Hemant

Chandrakant Trivedi, Project Manager as MW1 and he tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.MW1/A alongwith

documents Ex.MW1/1 to Ex.MW1/5.

6.

I have heard Shri Devender Sharma, A/R for the claimant and Shri M.L. Pandey, A/R for the Management No.2

and 3 and have gone through the records carefully. My findings on the above issues are as follows.

Issue No.1 and 2 :

7. Both these issues being inter related are being taken up together for the purpose of discussion and they can be

conveniently disposed of.

8.

From the pleadings of the parties and evidence adduced on record, it is manifest that there existed relationship of

employee-employer between the workman/claimant herein and the Management No.2 and 3 as he was working under the

said Management April, 2011. This fact also finds corroboration from the pay slips Ex.WW1/1 (colly.) of the workman

and documents Ex.MW1/1 to Ex.MW1/5 filed on record by Management No.2 and 3 However, the workman has failed

to adduce any cogent evidence to show that over his work there was direct control & supervision of Management No.1 or

that the Management No.1 had engaged him for the job.

9.

Testimony of the workman by way of affidavit Ex.WW1/A is in line with the averments made in the statement

of claim. It is the specific case of the workman that Wages for the month of May, 2015 was not paid to him and his

services were illegally terminated on 29/5/2015 by the Management, without issuing any notice or charge sheet and

without payment of compensation in lieu of notice period. Shri Hemant Chandrakant Trivedi MW1- sole witness

examined by the Management though claimed that the workman was on unauthorized absence from duty and that the

Management had made oral requests to the workman to join duty, however admitted that the Management did not issue

any charge sheet regarding unauthorized absence of the workman, nor conducted any enquiry against him. He also stated

that no appointment letter was issued to the workman. He also admitted that the workman worked in Delhi from the

date of his engagement. Even if the workman remained unauthorised absent from duty w.e.f. 31/5/2015, it was

incumbent upon the Management No.2 & 3 to issue letter/notice, asking the workman to report back for duty or to hold

enquiry against him regarding his unauthorized absence prior to termination of his services. Nothing of the sort has been

done by the Management. As such, it can not be concluded that the workman himself had abandoned the job of the

Management No.2 and 3 voluntarily or that he was not interested to work there.

10.

Order sheet dated 3/10/2016 shows that during pendency of the matter, the Management No.2 and 3 herein had

filed an application directing the claimant to report for duty and the claimant had shown his inclination to join duties,

without prejudice to his rights. However, on 28/11/2016 the claimant had informed the Tribunal that as per previous

order he had gone to the Office of Management for reporting duties but the Management had clearly told him that there

was no vacant post in Delhi and he might join duties at Mumbai. This was suggestive of the fact that the Management

did not have any regard for the verbal undertaking given by its A/R. Despite that another opportunity was granted to the

Management to consider the aspect of posting of the claimant in any of its two branches in Delhi –either at Akbar

Bhawan and Patiala House but the Management failed to do so. These facts lead this Tribunal to draw an inference that

the Management was not at all interested to allow the workman to join duty at Delhi and to harass the workman, they

wanted him to post at its office at Mumbai, despite the fact that the workman since very beginning was working at its

Delhi office. Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, it can be safely concluded that the

services of the workman were illegally terminated by the Management, inasmuch as neither any notice nor any

compensation in lieu of notice period has been paid by it to the workman. There is long line of decisions of Hon’ble

Apex Court as well as of various High Courts that provisions of Section 25-F of the Act are mandatory in nature and

termination of the workman from services in derogation of the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act will render whole

action of the Management Bank to be illegal and wrong under the law. Resultantly, it is held that the action of the

Management in terminating services of the workman w.e.f. 29/5/2015 is void, illegal and against the provisions of the

Act. These issues are, therefore, decided in favour of the workman and against the Management.

Issue No. 3 :

11.

Now the residual question is whether the claimant/work is entitled to any incidental relief of payment of back

wages and/or reinstatement of service with full back wages. Though it was alleged by the claimant/workman that he was

not paid wages for the month of May, 2015 but he admitted in his cross examination that salary for the month of May,

2015 was credited in his account with HDFC Bank. As such, this claim of the workman/claimant is not tenable. This

Tribunal while rendering findings on Issue No.1 and 2 has held that the Management has failed to comply with the

provisions of Section 25-F of the Act prior to termination of the workman from service. It is undisputed fact that the

workman was serving under the Management for a job of regular and perennial in nature, for the last about four years

prior to termination of his service. The workman has categorically pleaded and deposed on oath that he is unemployed

196

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

since after his termination. The Management has not adduced any evidence to show that the workman/claimant is

gainfully employed.

12.

The Hon’ble Apex Court in case “Deepali Gundu Surwase v. Kranti Junior Adhyapak Mahavidyalaya”

reported as (2013) 10 SCC 324 has held as under :

“The propositions which can be culled out from the aforementioned judgments are :

i)

In cases of wrongful termination of service, reinstatement with continuity of service and back

wages is the normal rule.

ii)

Ordinarily, an employee or workman whose services are terminated and who is desirous of

getting back wages is required to either plead or at least make a statement before the

adjudicating authority or the Court of first instance that he/she was not gainfully employed or

was employed on lesser wages. If the employer wants to avoid payment of full back wages,

then I has to plead and also lead cogent evidence to prove that the employee/workman wads

gainfully employed and was getting wages equal to the wages he/she wads drawing prior to

the termination of service. This is so because it is settled law that the burden of proof of the

existence of a particular fact lies on the person who makes a positive averments about its

existence. It is always easier to prove a positive fact than to prove a negative fact. Therefore,

once the employee shows that he was employed, the onus lies on the employer to specifically

plead and prove that the employee was gainfully employed and was getting the same or

substantially similar emoluments.”

13.

The Hon’ble Apex Court also held that different expressions are used for describing the consequence of

termination of a workman’s service/employment/engagement by way of retrenchment without complying with the

mandate of Section 25F of the Act. Sometimes it has been termed as ab initio void, sometimes as illegal per se, sometime

as nullity and sometimes as non est. Leaving aside the legal semantics, we have no hesitation to hold that termination of

service of an employee by way of retrenchment without complying with the requirement of giving one month’s notice or

pay in lieu thereof and compensation in terms of Section 25F (a) and (b) has the effect of rendering the action of the

employer and nullity and the employee is entitled to continue in employment as if his service was not terminated. (Anoop

Sharma Vs. Executive Engineer, Public Health Division No.1 Panipat (2010) 5 SCC 497).

14.

A Bench of three Judges of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Tin Works Private Limited v.

Employees of Hindustan Tin Works Private Limited (1979) 2 SCC 80 held that relief of reinstatement with continuity of

service can be granted where termination of service is found to be invalid. It would mean that the employer has taken

away illegally the right to work of the workman contrary to the relevant law or in breach of contract and simultaneously

deprived the workman of his earnings. If thus the act of employer is found to be totally illegal and arbitrary, in that

eventuality the workman is required to be reinstated, with full back wages. Plain common sense also dictates that the

removal of an order terminating the services of workmen must ordinarily lead to the reinstatement of the services of the

workmen alongwith payment of back wages.

15.

However, Hon’ble Apex Court in the case General Manager, Haryana Roadways Vs. Rudan Singh,

reported as 2005 SCC (L&S) 716 observed as under :-

“8. There is no rule of thumb that in every case where the Industrial Tribunal gives a finding that the termination

of service was in violation of Section 25-F of the Act, entire back wages should be awarded. A host of factors

like the manner and method of selection and appointment i.e. whether after proper advertisement of the vacancy

or inviting applications from the employment exchange, nature of appointment namely, whether ad hoc, short

term, daily wage, temporary or permanent in character, any special qualification required for the job and the like

should be weighed and balanced in taking a decision regarding award of back wages. One of the important

factors which has to be taken into consideration is the length of service, which the workman had rendered

with the employer. If the workman has rendered a considerable period of service and his services are

wrongfully terminated, he may be awarded full or partial back wages keeping in view the fact that at this age

and the qualification possessed by him he may not be in a position to get another employment. However,

where the total length of service rendered by a workman is very small, the award of back wages for the

complete period i.e. from the date of termination till the date of the award, which our experience shows is

often quite large, would be wholly inappropriate. A regular service of permanent character cannot be

compared to short or intermittent daily wage employment though it may be for 240 days in a calander year.”

16.

Yet in another latest case of Bholanath Lal and others Vs. Shree Om Enterprises (P) Ltd.,

Manu/DE/1922/2018 (decided on 10/5/2018), Hon’ble High Court of Delhi while considering the question of illegal

termination and reinstatement held as under :-

“The cases in which the competent court or tribunal finds that the employer has acted in gross violation of the

statutory provisions and/or the principles of natural justice or is guilty of victimizing the employee or workman,

then the court or tribunal concerned will be fully justified in directing payment of full back wages. In such

cases, the superior courts should not exercise power under Article 226 or 136 of the Constitution and interfere

with the award passed by the Labour Court, etc. merely because there is a possibility of forming a different

opinion on the entitlement of the employee/workman to get full back wages or the employer’s obligation to pay

the same The courts must always keep in view that that in the cases of wrongful/illegal termination of service,

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

197

the wrongdoer is the employer and the sufferer is the employee./workman and there is no justification to give a

premium to the employer of his wrongdoings by relieving him of the burden to pay to the employee/ workman

his dues in the form of full back wages.”

A similar view has been taken in the case of Delhi Jal Board Vs. Vimal Kumar (decided on 5-4-2018)

MANU/de/1322/2018 wherein service of a casual driver was terminated without any notice or payment of one month’s

salary in lieu of such notice. The Industrial Tribunal answering the reference held the action of the management to be

illegal and in violation of Section 25-F of the Act. The Award was upheld by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi by observing

as under :-

“In view of the above discussion, I am unable to discern any illegality or infirmity in the impugned Award,

dated 29th May, 2003, of the Labour Court, to the extent that it holds the termination of the services of the

respondent, by the petitioner, to be illegal and unlawful. I am entirely in agreement with the finding, of the

Labour Court, that the services of the respondent were retrenched in violation of Section 25-F of the ID Act and

that, therefore, he was entitled to be reinstated in service with all consequential benefits. In view of the fact that

going by the age of the respondent as disclosed in the counter affidavit filed before this Court, he would, today,

be only 50 years of age, and also in view of the fact that the termination of his services as SCM Driver was not

on account of any deficiency or shortcoming detected in the manner of discharge by the respondent, of his duties

as such, I am of the opinion, that the facts of the present case, do not warrant any interference with the direction,

of the Labour Court, to the petitioner to reinstate the respondent in service with the benefit of continuity of

service. The petitioner is, therefore, directed to reinstate the respondent in service forthwith.

Inasmuch as the respondent has not been rendering any service to the petitioner since the date of his

termination, however, the back wages payable to the respondent would be limited to 50 per cent of the wages

which he would have drawn he had continued to serve the petitioner…..”

17.

Having regard to the legal position as discussed above and the fact that the claimant was performing duty to a

post of regular and perennial nature, this Tribunal is of the firm view that the claimant herein is entitled for

reinstatement into service on the same post, with 50 per cent back wages, iinasmuch as termination of the

claimant/workman is per-se illegal and the claimant/workman is not gainfully employed anywhere since after his

termination by the Management No.2 and 3. Award is passed accordingly against Management 2 & 3.

Date : 04.12.2018

AVTAR CHAND DOGRA, Presiding Officer

नई दली, 20 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 35

35

35

35.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947(1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस मु8य महा$बंधक, दूरसंचार िवभाग अहमदाबाद, और अय एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और

उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय,

नई अहमदाबाद के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या. 1165/2004) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 24.08.18 को $ा; <ए

थे।

[सं. एल-40012/444/2000- आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

New Delhi, the 20th December, 2018

S.O. 35.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.1165/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court

Ahmedabad, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Chife General

Manager, Telecom Department Ahmedabad, and others, and their workmen which were received by the Central

Government on 24.08.18.

[No. L-40012/444/2000-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

198

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

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

AHMEDABAD

Present : Pramod Kumar Chaturvedi, Presiding Officer, CGIT cum Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated 06th August, 2018

Reference: (CGITA) No. 1165/2004

1. The Chief General Manager,

Telecom Department,

Seva Sadan Building, 1st Floor, Bhadra,

Ahmedabad (Gujarat) – 380001

2. The Telecom District Manager,

Telecom Department,Near Aiankar Talkies,

Surendranagar (Gujarat) – 363001

…First Party

V/s

The President,

Saurashtra Employees Union,

City Shops, 3rd Floor, Opposite Jagnath Police Chowky,

Dr. Yagnik Road,

Rajkot (Gujarat) – 360001

…Second Party

For the First Party

: Shri H.R. Raval

For the Second Party

: Ms. Kajal Kalwani

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-40012/444/2000–

IR(DU) dated 18.01.2001 referred the dispute for adjudication to theIndustrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) in

respect of the matter specified in the Schedule:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the management of Telecom Department, Surendranagar/Ahmedabad in

terminating/discontinuing the services of Shri Jasmuddin Ansari, Casual Labour w.e.f. 30.09.1997 is just, valid

and legal? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled and what directions are necessary in the matter?”

1. The reference dates back to 18.01.2001 and received on 12.02.2001 from Ministry of Labour and Employment,

New Delhi for adjudication.

2. In response to the notice issued to the parties, the second party submitted the statement of claim Ex. 2 alleging

that he was engaged as a Casual Labour by the first parties The Chief General Manager, Telecom Department,

Seva Sadan Building, 1st Floor, Bhadra, Ahmedabad and The Telecom District Manager, Telecom Department,

Near Aiankar Talkies, Surendranagar on 03.07.1979 where he worked till 29.02.1984. Thereafter, he was re-

engaged on 01.02.1989 till August, 1997 by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Phone), Surendranagar and Sub-

Divisional Officer (Telephone), Ahmedabad. The copies of the working days are enclosed with the statement of

claim mark as 1. Thus he continuously worked for 15 years with the first party and also worked for more than

240 days in the last preceding 12 months prior to the termination of his service in the month of August, 1997

without following the procedure laid down in Section 25 F of the Industrial Disputes Act. He has further alleged

that while terminating his service, the persons/workmen junior to him were retained and many of them have also

been regularised violating the provisions of Section 25 F, G and H of the Industrial Disputes Act. He has further

alleged that he was entitled for temporary status as per the scheme of the first party which was denied to him in

mala-fide manner by termination of his service by way of oral order. Thus he has prayed for declaring the

termination as illegal in violation of the provisions of Section 25 F, G and H of the Industrial Disputes Act and

Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

3. The first parties The Chief General Manager, Telecom Department, Seva Sadan Building, 1st Floor, Bhadra,

Ahmedabad and The Telecom District Manager, Telecom Department, Near Aiankar Talkies, Surendranagar,

jointly submitted the written statement Ex. 6 denying the averments made in the statement of claim submitted

that the second party workman has no cause of action, the reference is barred by Limitation Act and

misconceived, therefore, liable to be dismissed. It is further submitted that the judgement of Central

Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh in O.A. No. 1075/HP of 1996 has held that daily wages employees cannot

claim any right to hold civil post and in State of Himachal Pradesh V/s Suresh A. Kumar Verma, 1996 (2) SC C

455, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that appointment to a post in the Government of India can only be

according to its rules and the Court cannot give any direction to re-engage such persons in any work or to

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

199

appoint him against the existing vacancies and if the Court does so, the judicial process would become another

mode of recruitment de-hors of rules. Similarly, the Supreme Court in Tulsi Ram Patel V/s Government of

India, AIR 1985 SC 1416, has held that the servants employed by the Government of India hold the post under

the pleasure of the President of India and such pleasure cannot be curtailed by a parliamentary enactment. It has

been further submitted that the workman worked from July, 1979 to 29.02.1984 under SDO, Telephones,

Ahmedabad and Surendranagar and remained absent from 01.03.1984 to 31.01.1989 at his own accord without

intimating the first party and such period of absence cannot be condoned as per rules. It is further submitted that

the workman re-engaged as Casual Labour from 01.02.1989 to 28.02.1991 under SDO, Telephones,

Dharangadhara and from 01.03.1991 to 30.03.1997 under SDO, Telephones, Halvad. It is wrong to say that he

was re-engaged by SDO, Telephones, Surendranagar and Ahmedabad. It is further submitted that his services

were terminated following the procedure laid down in Section 25 of the Industrial Disputes Act as there was no

work available to be given to the workman.

4. It is further submitted that the workman challenged the termination before the Central Administrative Tribunal,

Ahmedabad vide O.A. No. 583/1997 for regularising of service and consequential benefits which was

dismissed. No junior employee was retained while terminating his services. Thus the prayer sought by the

workman in his statement of claim has no force and liable to be rejected.

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

I.

Whether the action of the management of Telecom Department, Surendranagar/Ahmedabad in

terminating/discontinuing the services of Shri Jasmuddin Ansari, Casual Labour w.e.f. 30.09.1997 is

just, valid and legal?

II.

To what relief, if any, the employee concerned is entitled?

6. Issue No. I and II: Both the issues are interrelated, therefore, are to be decided together. The burden of proof of

these issues was lying on the second party workman. He has submitted his affidavit Ex. 10 reiterating the

averments made in the statement of claim. In his cross-examination, he has stated that he was engaged as Casual

Labour in July 1979 and worked till the year 1984, thereafter; he did not go to the office for doing work as he

was not given work. He was re-engaged in the year 1987 as Casual Labour on vouchers and he was orally

terminated on 30.09.1987. He also remained ill for 2 years during the year 1984 to 1989 and he did not inform

the first party regarding his illness. He was also given notice while terminating his service with 2 cheques as

notice pay which he returned to the first party. He admitted that he worked at Halvad and Tikar. He has also

admitted that no one was re-engaged or re-employed after his termination. He also admitted that he did not work

for 240 days in any calendar year. He is still unemployed though he searches the job. He has 5 members in his

family and used to earn Rs.1000/- by doing labour work.

7. After cross-examination of the workman, he stopped coming to the Tribunal and on 13.07.2017, The Assistant

General Manager (Legal), Telephones, Surendranagar, informed the Tribunal that the workman has expired. Ms.

Kajal Kalwani, advocate for the second party workman on 14.07.2017 requested for time to verify the facts

regarding the death of the workman but till date Ms. Kajal Kalwani is unable to explain regarding the facts.

8. Firstly, as the workman has expired, therefore, the reference has become abate as no legal heirs have moved any

application for their substitution as party in the place of the deceased workman. Secondly, the deceased

workman while alive has admitted that he was a casual labour and was retrenched after giving notice and paying

the notice pay by way of cheques. There is no proof on the record that he did not en-cash such cheques. Thirdly,

he cannot be said to be a workman as he admitted that he never worked for 240 days in any calendar year.

9. Thus the reference has no force and the action taken by the management of Telecom Department,

Surendranagar/Ahmedabad in terminating/discontinuing the services of Shri Jasmuddin Ansari, Casual Labour

w.e.f. 30.09.1997 cannot be said to be unjust and illegal.

10. The award is passed accordingly. No relief can be granted.

P.K. CHATURVEDI, Presiding Officer

नई दली, 20 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 36

36

36

36.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस मंडल सिचव, अिखल भारतीय डाक कम चारी संघ अहमदाबाद, और अय एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0

िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म

यायालय, नई दली -1 के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 978/2004) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 24.08.18 को

$ा; <ए थे ।

[सं. एल-40012/149/93- आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

200

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi, the 20th December, 2018

S.O. 36.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 978/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,

Ahmedabad, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Circlr

Secretary, All India postal Employees Union Ahmedabad, and others, and their workmen which were received by the

Central Government on 24.08.18.

[No. L-40012/149/93-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

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

AHMEDABAD

Present : Pramod Kumar Chaturvedi,Presiding Officer, CGIT cum Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated 06th August, 2018

Reference: (CGITA) No. 978/2004

1. The Supdt. Of Post Offices,

Kutch Division, Bhuj, Kutch (Gujarat)

2. The Chief Post Master General,

Gujarat Circle, Ahmedabad (Gujarat)

3. The Sub-Divisional Inspector,

Bhachau Post Office, Bhachau,

Kutch (Gujarat)

…First Party

V/s

The Circle Secretary,

All India Postal Employees Union,

Postman Class IV and EDAS,

BecharGnanchiChal, Opp. Behrampura,

Ahmedabad (Gujarat) – 380022

…Second Party

For the First Party

: Shri P.M. Rami

For the Second Party

: Shri R.C. Pathak

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-40012/149/93–

IR(DU) dated 25.11.1994 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 Supdt. Of Post Offices, Kachchh Division, Bhuj in terminating/not taking on

duties/discontinuance/the services of Shri Popatlal Gokalbhai Prajapati, Extra Departmental Agent, Chitrod

Branch of Post Office w.e.f. 13.05.1991 is valid, justified and legal? If not, to what benefits the workman is

entitled to and what directions are necessary in the matter?”

1. The reference dates back to 25.11.1994 and received on 12.12.1994 from Ministry of Labour and Employment,

New Delhi for adjudication.

2. In response to the notice issued by the Tribunal to the parties, the second party workman Popatlal Gokalbhai

Prajapati submitted the statement of claim Ex. 2 alleging that he was initially engaged as Postman by the first

party on 14.09.1988 against a clear vacant post of Postman and he worked on the said post till 13.05.1991 when

his services were suddenly terminated by the first party without following the due procedure of law. His work

was satisfactory during the said period. He has further alleged that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its various

decisions has observed as under: “Where the workman has worked for a period of more than 2 years

continuously then obviously the work will be of permanent nature and the said workman shall be absorbed by

the Management.” The Hon’ble Supreme Court specifically in a case of daily wages employee of Post and

Telegraph Department observed that there is no scheme of regularisation for Class IV employee in the Post and

Telegraph Department, therefore, all the employees of Post and Telegraph Department must be regularised who

have completed 360 days of service. He has further alleged that as per the circulars of the first party itself, such

workman was entitled for the grant of temporary status but the management neither granted him the temporary

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

201

status as per its circular nor regularise his service as per the decision of Supreme Court. Thus the termination

was unjust and illegal. He has further alleged that the management has not followed the principle of ‘last come

and first go’ as numbers of employees who were junior to him were retained in the service while terminating his

service. He was also not issued any notice or paid retrenchment compensation while terminating his services

violating the principles of Section 25 F, G and H of the Industrial Disputes Act. In the conciliation proceedings

also, the management did not agree for reinstatement of service. Therefore, he has prayed for reinstatement of

service with back wages, continuity of service and all the consequential benefits.

3. The first parties The Supdt. Of Post Offices, Kutch Division, Bhuj, Kutch (Gujarat), The Chief Post Master

General, Gujarat Circle, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) and The Sub-Divisional Inspector, Bhachau Post Office,

Bhachau, Kutch (Gujarat), partly admitting the averments made in the statement of claim, jointly submitted the

written statement Ex. 28 alleging that the workman has worked as Extra Departmental Agent from 14.09.1988

to 13.05.1991 and was not appointed or engaged as Postman as stated by him in his statement of clam. It is true

that the post on which he was engaged was of permanent nature but he was engaged purely on ad-hoc basis as a

stop-gap arrangement against the post of a regular employee named R.A. Sadhu who was placed under

suspension/put off duty. Thus the post was not vacant. The engagement of the workman was purely a stop-gap

arrangement to manage the work assigned to R.A. Sadhu till the disciplinary proceedings are finalised against

him. It is wrong to say that the services of the workman were terminated without following due process of law.

There was no violation of Section 25 F, G and H of the Industrial Disputes Act because he was not appointed on

permanent basis as said above. It is also submitted that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter

because the services of the Government servant under Union of India are not governed by the Industrial

Disputes Act. Their service disputes are always adjudicated by the Central Administrative Tribunal as the Post

and Telegraph Department is not an Industry. Thus the reference has no force and the prayed sought by the

workman is liable to be rejected.

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

I.

Whether the action of the Supdt. Of Post Offices, Kachchh Division, Bhuj in terminating/not taking on

duties/discontinuance/the services of Shri Popatlal Gokalbhai Prajapati, Extra Departmental Agent,

Chitrod Branch of Post Office w.e.f. 13.05.1991 is valid, justified and legal?

II.

To what relief, if any, the employee concerned is entitled?

5. Issue No. I and II: Both the issues are interrelated, therefore, are to be decided together. The burden of proof of

these issues was lying on the second party workman. The workman was examined vide Ex. 17 wherein he has

reiterated the averments made in the statement of claim and in his cross-examination, he has not said anything

contrary to his examination-in-chief but has not stated that he was recruited as per the procedure of the

recruitment rules of Post and Telegraph Department. He has admitted that he was engaged as a Extra

Departmental Agent as stop-gap arrangement for a fixed period from time to time. He submitted number of

documents vide list Ex. 7. Neither of the documents reveals that he was appointed on permanent basis but some

of the documents reveal that he was paying the premium of insurance in the Postal Department.

6. The first party examined one Valajibhai Maheshwari who has stated on oath that the second party workman was

not a permanent employee or Postman but he was engaged as Extra Departmental Agent in the leave vacancy of

a permanent employee who was subjected to disciplinary proceedings.

7. The workman in his oral and documentary evidences has not proved that any junior person has been appointed

after termination of his service.

8. The first party has submitted the departmental rules and regulations of recruitment (D.G., P.&T., Letter No. –

43-4/77-Pen., dated 18.05.1979 and Circular No. 19-34/99-ED & Trg., dated 30.12.1999) which provides as

under:

“(16) Provisional appointment of ED Agents – It has come to the notice of this office that provisional

appointments made to ED posts are being allowed to continue for indefinite periods and when regular

appointments are made, the provisionally appointed persons do not readily hand over the charge. The following

instructions are issued in this regard: -

i. As far as possible, provisional appointments should be avoided. Provisional appointments

should not be made to fill the vacancies caused by the retirement of ED Agents. In such cases,

the Appointment Authority should take action well in time before the retirement of the

incumbent ED Agent, to select 2 suitable successors.

ii. Where possible, provisional appointments should be made only for specific periods. The

appointed person should be given to understand that the appointment will be terminated on

expiry of the specified period and that he will have no claim for regular appointment. Where a

new post office is opened or where a new post is created or where an ED Agent dies while in

service or resigns from his post and it is not possible to make regular appointment

immediately, a provisional appointment should be made for a specific period. The offer for

appointment should be in the form annexed (Annexure A).

202

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

iii. Where an ED Agent is put off duty pending departmental or judicial proceedings against him

and it is not possible to ascertain the period by which the departmental/judicial proceedings

are likely to be finalized, a provisional appointment may be made, in the form annexed

(Annexure B). It should be made clear to the provisionally appointed person that if ever it is

decided to reinstate the previous incumbent, the provisional appointment will be terminated

and that he shall have no claim to any appointment.

Even in cases where an appointment is made to fill the vacancy caused by the dismissal/removal of an ED Agent

and the dismissed/removed employee has not exhausted all channels of appeal, the appointment should only be

provisional. The offer for appointment should be in the form annexed (Annexure B).

Efforts should be made to give alternative employment to ED Agents who are appointed provisionally and

subsequently discharged from service due to administrative reasons, if at the time of discharge they had put in

not less than three years’ continuous approved service. In such cases, their names should be included in the

waiting list of ED Agents discharged from service, prescribed in D.G., P. & T., Letter No. 43-4/77-Pen., dated

23.02.1979.”

9. I considered the oral and written arguments of the parties. From the evidence of record, it is established that the

workman was appointed as an Extra Departmental Agent on a fixed term as a stop-gap arrangement against the

vacancy of permanent employee named R.A. Sadhu who has been subjected to disciplinary proceedings.

10. It is a settled law that no appointment can be made in the Government of India against the recruitment rules.

This workman was engaged on a fixed term basis against the non-vacant post of one R.A. Sadhu who was put

under suspension for undergoing disciplinary proceedings. Thus the retrenchment cannot be said to be illegal

but as the documentary evidences reveal that he worked for more than 391 days but in less than 3 years,

therefore, it would be equitable to grant a lump-sum amount of Rs. 50000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) as

compensation. No further relief is granted except as said above.

11. The award is passed accordingly. The first parties are directed to pay the aforesaid amount of Rs. 50000/-

(Rupees Fifty Thousand) to the second party workman Popatlal Gokalbhai Prajapati within 60 days from the

publication of the award.

P.K. CHATURVEDI, Presiding Officer

नई दली, 20 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 37

37

37

37.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस सहायक भिवLय िनिध आयुE, कम चारी भिवLय िनिध संगठन अहमदाबाद, और अय एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के

संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं

6म यायालय, नई दली-1 के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 10/2009) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 17.10.18 को

$ा; <ए थे ।

[सं. एल-42012/52/2009- आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

New Delhi, the 20th December, 2018

S.O. 37.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.10/2009) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court

Ahmedabad, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Assistant

Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organisation Ahmedabad, & Others, and their workmen

which were received by the Central Government on 17.10.18.

[No. L-42012/52/2009-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

203

ANNEXURE

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

AHMEDABAD

Present : Pramod Kumar Chaturvedi, Presiding Officer, CGIT cum Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated 09th October, 2018

Reference (CGITA) No. 10/2009

1. The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner,

Employees Provident Fund Organisation,

SRO,

Vapi (Gujarat)

2. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner,

Employees Provident Fund Organisation,

Head Office, 14, Bhikaji Cama Place,

New Delhi

3. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner,

Employees Provident Fund Organisation,

Regional Office, Bhavishyanidhi Bhawan,

Nr. RBI, Income Tax Circle, Ashram Road,

Ahmedabad (Gujarat)

…First Parties

V/s

Shri Harish Kumar M. Gulrajani,

52, Hathram Ka Darwaja, Near Mohan Talkies,

Ratlam (MP) – 457001

…Second Party

For the First Parties

: None

For the Second Party

: Shri R.C. Pathak

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-42012/52/2009–

IR(DU) dated 07.12.2009 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal cum Labour

Court, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) in respect of the matter specified in the Schedule:

SCHEDULE

“Whether the action of the management of Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Ahmedabad in imposing

the penalty of dismissal from service on their workman Shri Harish M. Gulrajani vide order dated 23.12.2004 is

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

1. The reference dates back to 07.12.2009 and received on 21.12.2009 from Ministry of Labour and Employment,

New Delhi for adjudication and passing the award.

2. In response to the notice issued to the parties, the second party workman submitted the statement of claim Ex. 7

alleging that he joined as Lower Division Clerk in the office of Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Vapi

on 19.04.1995. His services were found satisfactory, therefore, he was promoted on 31.12.1998 as Upper

Division Clerk and posted at SRO, Vapi but he was dismissed from service on 04.08.2004 with a mala-fide

intention and illegally on the ground that he was trapped to take bribe by the Anti Corruption Bureau. He was

subjected to criminal trial under Prevention of Corruption Act wherein he was acquitted by the court of law for

want of evidence. But as the first party was adamant to victimize him, therefore, he was subjected to

departmental enquiry wherein he was awarded the punishment of dismissal from service. He preferred an appeal

against the order of dismissal before the appropriate authority but same was also rejected. Therefore, he raised

this dispute before the Conciliation Officer; hence, this reference was referred for adjudication before the

Tribunal.

3. The first party did not prefer to submit the written statement, therefore, the reference was ordered to proceed ex-

parte against the first party on 10.03.2016.

4. The second party workman in support of his statement of claim Ex. 7 submitted the affidavit Ex. 12 reiterating

the averments made in the statement of claim Ex. 7 and has also filed the documents regarding the order of

acquittal by the Criminal Court and other relevant documents regarding the departmental proceedings.

5. I heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the second party.

204

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

6. The Section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code provides as under:

“9. Courts to try all civil suits unless barred: The Courts shall (subject to the provisions herein contained)

have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or

impliedly barred.”

7. The Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 provides as under:

“SECTION 1 SHORT TITLE, EXTENT AND COMMENCEMENT:

(1)

This Act may be called the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

(2)

It extends, – (a) in so far as it relates to the Central Administrative Tribunal, to the whole of India;

(b)

In so far as it relates to the Administrative Tribunals for States, to the whole of India, except the State of

Jammu and Kashmir.

(3)

The provisions of this Act, in so far as they relate to the Central Administrative Tribunal, shall come into

force on such date 1 as the Central Government may, by notification, appoint.

(4)

The provisions of the Act, in so far as they relate to Administrative Tribunal, for a State shall come into

force in State on such date 2 as the Central Government may, by notification appoint.

Comments:

The Act applies to all categories of Central Government servants and others posted to work in the State of Jammu

and Kashmir as well; Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan v. Subhas Sharma, (2002) 4 SCC 145.

1. The provisions of this Act in so far as they relate to the Central Administrative Tribunal, came into force on 1-7-

1985, vide G.S.R. 527(E), dated 1st July, 1985.

2. The provisions of this Act in so far as they relate to the State Administrative Tribunal, for Andhra Pradesh came

into force on I-11-1989, vide G.S.R. 921(E), dated 25th October, 1989 and for Arunachal Pradesh came into

force on 3-8-1989, vide G.S.R. 638(E), dated 3rd August, 1989 and for Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka,

Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Orissa came into force on 1-1-1985; vide G.S.R. 956(E), dated 31st

December, 1985, and for the State of Bihar came into force on 22-10-1991, vide S.O. 715(E), dated 22nd

October, 1991.

2. ACT NOT TO APPLY TO CERTAIN PERSONS:

The provisions of this Act shall not apply to –

(a) Any member of the naval, military or air force or of any other armed forces of the Union; 1[***]

(b) Omitted

(c) Any officer or servant of the Supreme Court or any High Court 2 [or Courts subordinate thereto;]

(d) Any person appointed to the secretarial staff of either House of Parliament or to the secretarial staff of any

State Legislature or a House thereof or, in the case of a Union territory having a Legislature, of that

Legislature.

1.

Clause (b) omitted by Act 19 of 1986, sec. 3 (w.r.e.f. 1-11-1985).

2.

Ins. by Act 51 of 1987, sec. 2 (w.e.f. 22-12-1987).

8. The Section 2 (s) of the Industrial Disputes Act provides as under:

“The Section 2 (s) of the Industrial Disputes Act defines workman as under: ’’

“Section 2 (s): “workman” means any person (including an apprentice) employed in any industry to do any

manual, unskilled, skilled, technical, operational, clerical or supervisory work for hire or reward, whether the

terms of employment be express or implied, and for the purposes of any proceeding under this act in relation to

an industrial dispute, includes any such person who has been dismissed, discharged or retrenched in connection

with, or as a consequence of, that dispute, or whose dismissal, discharge or retrenchment has led to that dispute,

but does not include any such person –

(i)

Who is subject to the Air Force Act, 1950 (45 of 1950), or the Army Act, 1950 (46 of 1950), or the

Navy Act, 1957 (62 of 1957); or

(ii)

Who is employed in the police service or as an officer or other employee of a person; or

(iii)

Who is employed mainly in a managerial or administration capacity; or

(iv)

Who, being employed in a supervisory capacity, draws wages exceeding (ten thousand rupees) per

mensem or exercises, either by the nature of the duties attached to the office or by reason of the powers

vested in him, functions mainly of a managerial nature.”

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

205

9. The principles of legal jurisprudence provide that Civil Court has jurisdiction over all the matters of civil nature

unless it is expressly or impliedly barred as given under Section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code. The service

disputes regarding employees of State and Central Government are barred by the Administrative Tribunal Act,

1985 and Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Second principle is that if there is a dispute of jurisdiction between the

two statutes, then the later statutes in date will be applicable. In the present case, the workman has himself

alleged in his statement of claim that he was a Upper Division Clerk in the office of Regional Provident Fund

Commissioner under the Government of India, therefore, is a central government employee and the later in date

the statute namely Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 provides that any service dispute with respect to a person

regarding all matters relating to the conditions of his service in connection with the affairs of the Union or of

any state or of any local or other authority within the territory of India or under the control of Government of

India regarding (i) Remuneration (including allowances), pension and other retirement benefits; (ii) Tenure

including confirmation, seniority, promotion, revision, pre-mature retirement and superannuation; (iii) Leave of

any kind; (iv) Disciplinary matters; (v) any other matters whatsoever shall be adjudicate by the Central

Administrative Tribunal or State Administrative Tribunal as the case may be.

10. In the present case, the so called workman has himself admitted that he was dismissed from service while

serving as Upper Division Clerk in the service of Union of India, thus the question of his dismissal or

termination as per the provisions of the Central Administrative Act can only be adjudicated by the Central

Administrative Tribunal under the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 being later in date to the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 and this is a basis principle that if there is a dispute between the two statutes regarding

jurisdiction then the statute later in date shall prevail.

11. Thus this Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court has no jurisdiction over the matter and the

reference is disposed of with a direction to the so called workman Harish M. Gulrajani to approach the proper

forum.

12. The award is passed accordingly.

P.K. CHATURVEDI, Presiding Officer

नई दली, 20 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 38

38

38

38.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस उप-मंडल (टेली), भारत संचार िनगम िलिमटेड देसा, अहमदाबाद , और अय एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0

िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म

यायालय, अहमदाबाद के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 551/2004) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 22.10.18 को $ा;

<ए थे ।

[सं. एल-40012/257/2002- आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

New Delhi,the 20th December, 2018

S.O. 38.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.551/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court

Ahmedabad, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Sub –

Divisional (Tele) , Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Deesa, Ahmedabad, and others, and their workmen which were

received by the Central Government on 22.10.18.

[No. L-40012/257/2002-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

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

AHMEDABAD

Present : Pramod Kumar Chaturvedi, Presiding Officer, CGIT cum Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated 22nd October, 2018

Reference (CGITA) No. 551/2004

1. The Sub-Divisional Officer (Tele.),

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited,

Deesa Telephone Exchange,

Deesa (B.K.) – 385536

206

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

2. The Chief General Manager,

Telecom Department,

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Khanpur,

Ahmedabad (Gujarat) – 380001

3. The General Manager Telecom,

Telecom Department,

Palanpur Telecom District, Joravar Palace,

Palanpur (B.K.) – 385001

…First Parties

V/s

The Org. Secretary,

The Association of Railway and Post Employees,

15, Shashi Apartment,

Nr. Anjalee Cinema, Vasna Road,

Ahmedabad (Gujarat) – 380007

…Second Party

For the First Party

: Shri H.R. Raval

For the Second Party

: Shri Chintan Gohel

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-40012/257/2002–

IR(DU) dated 17.04.2003 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 Telecom District Manager, Palanpur/SDOT, Deesa, Bharat Sanchar

Nigam Limited (Telecom Department) in terminating the services of Shri Md. Umatali Md. Alim is legal, proper

and justified? If so, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to and since when?”

1. The reference dates back to 17.04.2003 and received on 21.05.2003 from Ministry of Labour and Employment,

New Delhi for adjudication and passing the award.

2. In response to the notice, the second party submitted the statement of claim along with vakalatpatra of Shri R.C.

Pathak on 05.04.2005. The first party submitted the vakalatpatra Ex. 6 of Shri H.R. Raval on 31.01.2010 and

written statement Ex. 7 on 06.08.2010.

3. The second party workman submitted an application Ex. 8 for production of documents and the first party

submitted the reply Ex. 9 in response to the application Ex. 8.

4. Today on 22.10.2018, Shri Chintan Gohel, the advocate for the second party stated in the Tribunal that the

workman has not been in his contact and he has no instructions from the client.

5. Thus it appears that the second party workman is not willing to prosecute the case.

6. Thus the reference is disposed of in the absence of the evidence of the second party workman with the

observation as under: “the action of the management of Telecom District Manager, Palanpur/SDOT, Deesa,

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (Telecom Department) in terminating the services of Shri Md. Umatali Md.

Alim is legal, proper and justified.”

7. The award is passed accordingly.

P.K. CHATURVEDI, Presiding Officer

नई दली, 20 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 39

39

39

39.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस मु8य महा$बंधक

)

दूरसंचार

(

, गुजरात स3कल, भारत संचार िनगम िलिमटेड, खानपुर अहमदाबाद, और अय एवं उनके

कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार

औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय, अहमदाबाद के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या. 536/2004) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय

सरकार को 17.10.18 को $ा; <ए थे ।

[सं. एल-40012/163/2004- आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

207

New Delhi, the 20th December, 2018

S.O. 39.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.536/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court

Ahmedabad, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Chife General

Manager (Telecom), Gujarat Circle ,Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Khanpur Ahmedabad, and others, and their

workmen which were received by the Central Government on 17.10.18.

[No. L-40012/163/2002-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

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

AHMEDABAD

Present : Pramod Kumar Chaturvedi, Presiding Officer, CGIT cum Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated 24th September, 2018

Reference (CGITA) No. 536/2004

1. The Chief General Manager (Telecom),

Gujarat Circle, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Khanpur,

Ahmedabad (Gujarat) – 380001

2. The Telecom District Manager,

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Ganj Market,

Palanpur (B.K.) – 385001

…First Parties

V/s

The Org. Secretary,

The Association of Railway and Post Employees,

15, Shashi Apartment,

Nr. Anjalee Cinema, Vasna Road,

Ahmedabad (Gujarat) –380007

…Second Party

For the First Party

: Shri H.R. Raval

For the Second Party

: Shri Chinten Gohel

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-40012/163/2002–

IR(DU) dated 10.02.2003 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 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (Telecom Department) in terminating

the services of Shri Baijnath Sing Yadav is legal, proper and justified? If not, to what relief the concern

workman is entitled to and what other directions are necessary in the matter?”

1. The reference dates back to 10.02.2003 and received on 06.03.2003 from Ministry of Labour and Employment,

New Delhi for adjudication and passing the award.

2. After issuing notice to the parties, the second party submitted the statement of claim on 05.04.2005 and the first

party submitted the written statement on 22.04.2010.

3. On 24.09.2018, Shri Chintan Gohel, advocate for the second party workman has given in writing that the

workman Baijnath Sing Yadav has not been in his contact.

4. Therefore, it appears that the second party union or its workman is not willing to prosecute the case.

5. Thus the reference is disposed of in the absence of the evidence of the second party union or its workman with

the observation as under: “the action of the management of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (Telecom

Department) in terminating the services of Shri Baijnath Sing Yadav is legal, proper and justified.”

P.K. CHATURVEDI, Presiding Officer

208

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नई दली, 20 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 40

40

40

40.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस दूरसंचार िजला अिभयंता, दूरसंचार िवभाग अहमदाबाद, और अय एवं उनके कम चारी के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2

और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय,

अहमदाबाद पंचाट के (संदभ सं8या 1215/2004) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 17.10.18 को $ा; <ए थे ।

[सं. एल-40012/171/2002- आईआर

)

डीयू

(

]

राज जोशी, उप िनदेशक

New Delhi, the 20th December, 2018

S.O. 40.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.1215/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court

Ahmedabad, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Telecom

District Engineer, Telecom Department Ahmedabad, and others, and their workmen which were received by the Central

Government on 17.10.18.

[No. L-40012/171/2002-IR (DU)]

RAJENDRA JOSHI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

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

AHMEDABAD

Present : Pramod Kumar Chaturvedi, Presiding Officer, CGIT cum Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated 05th October, 2018

Reference (CGITA) No. 1215/2004

The Telecom District Engineer,

Telecom Department,

Surendranagar (Gujarat) – 363001

…First Party

V/s

The President,

Saurashtra Employees Union,

City Shops, 3rd Floor,

Opp. Jagnath Policy Chowky, Dr. Yagnik Road,

Rajkot (Gujarat) – 360001

…Second Party

For the First Party

: Shri H.R. Raval

For the Second Party

: Shri Prabhatsinh Parmar

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-40012/171/2002–

IR(DU) dated 08.01.2003 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 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Surendranagar not to give

employment to Shri Hejam Kishorkumar Tulsidas is justified or legal? If not, what relief the workman is entitled

for and since when?”

1. The reference dates back to 08.01.2003 and received on 16.02.2003 from Ministry of Labour and Employment,

New Delhi for adjudication and passing the award.

2. After issuing notice to the parties, the second party submitted the statement of claim Ex. 2 on

19.08.2003/04.11.2003 along with number of documents. The first party submitted the written statement Ex. 7

on 06.01.2005.

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

209

3. Today on 05.10.2018, the second party workman moved an application Ex. 32 stating that he does not want to

proceed the case and requested the Tribunal to withdraw the case. The application Ex. 32 is allowed.

4. Thus the reference is disposed of as withdrawn.

P.K. CHATURVEDI, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 26 fnlEcj] 2018

dk- vk- 41-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947 (a1947 dk 14 ) dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkU/kzk cSad ds

izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjkas ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ukxiqj] ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la- 04@2013&14½ dks izdkf’kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 26-12-2018 dks

izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&12012@82@2012&vkbZvkj ¼ch-II½]

jfo dqekj] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh

New Delhi, the 26th December, 2018

S.O. 41.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 04/2013-14) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Nagpur as

shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Andhra Bank, and their workmen, received

by the Central Government on 26.12.2018.

[No. L-12012/82/2012-IR(B-II)]

RAVI KUMAR, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI S.S. GARG, PRESIDING OFFICER,CGIT-CUM-LABOURT COURT, NAGPUR

Case No.CGIT/NGP/04/2013-14

Date: 01.11.2018

Party No.1(a)

:

The General Manager,

Andhra Bank, Zonal Office,

Mahakali Caves Road,

Mahal Industrial Estate, Andheri (East),

Mumbai 400093.

Party No.1(b)

:

The Branch Nanager,

Andhra Bank, Butibori Branch,

Tehsil & Distt. Nagpur,

Nagpur – 441108.

Party No.1(c)

:

Shri C. Ramchandran,

C.M.D., Andhra Bank, Pattabhi Bhawan,

Khairtabad, Hyderabad,

Hyderabad (A.P.).

Versus

Party No.2

:

Smt. Sangita Satish Patil,

R/o C/o Sonu Devaji Shivankar,

At & PO. New Basti, Shrusti Layout,

Ward No. 3, Behind Jijamata School,

Butibori, Tehsil & Distt. Nagpur,

Nagpur (M.S.).

(Dated: 01st November, 2018)

AWARD

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

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) (“the Act” in short), the Central Government has referred the industrial

dispute between the employers, in relation to the management of Andhra Bank and their workman, Smt. Sangita Satish

Patil for adjudication, as per letter No.L-12012/82/2012-IR (B-II) dated 01.03.2013, with the following schedule:-

“Whether the action of the management of the Andhra Bank, Buttibori, Tah & Distt. Nagpur through its

Branch Manager for termination from services of Smt. Sangita Satish Patil, R/o Buttibori, Distt. Nagpur is legal

and justified? What relief to the workman is entitled to?”

210

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

2.

On receipt of the reference, the parties were noticed to file their respective statement of claim and written

statement, by registered post with acknowledge due, Shri B.B Sharma and Y.B. Sharma, advocates field joint

vakalatnama on behalf of the Party No. 1 i.e. management on 20.06.2013 and Mrs. Rajshree Waikar, advocate filed

vakalatnama on behalf of the petitioner on 07.08.2013. Petitioner filed statement of claim on 20.09.2013 and Party No. 1

filed their reply on affidavit on 01.03.2018. Petitioner also examined herself after filing evidence on affidavit on

13.02.2015, but petitioner was absent from 02.11.2017, even this Tribunal issued fresh notice to both parties.

3.

Party No. 1/management filed an application, I.A. No. 1 for setting aside the exparte order, which was allowed

by this Tribunal on 18.10.2018, after the service of the application I.A. No. 1(According to the track report). Party No. 1

also filed an application for dismissal of the reference on 18.10.2018, which was marked as I.A. No. 2. In these

circumstances, without going on merit of the case, I.A. No. 2 is allowed. It shows that, petitioner is not interested to

continue with this reference. Hence it is ordered:

ORDER

The reference is answered in the negative and against the petitioner. The petitioner is not entitled to any

relief.

S.S. GARG,Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 26 fnlEcj] 2018

dk- vk- 42-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947 (a1947 dk 14) dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj cSad vkQ

egkjk"Vª ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ukxiqj] ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la- 86@2006½ dks izdkf’kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 26-12-

2018 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&12012@73@2006&vkbZvkj ¼ch-II½]

jfo dqekj] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh

New Delhi, the 26th December, 2018

S.O. 42.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 86/2006) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Nagpur as shown in

the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Bank of Maharashtra and their workmen, received by

the Central Government on 26.12.2018.

[No. L-12012/73/2006 - IR(B-II)]

RAVI KUMAR, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI S.S. GARG, PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM-LABOURT COURT, NAGPUR

Case No.CGIT/NGP/86/2006

Date: 09.10.2018

Party No.1

:

The Regional Manager,

Bank of Maharashtra,

Regional Office, Near Siddharth Hotel,

Chandrapur (M.S.) - 442402.

Versus

Party No.2

:

Shri Bhalchandra Parshuram Lengure,

R/O Madnapur Ward, Post Sindewahi,

Chandrapur (M.S.).

(Dated: 09th October, 2018)

AWARD

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

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) (“the Act” in short), the Central Government has referred the industrial

dispute between the employer, in relation to the management of Bank of Maharashtra and their workman,

Shri Bhalchandra Parshuram Lengure for adjudication, as per letter No.L-12012/73/2006- (IR(B-II) dated 30.10.2006,

with the following schedule:-

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

211

“Whether the action of the management of Bank of Maharashtra in respect of their Sindewahi Branch,

Distt. Chandrapur in terminating the services of Shri Bhalchandra Parshuram Lengure, Ex-Sub Staff w.e.f.

30.10.2004 is proper & justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?”

2.

On receipt of the reference, the parties were noticed to file their respective statement of claim and written

statement, by registered post with acknowledge due. In this case, petitioner/claimant filed statement of claim and

management filed written statement. Management also filed evidence on affidavit, but nobody has appeared on behalf of

the workman from 29.12.2010 to 22.03.2011. Management also filed written notes of argument and petitioner filed an

application for setting aside the order dated 29.12.2010. This application was allowed on 03.01.2014 by my predecessor.

On 16.12.2014, my predecessor rejected the application of the petitioner, in which, he prayed to set aside the order dated

19.03.2014. After that, petitioner and his advocate have been absent.

3.

This Tribunal issued a notice to the petitioner for appearance on 12.03.2018, but nobody was present on behalf

of the petitioner. It shows that, petitioner did not want to proceed with the reference, so it was closed. Hence, it is

ordered:

ORDER

The reference is answered in the negative and against the workman. The workman is not entitled to any

relief.

SHYAM SUNDER GARG, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 26 fnlEcj] 2018

dk- vk- 43-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947 (a1947 dk 14) dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ;wfu;u cSad

vkQ bafM;k ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] ubZ fnYyh ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la- 154@2013½ dks izdkf’kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks

26-12- 2018 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&39025@01@2017&vkbZvkj ¼ch-II½]

jfo dqekj] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh

New Delhi, the 26th December, 2018

S.O. 43.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 154/2013) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No 1, New Delhi as

shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Union Bank of India, and their workmen,

received by the Central Government on 26.12.2018.

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

RAVI KUMAR, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE COURT OF SHRI AVTAR CHAND DOGRA : PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT No.1, DWARKA COURTS COMPLEX : NEW DELHI

ID No. 154/2013

Shri Chedda Lal Sharma,

S/o. late Shri Puran Chand,

R/o. H.No.B014/1, Manbhari Kunj,

Sindhu Farm Road, Meetapur Extn.

New Delhi 110044.

…Workman

Versus

(1)

The Regional Manager,

Union Bank of India,

Shaheed Bhagat Singh Market,

Gole Market, New Delhi.

(2) The Branch Manager,

Union Bank of India,

SSI Branch Okhla, 173-174 DSIDC,

Okhla Indl. Area, Phase-I,

New Delhi 110020.

… Management

212

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

AWARD

This Award shall decide a claim petition directly filed by the workman/claimant Chedda Lal Sharma under

Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”)., with the averments that he was

engaged as a casual worker by Management No.2 in the year 1998, where he worked till 21/6/2011 without any break.

The Management was taking the work of dafty from the workman for stitching of vouchers etc. continuously and paid

him wages/salary in his bank account as there was no daftry posted in the said Branch of the Management Bank. The

Management did not regularize the workman though gave assurances and as such, the workman raised an Industrial

dispute in the year 2011 for his regularization before the Conciliation Officer but after that the Management in

frustration terminated the services of the workman during the conciliation proceedings. The petitioner had rendered

service for more than 13 years with the Management Bank on regular basis without any break. Though the prayer clause

of the statement of claim is not happily worded, yet it can be inferred from the averments made in para (viii) thereof that

the workman is seeking relief of reinstatement into service on regular basis, inasmuch as he has already crossed the age

bar to get some other service and has spent most part of his life to serve the Bank.

2.

The claim petition has been resisted by the Management who filed written statement and took preliminary

objections that the claimant was neither an employee of the Management Bank nor was appointed by the Management

rather he was only engaged for casual work by the Management Bank at its SSI Branch, Okhla, New Delhi and as such

there never existed any employer-employee relationship between the parties. On merits, it is stated that the claimant was

engaged for doing the job work of book binding at its Okhla Branch as and when required and he was paid according to

the job work performed by him and as per bills submitted by him. It has been denied that the claimant worked from 1998

to 21/1/2011 as alleged by him. Since the claimant was not an employee of the Management Bank, question of

termination of his service did not arise. Prayer has been made for dismissal of the claim petition.

3.

On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by my learned Predecessor on 26/2/2014 :-

(1)

Whether the claimant rendered continuous service of one year as contemplated by provisions of

Section 25-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in preceding 12 months from the date of his alleged

termination of service ?

(2)

Whether claimant is entitled to relief of reinstatement in service ?

4. The Claimant in support of his case examined himself as W.W.1 and tendered his affidavit Ex.WW1/A alongwith

documents Ex.WW1/1 to WW1/4.

5.

On the other hand, the Management in order to rebut the case of the claimant examined Shri Roop Lal Meena,

Assistant General Manager as MW1 who also tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.MW1/A alongwith

documents Ex.MW1/1 and Ex.MW1/2.

6.

I have heard Shri Devender Sharma, A/R for the workman and Shri Rajat Arora, A/R for the Management and

have gone through the records carefully. My findings on the above issues are as follows.

Issue No. 1 :

7.

There is no dispute about preposition of law that onus to prove that claimant was in the employment of

Management is always on the workman/claimant and he worked with the Management for 240 days in a calendar year.

it is for the workman to adduce evidence to prove factum of his employment with the Management Bank. Such evidence

may be in form of receipt of salary or wages for 240 days or record of his/her appointment or engagement for that year to

show that he/she has worked with the employer for 240 days or more in a Calendar year. In this regard, reference may

be made to Batala Coop. Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Sowaran Singh, (2005) 8 Supreme Court Cases 481 as well as Director

Fisheries Terminated Division Vs. Bhikubhai Meghajibhai Gavda (2012) 1 SCC 47.

8.

This Tribunal has to consider the oral as well as documentary evidence adduced on record so as to decide the

question of relationship of employer and employee between the Management and the claimant herein. In this respect, it

is appropriate to refer to the affidavit Ex.WW1/A of the claimant which is in line with the averments made in the claim

petition. According to the testimony of the claimant that the Management was taking the work of daftry from him and

he worked as such for the last 13 years at different branches of the Bank and his work was totally supervisd by the Bank

officials. His salary was paid by the Bank and used to be credited in his account by the bank and in support, he has filed

on record copies of the bank statement and cheque deposit slips as Ex.WW1/1 and Ex.WW1/2 (colly.) He also deposed

that he had been working at the instructions of the Management and dealt in maintaining vouchers, current deposit and

day book which work was of perennial in nature. He has filed on record copies of cover note of cash book/day book etc.

maintained by him as Ex.WW1/3 alongwith photographs Ex.WW1/4 to show that he was working inside the bank

premises. In cross examination he clarified that no appointment letter was issued to him by the Management and that

entry dated 4/11/1999 & 6-11-1999 and other entries in Ex.WW1/1 pertain to the wages having been paid by the Bank.

9.

It has been admitted by the Management in its written statement that the claimant was engaged for casual work

by the Management Bank at its SSI Branch, Okhla, New Delhi. MW1 Shri Roop Lal Meena clarified in his cross

examination that the claimant was engaged only for book binding work casually during the period from 1998 to 2011 and

that no record of such casual employee is maintained by the Bank. According to him, payment used to be made to the

claimant under book binding expenses/misc. expenses head by way of cheque or through ECS. He admitted that the

workman had worked at various branches of the Management bank but he could not say for how many hours in a day, the

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

213

claimant worked. He also admitted that the claimant ued to prepare/bind books like documents Ex.WW1/3. He could

not admit or deny if the claimant did the work of daftry with the Management Bank. He also stated that the Bank does

not have any documentary evidence to show that the workman worked for less than 240 days in a calendar year. He

admitted that the payments having been made to the workman/claimant from time to time through vouchers must have

been reflected./entered in the General Register and/or Cash Book maintained by the branch.

10.

From the pleadings and evidence on record as discussed above it stands proved that the claimant was duly

engaged by the Management Bank for casual work and he did the work of daftry/book binder from 1998 to 2011 at

different branches of the Management Bank. As such, it clearly establishes relationship of employer-employee between

the Management and claimant. In this regard, reference can be made to the decision in the case of Devinder Singh Vs.

Municipal Council, Sanaur, AIR 2011 Supreme Courtt 2532, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court while interpreting the

provisions of Section 2(S) of the Act which deals with the definition of “workman” has observed as under :-

“The source of employment, the quantum of recruitment, the terms & conditions of employment/

contract of service, the quantum of wages/ pay and mode of payment are not at all relevant for

deciding whether or not a person is a workman within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Act. The

definition of workman also does not make any distinction between full time and part time employee or a

person appointed on contract basis. There is nothing in the plain language of Section 2(s) from which

it can be inferred that only person employed on regular basis or a person employed for doing whole

time job is a workman and the one employed on temporary, part time or contract basis on fixed wages

or as a casual employee or for doing duty for fixed hours is not a workman.”

It is clear from the perusal of aforesaid observations that even if a person is engaged on temporary, part time or contract

basis or for doing any other kind of work and is duly paid wages for the said work, in that eventuality such a person

would be covered by the definition of “workman” as provided in Section 2(S) of the Act. Consequently, it is held that

there existed relationship of employee –employer between the workman/claimant and the Management.

11.

Equally settled is the position of law that when relationship of employer-employee stands proved between the

parties, then onus will shift upon the employer/management to show that the claimant has not worked for 240 days or

more in a calendar year or that the services of the claimant was terminated in accordance with the provisions of the Act

or in accordance with Standing Order applicable to the establishment concerned, As discussed above, in the case in hand,

engagement of the claimant for casual work of book binding has been duly proved on record. The Management has not

filed any document in the form of abstract of attendance of claimant or other such casual workers so as to show that

claimant has not completed 240 days in a calendar year. Even MW1 Roop Lal Meena admitted that the Management

Bank does not have any documentary proof to show that the workman worked for less than 240 days in a calendar year.

In such circumstances, statement of the claimant who appeared as WW1 can not be brushed aside, more so for the reason

that work of daftry is of regular and perennial in nature. The Management bank has not adduced any evidence to show as

to who was/were the person/s engaged or doing such like work in the said Branch.

12.

Net result of the aforesaid discussion is that the claimant had completed 240 days in a calendar year as

contemplated under Section 25-B of the Act. This issue is accordingly decided in favour of the claimant and against the

Management.

Issue No.2 :

13.

Now the vital question for consideration is as to whether the action of the management in terminating the

services of the workman w.e.f. 21/6/22011 is legal and justified.

14.

The case of the workman is that since the Management did not regularize the workman despite assurances, the

workman raised an Industrial dispute in the year 2011 for his regularization before the Conciliation Officer but after that

the Management in frustration terminated his services during the conciliation proceedings by an oral order. The claimant

has deposed in his testimony that no memo or charge sheet was issued to him prior to his illegal termination and even no

compensation was paid or offered by the Management. This Tribunal has already held that the claimant was the

“Workman” for the purposes of the Act and had worked for over 240 days in a calendar year.

15.

Management has not adduced any evidence to show that before ordering termination of workmen herein w.e.f.

21/6/2011, the workmen has been issued any notice or has been paid one month’s wages in lieu of such notice as

required under Section 25-F of the Act. There is long line of decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court as well as of various

High Courts that provisions of Section 25-F of the Act are mandatory in nature and termination of the workman from

services in derogation of the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act will render whole action of the Management Bank to

be illegal and wrong under the law. In the circumstances, it is held that action of the Management in terminating the

service of the workmen is totally illegal, wrong and in violation of Section 25-F of the Act.

16.

Now the residual question is whether the claimant/work is entitled to any incidental relief of payment of back

wages and/or reinstatement of service with full back wages. In his affidavit, the workman has specifically stated that he

is unemployed since the date of his illegal termination and he could not get any job despite best efforts. The

Management has not adduced any evidence to show that the claimant is gainfully employed somewhere else on full

time/regular basis. Even if it is assumed that the workmen is doing some intermittent or adhoc work to make his both

ends meet on daily wage basis, that would not itself amount to gainful employment.

17.

The Hon’ble Apex Court in case “Deepali Gundu Surwase v. Kranti Junior Adhyapak Mahavidyalaya”

reported as (2013) 10 SCC 324 has held as under :

214

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

“The propositions which can be culled out from the aforementioned judgments are :

i)

In cases of wrongful termination of service, reinstatement with continuity of service and back

wages is the normal rule.

ii)

Ordinarily, an employee or workman whose services are terminated and who is desirous of

getting back wages is required to either plead or at least make a statement before the

adjudicating authority or the Court of first instance that he/she was not gainfully employed or

was employed on lesser wages. If the employer wants to avoid payment of full back wages,

then I has to plead and also lead cogent evidence to prove that the employee/workman wads

gainfully employed and was getting wages equal to the wages he/she wads drawing prior to

the termination of service. This is so because it is settled law that the burden of proof of the

existence of a particular fact lies on the person who makes a positive averments about its

existence. It is always easier to prove a positive fact than to prove a negative fact. Therefore,

once the employee shows that he was employed, the onus lies on the employer to specifically

plead and prove that the employee was gainfully employed and was getting the same or

substantially similar emoluments.”

18.

The Hon’ble Apex Court also held that different expressions are used for describing the consequence of

termination of a workman’s service/employment/engagement by way of retrenchment without complying with the

mandate of Section 25F of the Act. Sometimes it has been termed as ab initio void, sometimes as illegal per se, sometime

as nullity and sometimes as non est. Leaving aside the legal semantics, we have no hesitation to hold that termination of

service of an employee by way of retrenchment without complying with the requirement of giving one month’s notice or

pay in lieu thereof and compensation in terms of Section 25F (a) and (b) has the effect of rendering the action of the

employer and nullity and the employee is entitled to continue in employment as if his service was not terminated. (Anoop

Sharma Vs. Executive Engineer, Public Health Division No.1 Panipat (2010) 5 SCC 497).

19.

A Bench of three Judges of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Tin Works Private Limited v.

Employees of Hindustan Tin Works Private Limited (1979) 2 SCC 80 held that relief of reinstatement with continuity of

service can be granted where termination of service is found to be invalid. It would mean that the employer has taken

away illegally the right to work of the workman contrary to the relevant law or in breach of contract and simultaneously

deprived the workman of his earnings. If thus the act of employer is found to be totally illegal and arbitrary, in that

eventuality the workman is required to be reinstated, with full back wages. Plain common sense also dictates that the

removal of an order terminating the services of workmen must ordinarily lead to the reinstatement of the services of the

workmen alongwith payment of back wages.

20.

However, Hon’ble Apex Court in the case General Manager, Haryana Roadways Vs. Rudan Singh,

reported as 2005 SCC (L&S) 716 observed as under :-

“8. There is no rule of thumb that in every case where the Industrial Tribunal gives a finding that the termination

of service was in violation of Section 25-F of the Act, entire back wages should be awarded. A host of factors

like the manner and method of selection and appointment i.e. whether after proper advertisement of the vacancy

or inviting applications from the employment exchange, nature of appointment namely, whether ad hoc, short

term, daily wage, temporary or permanent in character, any special qualification required for the job and the like

should be weighed and balanced in taking a decision regarding award of back wages. One of the important

factors which has to be taken into consideration is the length of service, which the workman had rendered

with the employer. If the workman has rendered a considerable period of service and his services are

wrongfully terminated, he may be awarded full or partial back wages keeping in view the fact that at this age

and the qualification possessed by him he may not be in a position to get another employment. However,

where the total length of service rendered by a workman is very small, the award of back wages for the

complete period i.e. from the date of termination till the date of the award, which our experience shows is

often quite large, would be wholly inappropriate. A regular service of permanent character cannot be

compared to short or intermittent daily wage employment though it may be for 240 days in a calendar year.”

21.

Yet in another latest case of Bholanath Lal and others Vs. Shree Om Enterprises (P) Ltd.,

Manu/DE/1922/2018 (decided on 10/5/2018), Hon’ble High Court of Delhi while considering the question of illegal

termination and reinstatement held as under :-

“The cases in which the competent court or tribunal finds that the employer has acted in gross violation of the

statutory provisions and/or the principles of natural justice or is guilty of victimizing the employee or workman,

then the court or tribunal concerned will be fully justified in directing payment of full back wages. In such

cases, the superior courts should not exercise power under Article 226 or 136 of the Constitution and interfere

with the award passed by the Labour Court, etc. merely because there is a possibility of forming a different

opinion on the entitlement of the employee/workman to get full back wages or the employer’s obligation to pay

the same The courts must always keep in view that that in the cases of wrongful/illegal termination of service,

the wrongdoer is the employer and the sufferer is the employee./workman and there is no justification to give a

premium to the employer of his wrongdoings by relieving him of the burden to pay to the employee/ workman

his dues in the form of full back wages.”

A similar view has been taken in the case of Delhi Jal Board Vs. Vimal Kumar (decided on 5-4-2018)

MANU/de/1322/2018 wherein service of a casual driver was terminated without any notice or payment of one month’s

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

215

salary in lieu of such notice. The Industrial Tribunal answering the reference held the action of the management to be

illegal and in violation of Section 25-F of the Act. The Award was upheld by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi by observing

as under :-

“In view of the above discussion, I am unable to discern any illegality or infirmity in the impugned Award,

dated 29th May, 2003, of the Labour Court, to the extent that it holds the termination of the services of the

respondent, by the petitioner, to be illegal and unlawful. I am entirely in agreement with the finding, of the

Labour Court, that the services of the respondent were retrenched in violation of Section 25-F of the ID Act and

that, therefore, he was entitled to be reinstated in service with all consequential benefits. In view of the fact that

going by the age of the respondent as disclosed in the counter affidavit filed before this Court, he would, today,

be only 50 years of age, and also in view of the fact that the termination of his services as SCM Driver was not

on account of any deficiency or shortcoming detected in the manner of discharge by the respondent, of his duties

as such, I am of the opinion, that the facts of the present case, do not warrant any interference with the direction,

of the Labour Court, to the petitioner to reinstate the respondent in service with the benefit of continuity of

service. The petitioner is, therefore, directed to reinstate the respondent in service forthwith.

Inasmuch as the respondent has not been rendering any service to the petitioner since the date of his

termination, however, the back wages payable to the respondent would be limited to 50 per cent of the wages

which he would have drawn he had continued to serve the petitioner…..”

22.

Having regard to the legal position as discussed above and the fact that the claimant was performing duty to a

post of regular and perennial nature, this Tribunal is of the firm view that the claimant herein is entitled for

reinstatement into service on the same post, with 50 per cent back wages, iinasmuch as termination of the

claimant/workman is per-se illegal, particularly when the job is of regular and perennial nature and the

claimant/workman is not gainfully employed anywhere since after his termination by the Management. Award is passed

accordingly.

Date :4.12.18

AVTAR CHAND DOGRA, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 26 fnlEcj] 2018

dk- vk- 44-&vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947 (a1947 dk 14) dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj cSad vkQ

bafM;k ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd

vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] eqEcbZ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la- 36@2011½ dks izdkf’kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 26-12-2018 dks

izkIr gqvk FkkA

[la- ,y&12012@52@2011&vkbZvkj ¼ch-II½]

jfo dqekj] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh

New Delhi, the 26th December, 2018

S.O. 44.—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 No 1, Mumbai as

shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Bank of India, and their workmen, received

by the Central Government on 26.12.2018.

[No. L-12012/52/2011 - IR(B-II)]

RAVI KUMAR, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.1 MUMBAI

Present :JUSTICE RAVINDRA NATH MISHRA, Presiding Officer

REFERENCE NO.CGIT-1/ 36 OF 2011

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of Bank of India

and

Their workman (Harish G Chintalwad)

Appearances:

For the first party no.1/ Management

:

Mr.Lancy D’ Souza, Adv.

For the second party / Workman

:

Mr.R.M.Nijampurkar, Adv.

State

:

Maharashtra

Mumbai, dated the 22nd day of November, 2018

216

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

AWARD

1.

The present reference has been made by the Central Government by its order No. L-12012/52/2011 – IR (B-

II)dated04.11.2011 passed in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of

Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The terms of reference as per the schedule to the said order are as under:

“Whether the action of the management of Bank of India, Pune in imposing the punishment of

compulsory retirement on Shri Harish G. Chintalwad vide order dated 11.7.2007 is legal and justified?

What relief the concerned workman is entitled to?”

2.

Brief facts giving rise to this reference are that the workman Shri Harish G.Chintalwad was working as Sub-

staff – Cash Peon in the Bank of India, Khadki Branch. It I alleged that while working as sub-staff at the above Bank,

the workman prepared bogus salary certificate of himself on 23.9.2001 on the Banks letter head. The workman on the

above bogus salary certificate falsely showed his total emoluments as 7593.94 when his take home salary in the month of

September 2001 was Rs.2,962.00. He also impressed the rubber stamp of the above Bank on the said bogus salary

certificate. Thus, the workman committed an act of misconduct to qualify himself as a guarantor in respect of a loan

application made by one of his acquaintance Shri Ajay Manohar Torne. This fraud came to light of the Bank when an

order of attachment dated 1.3.2006 issued by Recovery Officer was received by the Branch. Owing to above gross

misconduct a charge sheet was issued to the workman. During enquiry the workman himself gave his admission in

writing on the copy of Marathi version of the charge sheet . He also unconditionally accepted the charges and the

documents filed by the Presenting Officer. After the conclusion of enquiry, the disciplinary authority awarded him the

punishment of compulsory retirement with immediate effect with superannuation benefits. The workman challenged the

punishment order and thereby raised an industrial dispute which has been referred by the Government of Indi for decision

by this Tribunal.

3.

The workman has pleaded that the punishment imposed on him is unjust, unreasonable and improper being

shockingly disproportionate and harsh one besides being discriminatory vis-à-vis the punishment imposed upon other

workman with similar act of misconduct. He has also pleaded that the action against him was vitiated on account of bias

and partial attitude of the Enquiry Officer. The findings of Enquiry Officer are perverse and vitiates the enquiry. He

blindly accepted the admission of the workman without going into the contents of the said admission. Thus, the workman

challenged the punishment order and has claimed is reinstatement with full back wages with other consequential benefits.

4.

The management of the Bank has filed its written statement depicting the factual position as above. However, it

pleaded inter alia that the act of misconduct committed by the workman comes within gross misconduct of “doing any

act prejudicial of the interest of the Bank” within the meaning of clause 5 sub-clause (j) of the Memorandum of

Settlement dated 10.4.2002. Therefore, a charge sheet was submitted and enquiry was conducted against the workman

concerned in which he admitted all the charges and the documents filed during enquiry. Consequently, the Enquiry

Officer found charges proved against him and submitted his report whereupon a show cause notice of punishment was

issued to the workman and after hearing him a punishment of compulsory retirement with superannuation benefits was

passed against the workman concerned.

5.

On behalf of the workman WW-1 Shri Harish Chintanwad has been examined to substantiate the illegality of

enquiry, however, on behalf of the management MW-1 Rajesh G.Iyer was examined by the management. No other

witness was produced on behalf of the management.

6.

Burden lies on the workman to prove that the enquiry conducted against him is illegal and not in consonance of

principles of natural justice. But as it is evident from the application moved by the workman concerned on 1.8.2018, the

workman concerned is not interested to pursue the proceedings of this case and he has requested for closure of the

proceedings, the illegality of enquiry is not required to be adjudicated upon.

7.

From the perusal of the record, it transpires that the punishment order was passed on the ground of admission

made by the workman concerned during enquiry proceedings. The workman concerned participated in the enquiry. He

does not want to say anything against the validity and illegality of the enquiry proceedings. He has requested for closure

of the proceedings. Therefore, in view of this application dated 1.8.2018, no further adjudication in the matter is required

as there exist no dispute and in view of above, let award be passed accordingly.

JUSTICE RAVINDRA NATH MISHRA, Presiding Officer

नई दली, 27 दस बर, 2018

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ. 45

45

45

45.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस नेशनल इंNयोरस क पनी िलिमटेड के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4

औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय, नागपुर के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 60/2014) को

$कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 26.12.2018 को $ा; <आ था।

[सं. एल-17012/140/2014-आईआर(एम)]

डी. के. िहमांशु, अवर सिचव

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

217

New Delhi, the 27th December, 2018

S.O. 45.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 60/2014) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Nagpur now

as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s.

National Insurance Company Limited and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on

26.12.2018.

[No. L-17012/140/2014-IR(M)]

D. K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI S. S. GARG, PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR

Case No.CGIT/NGP/60/2014-15

Date: 03.10.2018

Party No. 1(a)

:

The Divisional Manager,

National Insurance Company Ltd.,

Divisional Office, No.2, Paul Commercial Complex,

5th Floor, Ajni Chowk, Nagpur,

Nagpur – 440015.

Party No.1(b) :

The Branch Manager,

National Insurance Co. Ltd.,

Buttibori, Nagpur.

Versus

Party No.2

:

Shri Satish Mahadeorao Patil,

C/o Sonu Devaji Shivankar,

Srushti Layout, Navin Vasti,

Ward No. 3, Buttibori, Nagpur,

Nagpur.

(Dated: 03rd October, 2018)

AWARD

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

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) (“the Act” in short), the Central Government has referred the industrial

dispute between the employer, in relation to the management of National Insurance Co. Ltd. and their workman, Shri

Satish Mahadeorao Patil for adjudication, as per letter No.L-17012/140/2014- (IR(M) dated 22.01.2015, with the

following schedule:-

“Whether the action of the Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Nagpur/Buttibori, Nagpur in

terminating the services of Sh. Satish Mahadeorao Patil, Ex Office Boy/Peon w.e.f. 10.04.2012 is just, fair

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

2.

On receipt of the reference, the parties were noticed to file their respective statement of claim and written

statement, by registered post with acknowledge due, but nobody was appearing from either side from the beginning. On

07.11.2017, order was passed to issue fresh notice to the parties, fixing the date on 08.12.2017. On 08.12.2017,

Advocate C.A. Anthony filed Memo of Appearance on behalf of the management, but nobody appeared on behalf of the

petitioner, though notice was served on him.

3.

On 20.02.2018, Advocate C.A. Anthony filed vakalatnama on behalf of the management, but nobody appeared

on behalf of the petitioner. After perusal of the record, it reveals that, after serving of notice on the workman, eight

dates have been given to him to file statement of claim, but no statement of claim has been filed. On 25.09.2018,

advocate for the management filed a pursis mentioning therein for closure of this case and on that also, the workman was

absent and no claim was filed. So, I think that, the workman is not interested to continue with this reference. Hence, it is

ordered:

ORDER

The reference is answered in the negative and against the workman. The workman is not entitled to any

relief.

SHYAM SUNDER GARG, Presiding Officer

218

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नई दली, 27 दस बर, 2018

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ. 46

46

46

46.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस िहदु&तान Dजक िलिमटेड के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक

िववाद म औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय, उदयपुर के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 03/2000) को $कािशत करती है जो

केीय सरकार को 24.12.2018 को $ा; <आ था।

[सं. एल-43012/12/2000-आईआर(एम)]

डी. के. िहमांशु, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 27th December, 2018

S.O. 46.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 03/2000) of the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Udaipur now as shown in the

Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s. Hindustan Zinc Limited

and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 24.12.2018.

[No. L-43012/12/2000-IR(M)]

D. K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.

vuqca/k

vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] mn;iqj ¼jktLFkku½ ihBklhu vf/kdkjh & Jh v:.k dqekj nqcs

izdj.k la[;k 03@2000 I.T.R.(C)

Jh vf[ky Hkkjrh; tLrk mRiknd Jfed la?k

tujy lsdsVªh] pEikyky /keZ'kkyk] mn;iqj

---izkFkhZ

fo:)

Jh fgUnqLrku ftad fyfeVsM]

tujy eSustj] jktiqjk njhck ekbZUl]

iksLV njhck] jktleUn

---foi{kh

mifLFkr %&

izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls % Jh izHkqyky lq[koky] izfrfuf/k

foi{kh dh vkSj ls % Jh Hkjr l:ifj;k] vf/koDrk

iapkV

fnukad 23 vxLr] 2018

Hkkjr ljdkj ds Je foHkkx dh vf/klwpuk Øekad L-43012/ 12/2000(IR{M})New Delhi fnukad 30-06-2000 ds

}kjk fuEukafdr fookn bl U;k;ky; dks vf/kfu.kZ;kFkZ izsf"kr fd;k x;k &

”Whether the action of the management of

Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Rajpura Dariba Mines,

Dariba Distt. Rajsamand in not giving Pay

protection and step up to Sh. Mithulal

Vaishnav and giving more salary to his

Junior Workman is legal and justified ?

If not,to what relief the workmen concerned

is entitled to ?”

mDr vk’k; dk izlax izkIr gksus ij U;k;ky; }kjk izdj.k ntZ fd;k tkdj lEcfU/kr i{kdkjku dks uksfVl tkjh

fd;s x;sA ftl ij izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls fnukad 08-01-2001 dks Dyse fd;k x;k Fkk rFkk foi{kh dh vkSj ls fnukad 28-08-2001

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

219

dks tckc is'k fd;k x;k rFkk vU; dk;Zokgh gksus ds ckn cgl lquh tkdj U;k;ky; }kjk fnukad 13-04-2005 dks vfUre

iapkV fuEu izdkj ikfjr fd;k x;k &

^^Dyse jsQjsUl esa izkFkhZ i{kdkj vf[ky Hkkjrh; tLrk mRiknd Jfed la?k }kjk izLrqr o iSjoh ugha fd;s tkus ds

dkj.k pyus ;ksX; ugha gksus ls [kkfjt fd;k tkrk gS A **

mDr iapkV ds fo:) feBwyky oS".ko dh vkSj ls ekuuh; jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky;] tks/kiqj esa ;kfpdk S.B.Civil

Writ Petition No. 4844/2005 Mithu Lal Vaishnav Vs. The Judge Ind. Tribunal and Gen. Manager Hindustan Zin Ltd. is'k

dh A ftlesa ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us vius vkns'k fnuakd 06-04-2011 }kjk bl izdj.k dks bl U;k;ky; dks fjek.M djrs

gq, nksuksas i{kks dks lquokbZ dk volj nsdj xq.k&nks"k ij iapkV ikfjr djus dk vkns'k fn;k A

ftl ij fnuakd 13-12-2011 dks izdj.k iqu% ntZ fd;k tkdj nksuksa i{kksa dks lk{; o nLrkost is'k djus dk volj

fn;k x;k A

izkFkhZ }kjk izLrqr Dyse ds rF; la{ksi esa bl izdkj gS fd& Jfed feBwyky dks fu;kstd i{k us fnukad 30-08-75 ds

vius vkns'k }kjk 'kk[kk tkoj ekbZUl esa lsEiy ckW; ds in ij Js.kh&f}rh; esa osru J`a[kyk 160&6&250 esa fu;qDr fd;kA

mlds ckn fu;kstd }kjk Jfed dks fnuakd 01-01-79 dks Js.kh&r`rh; ds in ij inksUur fd;kA Jfed }kjk foi{kh ds v/khu

09-09-75 ls 31-03-84 rd yxkrkj dk;Z fd;k A fu;kstd us fnukad 01-05-86 dks Js.kh&prqFkZ ij inksUur fd;k o mlds ckn

Js.kh iape ij Lor% inksUur fd;k x;k A tgka fnukad 01-01-96 ls ewy osru 3586 :i;s gksdj fnukad 01-07-96 ls ewy osru

3662 ds fglkc ls Hkqxrku fd;k tk jgk gS] tcfd Jfed i{k ds i'pkr~ fu;kstd i{k ds ;gka dk;Zjr deZpkjh xksihyky]

papy dqekj] rstflag dks Js.kh& iape esa ewy osru 3738 :i;s ds fglkc ls Hkqxrku fd;k tk jgk gS A Jfed i{k ds i'pkr~

fu;qDr mDr deZpkfj;ksa dks 2 o"kZ 4 ekg ckn iape&Js.kh nh xbZ gS A blh izdkj tkoj ekbZUl esa dk;Zjr 'ke'kwy gd dks

fnukad 01-08-96 ls Js.kh iakp esa ewy osru 3814 :i;s ds fglkc ls Hkqxrku fd;k tk jgk gS A bl lEcU/k esa Jfed us dbZ

ckj fyf[kr ,oa ekSf[kd :i ls osru vlaxfr dks nwj djus dk fuosnu fd;k] ysfdu fu;kstd us dksbZ /;ku ugha fn;k A

Jfed ds fu;kstu dky easa foi{kh dsk dHkh dksbZ f'kdk;r ugha jgh A bl izdkj fu;kstd }kjk Jfed dks vU; dfu"B leku

in ,oa Js.kh ij dk;Zjr deZpkfj;ksa ls osru vlaxfr gksus ls de osru dk Hkqxrku djuk vuqfpr Je O;ogkj gS A blfy;s

osru folaxfr dks nwj dj mls lHkh ykHk fnyk;s tkus dk fuosnu fd;k A

foi{kh us vius tckc esa ;g vafdr fd;k gS fd izkFkhZ dk osru fu/kkZj.k fof/kor foi{kh laLFkku esa ekU;rk izkIr la?k

ls fnukad 29-09-95 dks gq, nh?kZ vof/k le>kSrs ds vk/kkj ij fd;k x;k gS ,oa mlh vuqlkj mldks Hkqxrku fd;k tk jgk gSA

izkFkhZ us fnuakd 30-08-75 dks tkoj ekbZUl esa Js.kh&nks esa viuk dk;ZHkkj xzg.k fd;k Fkk rFkk 31-03-84 rd yxkrkj dk;Z

fd;k ,oa izkFkhZ us izcU/ku dks tkoj [knku ls jktiqjk njhck [knku esa On request transfer dh izkFkZuk dh ftl ij vkns'k

fnukad 16-03-84 ls izkFkhZ dk LFkkukUrj.k fd;k x;k ftl vkns'k esa gh ;g Li"V :i ls lwfpr fd;k Fkk fd ^^vUr% ofj"Brk

esa dfu"Bre jgsxsa A** izkFkhZ us mDr vkns'k esa of.kZr 'krksZ dks Lohdkj djrs gq, jktiqjk njhck [knku bZdkbZ esa dk;ZHkkj xzg.k

fd;k Fkk A feBwyky }kjk fnuakd 01-05-86 ls ofj"B lsEiyesu&A] Js.kh&pkj esa 8 o"kZ dk dk;Zdky iw.kZ djus ij i= dzekad

568 fnukad 22-06-94 }kjk fu;ekuqlkj inksUufr nh xbZ A foHkkx esa dk;Zjr vU; deZpkjh xksihyky] papy dqekj] rstflag

fnukad 04-04z-84 dks izkFkhZ feBwyky ds tkoj [knku ls jktiqjk njhck [knku esa On request transfer ds le; ofj"B

lsEiyesu&aAA] Js.kh&rhu esa dk;Zjr Fks ,oa feBwyky }kjk bl bdkbZ esa LFkkukUrj.k vkns'k esa n'kkZ;h 'krksZ ds vuqlkj feBwyky

foHkkx esa dk;Zjr vU; deZpkfj;ksa ls dfu"Bre ekus x;s Fks A blfy;s feBwyky tkoj ekbZUl esa dk;Zjr deZpkfj;ksa ls osru

vlaxfr ds lEcU/k esa rqyuk djus dk gdnkj ugha gS A feBwyky }kjk osru vlaxfr ds lEcU/k esa izkFkZuk djus ij mls bl

ckcr lwfpr dj fn;k Fkk fd mldk osru vlaxfr dk ekeyk ugh curk gS A feBwyky dfu"B deZpkjh gksus ds dkj.k os

ofj"B deZpkjh ls de osru izkIr dj jgs gS A blfy;s izkFkhZ }kjk izLrqr izkFkZuk i= [kkfjt fd;s tkus dh izkFkZuk dh A

izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls vius Dyse ds leFkZu esa fnukad 04-12-15 dks 'kiFk i= izLrqr fd;k ftl ij fnukad 27-01-16 dks

ftjg gqbZ o foi{kh dh vkSj ls ujsUnz iqjksfgr dk 'kiFk i= is'k gqvk ftlls fnukad 05-02-18 dks ftjg iwjh gqbZ o mlh fnu

lk{; foi{kh lekIr dh rFkk i=koyh cgl vafre esa fu;r dh xbZ ftl ij nksuksa i{kksa dh vkSj ls fyf[kr cgl is'k dh xbZA

cgl lquh xbZ A i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;k x;k A

izkFkhZ ,oa foi{kh dh vkSj ls bl ekeys esa iwoZ ihBklhu vf/kdkjh ds le{k fnuakd 16-03-2018 dks fyf[kr cgl

izLrqr dh xbZ Fkh] ftldh vkSj Hkh /;ku vkdf"kZr fd;k x;k A

cgl ds nkSjku izkFkhZ ds fof/kd izfrfuf/k us vius rdZ esa ;g izdV fd;k gS fd bl ekeys esa izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls osru

laj{k.k ,oa LVsi&vi foi{kh }kjk ugha djus ds QyLo:i izLrqr gqvk gS A ftlesa foi{kh dh vksj ls izkFkhZ ls dfu"B Jfedksa

dks vf/kd osru fn;k x;k A lkFk gh bl izdj.k esa izkFkhZ dk LFkkukUrj.k tkoj ekbZUl ls njhck ekbZUl esa

o"kZ 1984 esa gqvk Fkk A LFkkukUrj.k gksus ds i'pkr~ foi{kh }kjk izkFkhZ dks njhck ekbZUl esa lcls dfu"B Jfed ekuk x;k] bl

dkj.k ;g fookn mRiUu gqvk] tcfd mlds i'pkr~ fu;qDr Jfedksa ls izkFkhZ dk osru de ugha gksrk gS u gh muls dfu"B

ekuk tk;sxk A viuh fyf[kr cgl esa izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls ;g rdZ Hkh fn;k x;k gS] fd izkFkhZ dh vksj ls vius firk ds chekj

gksus ds dkj.k ?kj ds utnhd njhck ekbZUl esa viuk LFkkukUrj.k djkus ckcr izkFkZuk i= izLrqr fd;k x;k Fkk] ysfdu ml

le; mldk LFkkukUrj.k u dj dkQh le; i'pkr~ mldk LFkkukUrj.k fd;k x;k A vr% mDr LFkkukUrj.k ds vk/kkj ij

izkFkhZ dks ofj"Brk esa dfu"B ugha ekuk tk ldrk gS A vkxs vius rdksZ esa ;g Hkh izdV fd;k gS fd izkFkhZ us LoSfPNd

LFkkukUrj.k dks Hkh pqukSfr nsrs gqos ;g izdV fd;k fd mldk LFkkukUrj.k LoSfPNd ugha Fkk] fodYi esa mldk ;g Hkh rdZ gS

fd ;fn LFkkukUrj.k LoSfPNd Hkh ekuk tk;s rks Hkh mls vius ls dfu"B Jfedksa ls dfu"B ugha ekuk tk ldrk gS A blds

vykok izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls viuh fyf[kr cgl esa bl U;k;ky; esas izsf"kr fookn ls vfrfjDr vU; rdZ Hkh izLrqr fd;s gSa]

ftudk mYys[k o foospu fd;k tkuk vko';d ugha gS A

220

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

mijksDr rdksZ dk [k.Mu djrs gqos fo}ku vf/koDrk foi{kh dk rdZ gS fd bl ekeys esa izkFkhZ o foi{kh dh vksj ls

izLrqr lk{; ls ;g iw.kZ:is.k lkfcr gS fd izkFkhZ dh fu;qfDr foi{kh laLFkku esa gqbZ Fkh] rRi'pkr~ izkFkhZ us foi{kh laLFkku esa

viuk LFkkukUrj.k njhck ekbZUl esa djkus dk vkosnu izLrqr fd;k] ftl ij foi{kh laLFkku ds fu;eksa ds rgr LoSfPNd

LFkkukUrj.k Jfed dk ml LFkku ij fu;qDr leku oxZ ds Jfedksa ls dfu"B ekuk tk;sxk] bu 'krksZa ds lkFk foi{kh laLFkku us

izkFkhZ dk LFkkukUrj.k tkoj ekbZUl ls njhck ekbZUl esa fd;k Fkk] ftl ij izkFkhZ us viuh lgefr nh Fkh A njhck ekbZUl esa

tksbZu djus ds i'pkr~ og iwoZ in LFkkiu ij leku oxZ ds Jfedksa ls dfu"B ekuk ml vk/kkj ij mldk o iwoZ fu;qDr

Jfedksa ls vius osru dh rqyuk djus dk fookn ugha mBk ldrk A vr% izkFkhZ dk Dyse izkFkZuk i= [kkfjt djus dh izkFkZuk

dh A

izkFkhZ feBwyky us viuh lk{; esa vius }kjk izLrqr izkFkZuk i=ksa dh iqujkofrZ djrs gqos ;g izdV fd;k gS fd foi{kh

laLFkku ds tkoj ekbZUl esa lSEiy ckW; ds in ij fnuakd 09-09-1975 dks mldh fu;qfDr gqbZ Fkh rFkk fnuakd 01-01-1979 dks

mls lSEiy eSu r`rh; Js.kh cuk fn;k Fkk A vkxs viuh lk{; esa ;g dgk gS fd esjs vuqjks/k ij esjk LFkkukUrj.k tkoj

ekbZUl ls njhck ekbZUl esa dj fn;k Fkk A ;g LFkkukUrj.k mn;yky ikyhoky ofj"B lSEiy eSu r`rh; dk in fjDr gksus ds

dkj.k fd;k x;k Fkk A LoSfPNd LFkkukUrj.k ij dEiuh ds fu;ekuqlkj eq>s LFkkukUrj.k ds ykHk ugha fn;s x;s rFkk ofj;rk

dk ykHk ugha fn;s tkus ds izko/kku ugha gksrs gq, Hkh foi{kh }kjk mls njhck ekbZUl esa dfu"B cuk fn;k x;k rFkk is&izksVsDV

ugha dh xbZ A njhck ekbZUl esa fnukad 04-04-1984 dks tksbZu fd;k rc r`rh; Js.kh esa ofj"B lsEiy esu ds in ij dk;Zjr

jgrs gq, mldk osru 716@&:Ik;s Fkk] tcfd mlls dfu"B Jfed jruyky] Hkxokuyky] vk'kwjke] ca'khyky] 'kadjyky

lsEiy esu r`rh; Js.kh esa dk;Zjr jgrs gq, mudk osru 680@&:i;s Fkk A vkxs viuh lk{; esa ;g dgk gS fd mldh prqFkZ

Js.kh esa inksUufr 01-01-1985 dks gksuh pkfg;s Fkh] tcfd mDr Jfedksa dh 1986 esa gksuh pkfg;s Fkh] ysfdu eq>ls dfu"B

Jfed jruyky] Hkxokuyky] vk'kwjke] ca'khyky] 'kadjyky dh inksUufr eq>ls iwoZ esa dh xbZ A blh izdkj viuh lk{; esa

vius ls dfu"B Jfed xksihyky] papy dqekj] rstflag dh inksUufr dj mudk osru vius ls vf/kd gksuk izdV fd;k gS

rFkk viuh lk{; esa bu Jfedksa dks dfu"B crkrs gqos viuk osru Hkh buds osru ds cjkcj fd;k tkuk izdV fd;k gS A vkxs

viuh lk{; esa bl xokg dh vksj ls bl U;k;ky; esa izsf"kr fookn ds i'pkr~ ds rF;ksa dk o.kZu djrs gqos vU; rF; vafdr

fd;s gSa] ftlds foospu dh dksbZ vko';drk bl izdj.k ugha gS A

foi{kh dh vksj ls izLrqr xokg ujsUnz iqjksfgr us vius 'kiFk i= esa ;g izdV fd;k gS fd izkFkhZ feBwyky dh lSEiy

ckW; Js.kh f}rh; ds :i esa fnuakd 30-08-1975 dks tkoj ekbZUl esa fu;qfDr gqbZ Fkh rFkk mls vkns'k fnuakd 01-01-1979 }kjk

ofj"B lSEiy eSu Js.kh r`rh; esa inksUufr dh x;h Fkh A feBwyky us fgUnqLrku ftad fyehVsM dh tkoj ekbZUl bZdkbZ esa

dk;Zjr jgrs gqos izcU/ku dks izkFkZuk i= is'k dj fuosnu fd;k fd mls tkoj ekbZUl ls jktiqjk njhck ekbZUl esa LoSfPNd

LFkkukUrj.k dj fn;k tkos A ftlds vk/kkj ij mldh izkFkZuk ij LFkkukUrj.k vkns'k fnuakd 16-03-1984 tkjh fd;k x;k Fkk]

ftlesa dEiuh ds fu;eksa ds vuqlkj LoSfPNd LFkkukUrj.k ij ofj"Brk esa dfu"B jgus rFkk fdlh izdkj ds LFkkukUrj.k ds

ykHk ds gdnkj ugha gksus dh 'krsZ FkhA bu 'krksZa ds vk/kkj ij izkFkhZ dk LFkkukUrj.k tkoj ekbZUl ls njhck ekbZUl esa fd;k

x;k Fkk rFkk izkFkhZ us bu 'krksZa dks Lohdkj dj njhck ekbZUl esa fnuakd 04-04-1984 dks viuk dk;ZHkkj xzg.k fd;k Fkk rFkk

izkFkhZ dk osru fu/kkZj.k Hkh ekU;rk izkIr la?k rFkk foi{kh izcU/ku ds e/; fnuakd 29-09-1995 dks gqos le>kSrs ds vk/kkj ij

fd;k x;k Fkk rFkk LFkkukUrj.k vkns'k esa n'kkZ;h x;h 'krksZa ds vuqlkj foi{kh laLFkku dh mDr bZdkbZ esa dk;Zjr vU;

deZpkfj;ksa ls dfu"B ekuk x;k Fkk rFkk izkFkhZ njhck ekbZUl esa vius ls iwoZ dk;Zjr deZpkfj;ksa ls osru folaxfr dh rqyuk

djus dk gdnkj ugha gS] blds vykok izkFkhZ vU; ekbZUl esa dk;Zjr Jfedksa ls osru dh vlaxfr ds vk/kkj ij viuk osru

iqu% fu/kkZj.k djus dk Hkh vf/kdkjh ugha gS A feBwyky dks fu;ekuqlkj inksUufr nh x;h gS rFkk o"kZ 1981 esa mldk osru

vlaxfr dk ekeyk cuk Fkk tks foi{kh laLFkku }kjk mldk osru 403@&:i;s ls 413@&:i;s dj fn;k x;k Fkk A bl

vkns'k dh izfr izn'kZ R-13 dks Hkh bl ckcr~ lk{; esa iznf'kZr djk;k gS rFkk viuh lk{; esa ;g crk;k gS fd izkFkhZ dk On

request transfer dk izkFkZuk i= Fkk] ftlds vk/kkj ij mldk LFkkukUrj.k fd;k x;k Fkk A bl izdkj ml LFkku ij fu;qDr

deZpkfj;ksa ls og dfu"B ekuk x;k rFkk vius ls ofj"B deZpkjh ls osru vlaxfr dh rqyuk djus dk og vf/kdkjh ugha gS]

u gh izkFkhZ ds osru vlaxfr dk dksbZ ekeyk gS A

izkFkhZ vkSj foi{kh dh lk{; ls ;g Lohd`r rF; lkeus vk;k gS fd izkFkhZ dh fu;qfDr foi{kh laLFkku esa lsEiy ckW;

f}rh; ds in ij fnuakd 09-09-1975 dks dh xbZ Fkh rFkk fnuakd 01-01-1979 dks izkFkhZ dh ofj"B lsEiy esu Js.kh r`rh; ds

in ij inksUufr dh xbZ Fkh A rRi'pkr~ bl ekeys esa izkFkhZ dk LFkkukUrj.k vkns'k fnuakd 29-03-1984 ls tkoj ekbZUl ls

jktiqjk njhck ekbZUl esa dh xbZ Fkh ftl ij izkFkhZ us fnuakd 04-04-1984 dks viuk dk;ZHkkj xzg.k fd;k rFkk mlds dk;ZHkkj

xzg.k djrs le; foi{kh laLFkku dh vkSj ls izkFkhZ dks ml oxZ esa dk;Zjr vU; deZpkfj;ksa ls lcls dfu"B ekuk x;k A

izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls vius LFkkukUrj.k vkns'k dks pqukSfr nsrs gq, ;g rdZ fn;k x;k gS fd LoSfPNd LFkkukUrj.k ls vius

i'pkr~ foi{kh laLFkku esa fu;qDr deZpkfj;ska ls dfu"B ugha ekuk tk ldrk gS vkSj lkjk fookn blh fcUnw ij gS fd D;k

LFkkukUrj.k ds i'pkr~ vius oxZ esa dk;Zjr vU; Jfedksa ls dfu"B ekuk tk;sxk rFkk D;k izkFkhZ viuh fu;qfDr fnukad ls

ofj"Brk izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh gS \

bl lEcU/k esa tks ekSf[kd ,oa nLrkosth lk{; izLrqr gqbZ gS] mlesa izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls vius rdksZ esa LoSfPNd

LFkkukUrj.k dks pqukSfr nh xbZ gS rFkk cgl ds nkSjku Hkh izkFkhZ ds izfrfuf/k }kjk izkFkhZ dk LFkkukUrj.k mlds LoSfPNd vkosnu

ij ugha fd;k tkuk izdV fd;k gS A bl lEcU/k esa tks nLrkosth lk{; foi{kh dh vkSj ls izLrqr gqbZ gS] mlesa izkFkhZ dk

LFkkukUrj.k vkns'k izn'kZ R-3 izLrqr fd;k x;k gS tks o"kZ 1984 dk gS] mlesa mYysf[kr 'krZ ;g Fkh fd izkFkhZ }kjk LoSfPNd

LFkkukUrj.k dk izkFkZuk i= fn;k x;k] bl vk/kkj ij mldk LFkkukUrj.k fd;k tkrk gS rFkk izkFkhZ lsEiy esu Js.kh r`rh; esa

mDr ;wfuV esa LFkkukUrj.k fd;k tkrk gS rFkk og mDr ;wfuV esa mDr oxZ esa dk;Zjr deZpkfj;ksa ls dfu"B ekuk tk;sxk rFkk

mls fdlh izdkj dk LFkkukUrj.k HkRrk fu;eksa ds rgr iznku ugha fd;k tk;sxk] u gh og tksbZfuax VkbZe izkIr djus dk

vf/kdkjh gksxk A

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

221

mDr vkns'k ds i'pkr~ izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls izn'kZ R-4A izkFkZuk i= foi{kh laLFkku dh njhck ekbZUl esa izLrqr fd;k

x;k A ftlesa ;g mYys[k fd;k x;k gS fd fjyho vkns'k dh ikyuk esa fnuakd 04-04-1984 dks viuh mifLFkfr ns jgk gwa rFkk

izn'kZ R-4A ij izkFkhZ feBwyky ds gLrk{kj gS o ftls viuh lk{; esa Lo;a ds gLrk{kj gksuk Lohdkj fd;k gSA bl izdkj

foi{kh dh vkSj ls izLrqr ekSf[kd ,oa nLrkosth lk{; ls ;g izdV gksrk gS fd izkFkhZ us foi{kh laLFkku esa tkoj ekbZUl ls

njhck ekbZUl esa viuk LoSfPNd LFkkukUrj.k gsrq vkosnu i= izLrqr fd;k Fkk] ftlds vk/kkj ij mldk LosfPNd LFkkukurj.k

vkns'k izn'kZ R-3 esa mYysf[kr 'krksZ ds vuqlkj izkFkhZ dks dksbZ ofj"Brk iznku u djrs gq, mldk LFkkukUrj.k fd;k x;k Fkk

ftls Lohdkj djrs gq, izkFkhZ us fnuakd 04-04-1984 dks njhck ekbZUl esa viuh M~;qVh tksbZu dh Fkh A bu rF;ksa ls iw.kZr;k ;g

izdV gksrk gS fd izkFkhZ us LFkkukUrj.k 'krksZ dks Lohdkj djrs gq, njhck ekbZUl esa viuh M~;qVh tksbZu dh Fkh A

bl lEcU/k easa izkFkhZ dh lk{; ds voyksdu ls LoSPNk LFkkukUrj.k ds ckcr~ tks rF; vk;s gSa] mlesa izkFkhZ us tkoj

ekbZUl ls njhck ekbZUl esa vius LFkkukUrj.k ckcr~ LoSPNk vkosnu i= izLrqr fd;k Fkk A bldk mYys[k izkFkhZ dh vksj ls

izLrqr tckcqy tokc ds isjk la[;k 2 esa gS] ftlesa izkFkhZ us ;g mYys[k fd;k gS fd vkns'k fnuakd 16-03-1984 ds vk/kkj ij

fnuakd 04-04-1984 dks jktiqjk njhck esa M~;qVh tksbZu dh Fkh A bl vkns'k ls ;g Li"V gS fd LFkkukUrj.k dk ykHk ;fn On

request eku Hkh fy;k tkos rks mls ;k=k o vU; HkRrs ds :i esa ugha fn;k x;k] fdUrq ,slh dksbZ fof/k ;k le>kSrk ugha gS]

ftlds vuqlkj izkFkhZ&Jfed dks dfu"Bre jktiqjk njhck ekbZUl esa cuk;k tk lds A ;g lekurk ds fl}kUr ds fo:} gS A

bl izdkj izkFkhZ us vius tokcqy tokc esa Hkh On request LFkkukUrj.k fd;k x;k ;g rF; ekuk gS A lkFk gh bl lEcU/k

esa izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls izLrqr vius 'kiFk i= ds isjk uEcj 2 esa ;g mYys[k fd;k gS fd esjs vuqjks/k ij esjk LFkkukUrj.k orZeku

in ofj"B lSEiy eSu Js.kh r`rh; ij fd;k x;k Fkk rFkk bl 'krZ ij fd;k x;k Fkk fd mls LoSfPNd LFkkukUrj.k dk ykHk

fu;eksa ds rgr~ ugha fn;k tk;sxkA bl ckcr~ tks ftjg gqbZ gS] mlesa izkFkhZ us viuh ftjg esa ;g Lohdkj fd;k gS fd izn'kZ

R-3 dk;kZy; vkns'k esa A ls B bZckjr lgh gS rFkk izn'kZ R-4A esa tks eSaus vius LFkkukUrj.k vkns'k dh ikyuk esa izLrqr

fd;k Fkk] og i= esjs }kjk fy[kk x;k Fkk A blls Hkh ;g izdV gksrk gS fd izkFkhZ dks vius LFkkukUrj.k vkns'k dk iw.kZ Kku

Fkk rFkk mlus izn'kZ R-3 ds vuqlkj njhck ekbZUl esa mifLFkfr ckcr~ izkFkZuk i= is'k fd;k Fkk] mls Lohdkj fd;k gS A lkFk

gh bl xokg us viuh ftjg esa ;g Hkh Lohdkj fd;k gS fd eSaus LFkkukUrj.k esa vafdr mDr 'krksZa dh ikyuk dh Fkh A ;g Hkh

lgh gS fd dSVsxjh 3 esa igys ls yksx dk;Zjr Fks A ;g Hkh lgh gS fd eq>s LFkkukUrj.k ls osru dh gkfu ugha gqbZ gS A

bl rjg ls nksuksa i{kksa dh lk{; ls ;g iw.kZ:is.k lkfcr gksrk gS fd izkFkhZ dks foi{kh laLFkku }kjk tkoj ekbZUl ls

njhck ekbZUl esa mlds LoSPNk ls LFkkukUrj.k dk izkFkZuk i= izLrqr fd;s tkus ij foi{kh us mldk LFkkukUrj.k fd;k Fkk rFkk

mDr LFkkukUrj.k dh 'krksZa dks ekurs gqos izkFkhZ us fnuakd 04-04-1984 dks njhck ekbZUl esa viuh M~;qVh tksbZu dh Fkh A

LFkkukUrj.k vkns'k izn'kZ R-3 foi{kh laLFkku dh vkSj ls tkjh fd;k Fkk] tks izkFkhZ ds LoSPN;k LFkkukUrj.k ds vkosnu ij tkjh

fd;k x;k Fkk A bl lEcU/k esa foi{kh dh vksj ls viuh laLFkku esa Jfedksa ds inksUufr o fu;qfDr ds lEcU/k esa vDVqcj 1981

esa fu;e cuk;s Fks tks izn'kZ R-13 gS A mDr fu;eksa ds fu;e 4 ds rgr ftlesa ;g mYys[k gS fd ;fn dksbZ Jfed ,d

;qfuV ls nwljs ;qfuV esa LFkkukUrj.k pkgrk gS rks mlds LoSPNk LFkkukUrj.k okys ;wfuV esa dk;Zjr deZpkfj;ksa ls lcls dfu"B

ekuk tk;sxk rFkk dfu"B ds in ij LFkkukUrj.k fd;k tk;sxk A

foi{kh laLFkku dh vkSj ls vius laLFkku ds fu;eksa ds rgr~ izn'kZ R-13 esa of.kZr 'krksZ ds v/khu izkFkhZ dk LoSPNk

LFkkukUrj.k vkns'k izn'kZ R-3 ds }kjk fd;k rFkk izkFkhZ dh lk{; ls Hkh ;g rF; lkfcr gS fd mlus bl vkns'k dh ikyuk esa

fnuakd 04-04-1984 dks njhck ekbZUl esa viuh M~;qVh tksbZu dh Fkh rFkk LoSPNk LFkkukUrj.k ls mldh Js.kh esa vU; Jfed tks

dk;Zjr Fks] mDr Jfedksa dh fu;qfDr viuh fu;qfDr ds i'pkr~ gksuk crkrs gqos izkFkhZ us muls ofj"B gksuk crkrs gqos viuh

ofj"Brk dh eakx rFkk ml vk/kkj ij viuk osru fu/kkZj.k djus o LVsi&vi djkus dh izkFkZuk dh A tcfd lk{; ls ;g

lkfcr gS fd foi{kh laLFkku esa viuh laLFkku ds fu;eksa ds rgr~ LoSPNk LFkkukUrj.k dk vkosnu Lohdkj djrs gqos mls tkoj

ekbZUl ls njhck ekbZUl esa LFkkukUrfjr fd;k] tgak ij izkFkhZ us viuh M~;qVh tksbZu dh A vr% izkFkhZ mDr LFkkukUrj.k ls vius

oxZ esa dk;Zjr Jfedksa ls lcls dfu"B ekuk tk;sxk A

bl rF; dh iqf"V foi{kh dh vksj ls ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr izLrqr U;kf;d n`"VkUr Civil Appeal

No. 2766/2009 Surendra Singh Beniwal Vs. Hukum Singh on 23 April 2009 ls gksrh gS A ftlesa ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky;

}kjk mRrj izns'k f'k{kk foHkkx ds bUVj ehMh;sV dkWyst ds v/;kid dks mldk LoSfPNd LFkkukUrj.k vU; fo|ky; esa fd;s

tkus ij LFkkukUrfjr fo|ky; esa lcls dfu"B v/;kid ekus tkus ds dkj.k U.P.Intermediate Education Act ds rgr lgh

Bgjk;k Fkk rFkk ;g vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k fd ;s fu;e LFkkukUrfjr dkWyst esa igys ls in LFkkfir v/;kidksa ds fgrksa dks

lqjf{kr djus ds fy, fu.kZ; fd;k gS rFkk v/;kid dks ofj"Brk esa lcls dfu"B ekuk tk;sxk A

gLrxr ekeys esa foi{kh laLFkku ds fu;e izn'kZ R-13 tks vDrwcj] 1981 esa fufeZr fd;s x;s Fks] ls LoSfPNd

LFkkukUrj.k ds fu;eksa ds rgr LoSfPNd LFkkukUrj.k ij vk;k deZpkjh mDr LFkku ij leku oxZ ds iwoZ ls dk;Zjr vU;

deZpkfj;sa ls ofj;rk dze esa lcls uhps ekuk tk;sxk A ;s fu;e fof/k lEer gS rFkk ogka ij dk;Zjr vU; Jfedksa ds fgrksa dks

lqjf{kr j[kus ckcr gS A mlds vk/kkj ij izkFkhZ dk LFkkukUrj.k vkns'k izn'kZ R-3 ds }kjk fd;k x;k LFkkukUrj.k vkSj mlesa

mYysf[kr 'krsZ ftuds vk/kkj ij izkFkhZ jktiqjk njhck [knku esa vius oxZ esa lcls dfu"B Jfed ekuk tkosxk A vr% izkFkhZ dk

;g rdZ ekus tkus ;ksX; ugh gS fd LFkkukUrj.k ds i'pkr~ og LFkkukUrj.k LFky ij vius i'pkr~ fu;qDr deZpkfj;ksa ls ofj"B

ekuk tkos A

vr% bl ekeys esa foi{kh laLFkku esa fnukad 04-04-1984 dks izkFkhZ dks jktiqjk njhck [knku esa fu;qfDr ds i'pkr~

mldks ofj;rk esa dfu"B ekurs gq, mldk osru fu/kkZj.k o LVsi&vi fd;k x;k gS og vius ls ofj"B deZpkjh ls osru dk

LVsi&vi o osru dh rqyuk ugha dj ldrk gS rFkk lk{; ls ;g iw.kZ :is.k lkfcr gS fd foi{kh laLFkku }kjk izkFkhZ dk osru

222

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

laj{k.k o LVsi&vi fd;k gS og fu;eksa ds vuqlkj fd;k gS rFkk jktiqjk njhck ekbZUl eas izkFkhZ ls dksbZ dfu"B deZpkfj;ksa gks

vkSj mls vf/kd osru iznku fd;k x;k gks] ;g lk{; ls lkfcr ugha gS A

bl ekeys esa cgl ds nkSjku fo}ku vf/koDrk foi{kh dh vkSj ls ;g rdZ fn;k x;k gS fd Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk bl

U;k;ky; dks vf/kfu.kZ;kFkZ tks izlax izsf"kr fd;k gS mlesa izkFkhZ dh ;wfu;u i{kdkj gS rFkk ;g fookn osru folaxfr ,oa

LVsi&vi ls lacaf/kr gS] tks izkFkhZ dh ;wfu;u }kjk gh izLrqr fd;k tk ldrk gS] tcfd ;g izdj.k izkFkhZ Lo;a }kjk izLrqr

fd;k x;k gS] vr% mldh vkSj ls igys mlds vf/koDrk }kjk rRi'pkr~ mlds fof/kd izfrfuf/k }kjk iSjoh dh tk jgh gS]

tcfd /kkjk 36 vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e ds rgr mlds vf/koDrk }kjk iSjoh djus ds fy;s btktr ugha yh xbZ gS rFkk

Jfed la?k }kjk iSjoh ugha fd;s tkus ds dkj.k ;g izdj.k blh vk/kkj ij [kkfjt fd;s tkus ;ksX; gSA

mijksDr rdksZ dk fojks/k djrs gq, izkFkhZ izfrfuf/k dh vkSj ls ;g rdZ fn;k gS fd izkFkhZ dh lk{; ls ;g lkfcr gS

fd ;g ekeyk Jfed la?k }kjk mBk;k x;k Fkk rFkk Jfed la?k dh vkSj ls Je vk;qDr ds ;gak fookn izLrqr fd;k x;k Fkk]

tgka ls ekeyk l{ke ljdkj dks Hksts tkus ij bl U;k;ky; esa ;g izlax izsf"kr gqvk gS A ml izlax esa i{kdkj Jfed la?k gh

gS] rRi'pkr~ bl U;k;ky; esa Jfed la?k }kjk iSjoh ugha dh xbZ gS] bl dkj.k izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls izkjEHk esa igys vf/koDrk dh

vkSj ls rRi'pkr~ fof/kd izfrfuf/k }kjk iSjoh dh tk jgh gS A foi{kh dh vkSj ls Hkh vius vf/koDrk ds }kjk iSjoh dh tk jgh

gS A brus o"kksZ ls ;g izdj.k U;k;ky; esa yfEcr gS rFkk foi{kh dh vkSj ls blesa iSjoh djus ls dHkh euk ugha fd;k x;k gSA

QyLo:i ;g rF; ekus tkus ;ksX; ugh gS fd U;k;ky; dh vuqefr ds fcuk izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls mlds vf/koDrk ;k izfrfuf/k

dh vkSj ls iSjoh dh tk jgh gS rFkk /kkjk 36 vkS- fo- vf/kfu;e ds rgr ;g izdj.k [kkfjt gksus ;ksX; ugha gS A vius rdksZ

ds leFkZu esa izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls fuEukafdr U;kf;d n`"VkUr is'k fd;k gS &

Superme Court Appeal (Civil) 1089/2003

J.H.Jadhav Vs. M/s. Forbes Gokak Ltd.

Date of Judgment 11/02/2005

mDr U;kf;d n`"VkUr esa deZdkj dh inksUufr dk ekeyk Fkk] ysfdu mDr izdj.k esa iSjoh Jfed la?k }kjk dh xbZ

Fkh] ftls lgh Bgjk;k x;k Fkk A

(1) AIR 1966 (S.C.) 182 (V 53 C 41)

Workman of M/s.Dharam Pal Vs. M/s Dharma Pal Premchand

(2) AIR 1970 (S.C.) 1205 (V 57 G 252)

M/s. Westran India Watch Vs.

bu nksuska izdj.kksa esa deZdkj dh c[kkZLrxh ds lEcU/k esa fookn Fkk] tcfd gLrxr ekeys esa osru fu/kkZj.k ls lacaf/kr

fookn gS A vr% bu nksuksa U;kf;d n`"VkUr ls izkFkhZ dks dksbZ enn ugha feyrh gs A

gLrxr ekeys ds voyksdu ls ;g izdV gksrk gS fd bl U;k;ky; esa dsUnzh; ljdkj }kjk ;g izlax vf[ky Hkkjrh;

tLrk mRiknd Jfed la?k dh vkSj ls izkFkhZ Jfed feBwyky ds fookn ds lEcU/k esa foi{kh laLFkku ds fo:) izsf"kr fd;k x;k

gS A izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls izLrqr lk{; rFkk mldh vkSj ls izLrqr nLrkost izn'kZ&26 yxk;r izn'kZ&33 ds voyksdu ls ;g izdV

gksrk gS fd izkFkhZ ds osru lEcU/kh fookn dks izkFkhZ ds Jfed la?k }kjk loZizFke Je vk;qDr ds le{k mBk;k Fkk] tgka foi{kh

laLFkku dh vkSj ls Hkh mifLFkfr nh Fkh A le>kSrk okrkZ vlQy gksus ds i'pkr~ ;g ekeyk l{ke ljdkj dks izsf"kr fd;k

x;k] tgka ls ;g izlax fu/kkZj.k gsrq bl U;k;ky; dks izkIr gqvk A bl U;k;ky; esa ;g izdj.k fnuakd 09-10-2000 dks ntZ

gqvk rFkk ;gka ij izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls Lo;a us vkosnu izLrqr fd;k Fkk rFkk mldh vkSj ls igys mlds vf/koDrk dh vkSj ls

rRi'pkr~ mlds izfrfuf/k }kjk iSjoh dh tk jgh gS rFkk foi{kh dh vkSj ls bl izdj.k easa iSjoh muds vf/koDrk dh vkSj ls

dh tk jgh gSA vkS- fo- vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 36 ds rgr nksuksa i{kdkjks us U;k;ky; ls vius vf/koDrk ;k izfrfuf/k ds ek/;e

ls iSjoh gsrq fyf[kr btktr ugha yh gS] ysfdu 10 o"kZ ls i{kdkjks ds vf/koDrk ;k izfrfuf/k }kjk bl izdj.k esa iSjoh dh tk

jgh gS] ftls bl U;k;ky; }kjk dHkh jksdk ugha x;k gS A vr% ;g ekus tkus ;ksX; gS fd U;k;ky; dh Lohd`fr ls nksuksa i{kksa

ds vf/koDrk o izfrfuf/k }kjk muds izdj.k esa iSjoh dh tk jgh gS A lkFk gh lk{; ls ;g rF; lkfcr gksrk gS fd izkFkhZ dk

fookn Je vk;qDr ds ;gka Jfed la?k }kjk mBk;k x;k Fkk ysfdu bl U;k;ky; esa izlax izkIr gksus ds i'pkr~ Jfed la?k

mifLFkr ugha vk jgk gS A la?k ds inkf/kdkjh o izkFkhZ ds e/; fookn gksus ds dkj.k la?k us mldh iSjoh NksM nh gS rFkk

foxr 18 o"kksZ ls izkFkhZ ds vf/koDrk o fof/kd izfrfuf/k }kjk izdj.k esa iSjoh dh xbZ gS A vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e ds rgr

izkFkhZ dk fookn Jfed la?k }kjk mBk;k tkuk ekurs gq, izkFkhZ ds }kjk vc iSjoh fd;k tkuk fof/k lEer gksuk ik;k tkrk gSA

vr% izdj.k ds rF;ksa ,oa ifjfLFkfr;ksa dks ns[krs gq, bl fookn esa iSjoh izkFkhZ }kjk Lo;a fd;k tkuk iw.kZr% fof/k lEer gS A

vr% mijksDr foospu ds vk/kkj ij foi{kh laLFkku }kjk izkFkhZ dk osru laj{k.k o LVsi&vi fd;k gS og fu;eksa ds

vuqlkj fd;k gS rFkk izkFkhZ ls dfu"B deZpkfj;ksa dks izkFkhZ ls vf/kd osru iznku ugha fd;k x;k gS A

vr% Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk izsf"kr izlax fnukad 30 vxLr] 2000 dks mRrfjr djrs gq, iapkV bl izdkj ikfjr fd;k

tkrk gS fd&

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

223

izcU/kd] fgUnqLrku ftad fyfeVsM] jktiqjk njhck ekbZUl] njhck] ftyk jktleUn }kjk izkFkhZ feBwyky dks osru

laj{k.k o LVsi&vi ugha nsuk mfpr ,oa oS/k gS rFkk jktiqjk njhck ekbZUl eas izkFkhZ ls dksbZ dfu"B deZpkfj;ksa gks vkSj mls

vf/kd osru iznku fd;k x;k gks] ;g lkfcr ugha gS A

vr% izkFkhZ dksbZ jkgr ikus dk vf/kdkjh ugha gS A

iapkV izdk’kukFkZ leqfpr ljdkj dks Hkstk tkosa A

iapkV vkt fnukad 23-08-2018 dks [kqys U;k;ky; esa fy[kk;k tkdj lquk;k x;k A

v:.k dqekj nqcs] U;k;k/kh’k

नई दली, 27 दस बर, 2018

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ. 47

47

47

47.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस अशोका िमनरस के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म

औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय, उदयपुर के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 03/2009) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय

सरकार को 24.12.2018 को $ा; <आ था।

[सं. एल-29012/90/2008-आईआर(एम)]

डी. के. िहमांशु, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 27th December, 2018

S.O. 47.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 03/2009) of the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Udaipur now as shown in the

Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s Ashoka Minerals and

their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 24.12.2018.

[No. L-29012/90/2008-IR(M)]

D. K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.

vuqca/k

vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] mn;iqj ¼jktLFkku½ ihBklhu vf/kdkjh && Jh v:.k dqekj nqcs

izdj.k la[;k 03@2009 I.T.R.(C)

Jh jktdqekj firk eksxkjke eh.kk ¼e`rd½

fuoklh xkao o iksLV <sykuk] rg- [kSjokMk] ftyk mn;iqj ds ctk;

¼1½

Jherh lfjrk iRuh Lo- jktdqekj eh.kk

¼2½

lqJh eksfudk iq=h Lo- jktdqekj eh.kk vk;q 11 o"kZ

¼3½

lqJh jatuk iq=h Lo- jktdqekj eh.kk vk;q 8 o"kZ

¼4½

Jh furhu firk Lo- jktdqekj eh.kk vk;q 5 o"kZ

¼5½

lqJh [kq'kcw iq=h Lo- jktdqekj eh.kk vk;q 4 o"kZ

pkjks ukckfyx tfj;s laj{kd ekrk Jherh ljhrk

fuoklh;ku xkao elkjks dh vksojh] rg- [kSjokMk

---izkFkhZx.k

fo:)

Jh eSustj] v'kksdk feujYl]

224

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Ekq- iks- <syk.kk] rglhy [kSjokMk] ftyk mn;iqj

---foi{kh

mifLFkr %

izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls % Jh jkts'k fla?koh] vf/koDrk

foi{kh dh vkSj ls % Jh g"kZo/kZu tSu] vf/koDrk

iapkV

fnukad 27 uoEcj] 2018

Hkkjr ljdkj ds Je foHkkx dh vf/klwpuk Øekad L-29012/ 90/2008-IR{M} New Delhi fnukad 18-11-2008 ds

}kjk fuEukafdr fookn bl U;k;ky; dks vf/kfu.kZ;kFkZ izsf"kr fd;k x;k &

‘‘Whether the action of the management of

M/s Ashoka Minerals, Village & Post Dhelana

Tehsil Kherwara Distt.Udaipur in terminating

the Service of Shri Rajkumar Meena S/o Shri

Mogaram Meena w.e.f. 03/08/2017 is just and

legal ? To what relief the workmen is entitled

and from which date ?”

mDr vk’k; dk izlax izkIr gksus ij U;k;ky; }kjk izdj.k ntZ fd;k tkdj lEcfU/kr i{kdkjku dks uksfVl tkjh

fd;s x;sA

fnukad 25-02-2010 dks Jherh lfjrk eh.kk us ,d izkFkZuk i= is'k dj fuosnu fd;k fd mlds ifr jktdqekj eh.kk

dk fnukad 14-09-2009 dks fu/ku gks x;k gS rFkk jktdqekj eh.kk dh og Lo;a rFkk pkj cPps eksfudk] jatuk] fufru] [kq'kcw

fof/kd okfjlku gS A blfy;s jktdqekj eh.kk ds LFkku ij mUgS i{kdkj cuk;s tkus dk vkns'k iznku fd;k tkos A ftl ij

U;k;ky; }kjk fnuakd 23-08-10 dks Jherh lfjrk o vU; dks jsdkMZ ij fy;s tkus dk vkns'k fn;k A

izkFkhZ i{k dh vkSj ls fnukad 23-08-10 dks Dyse fd;k x;k] ftlds la{ksi esa rF; bl izdkj gS fd jktdqekj eh.kk

dks fnukad 01-03-2005 dks foi{kh laLFkku esa ^^Msfjd dzsu vkWijsVj** ds in ij fu;qDr fd;k A tgka jktdqekj eh.kk ls fnuakd

02-08-2007 rd yxkrkj dk;Z fy;k x;k o tc fnukad 03-08-2007 dks jktdqekj eh.kk foi{kh ds le{k M~;qVh ds fy;s

mifLFkr gqvk rks foi{kh us mls fcuk dksbZ dkj.k crk;s M~;qVh ij ysus ls bUdkj dj ekSf[kd vkns'k ls lsok i`Fkd dj fn;k A

lsok i`Fkd djus ls iwoZ dksbZ vkjksi i=] psrkouh i= ugha fn;k] u gh lsok i`Fkd djus ls iwoZ dksbZ uksfVl ;k uksfVl&is dk

Hkqxrku fd;k] u eqvkotk jkf'k vnk dh A foi{kh ds v/khu fu;kstu ds nkSjku jktdqekj eh.kk dh dHkh dksbZ f'kdk;r ugha

jgh vkSj jktdqekj eh.kk us iwjh fu"Bk ds lkFk foi{kh ds ;gka dk;Z fd;k A bl izdkj foi{kh }kjk jktdqekj eh.kk dks voS/k o

vuqfpr :i ls lsok i`Fkd dj fn;k A blfy;s lsok eqfDr dks voS/k o vuqfpr ?kksf"kr fd;k tkos rFkk lsok i`Fkd fnuakd ls

mudh e`R;q fnukad 14-09-2009 rd dh vof/k dk lEiw.kZ osru o vU; ykHk fnyk;s tkos A

foi{kh us viuk tckc is'k dj izkFkZuk i= esa vafdr rF;ksa dks vLohdkj djrs gq, ;g vafdr fd;k fd jktdqekj

eh.kk dh foi{kh laLFkku esa dHkh Hkh LFkk;h fu;qfDr ugha dh xbZ] cfYd jktdqekj eh.kk nSfud osru ds vk/kkj ij dk;Z djrs

Fks rFkk jktdqekj }kjk fnukad 01-03-2005 ls 02-08-2007 rd fu;fer rkSj ij dk;Z ugha fd;k A jktdqekj eh.kk dbZ ckj

'kjkc ihdj vkus yxs] ftl ij mls dbZ ckj 'kjkc ihdj vkus ls euk fd;k A foi{kh }kjk dHkh Hkh jktdqekj eh.kk dks lsok

i`Fkd ugha fd;k x;k] cfYd jktdqekj eh.kk dks vR;f/kd 'kjkc dh yr iM tkus ds dkj.k og ukSdjh ij mifLFkr ughas gksrk

Fkk A foi{kh }kjk mls lsok i`Fkd ugha fd;k x;k blfy;s mls vkjksi i=] psrkouh i=] uksfVl ;k {kfriwfrZ jkf'k nsus dh

vko';drk ugha Fkh A jktdqekj eh.kk dks dHkh lsok i`Fkd ugha fd;k x;k] cfYd vR;f/kd 'kjkc dh yr iM tkus ds dkj.k

og ukSdjh ij mifLFkr ugha gksrk Fkk A blfy;s izkFkhZx.k dk Dyse [kkfjt fd;s tkus dh izkFkZuk dh A

izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls vius Dyse ds leFkZu esa Jherh lfjrk dk 'kiFk i= is'k gqvk ftlls foi{kh vf/koDrk us ftjg

dhA foi{kh dh vkSj ls Jh uklhj gqlSu o gjh'k dqekj vjksjk dk 'kiFk i= is'k gqvk ftuls izkFkhZ vf/koDrk us ftjg dh A

i{kdkjks ds vf/koDrk dh cgl lquh xbZ A i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;k x;k A

izkFkhZ vf/koDrk dk rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ us foi{kh laLFkku esa fnukad 01-03-2005 ls 02-08-2007 rd yxkrkj dzsu vkWijsVj

ds in ij dk;Z fd;k Fkk rFkk mlds dk;Z ls foi{kh laLFkku dks dHkh dksbZ f'kdk;r ugha jgh] cfYd izkFkhZ ,d vPNk deZdkj

Fkk] bl ckcr foi{kh laLFkku }kjk mls ,d izek.k i= izn'kZ&2 tkjh fd;k Fkk rFkk foi{kh }kjk vius tckc o lk{; esa ;g

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

225

izdV fd;k fd jktdqekj eh.kk 'kjkc ihdj vkus yxk Fkk blfy;s mls dk;Z ij ugha fy;k tkrk Fkk] ysfdu bl ckcr foi{kh

}kjk dHkh Hkh dksbZ uksfVl oxSjk mls ugha fn;k A izkFkhZ }kjk vius fu;kstu ds nkSjku izR;sd okf"kZd dky esa 240 fnu ls

vf/kd dh lsok,a nh rFkk mls fcuk fdlh dkj.k ls fnuakd 03-08-2007 dks foi{kh ds le{k M~;qVh ds fy;s mifLFkr gqvk rks

mls fcuk dksbZ dkj.k crk;s M~;qVh ij ysus ls bUdkj dj ekSf[kd vkns'k ls voS/k :i ls lsok i`Fkd dj fn;k rFkk lsok i`Fkd

djus ds ckn fnukad 14-09-2009 dks mldh e`R;q gks xbZ A blfy;s lsok eqfDr dks voS/k ?kksf"kr fd;k tkos rFkk jktdqekj dks

lsok i`Fkd djus dh fnuakd ls mldh e`R;q fnukad rd dh vof/k dk lEiw.kZ ykHk fnyk;k tkos A

foi{kh us mDr rdksZ dk fojks/k djrs gq, ;g izdV fd;k fd jktdqekj eh.kk foi{kh laLFkku esa fu;fer rkSj ij

dk;Zjr ugha Fkk cfYd mls nSfud osru ds vk/kkj ij fu;qDr fd;k x;k Fkk rFkk mls nSfud osru ds vk/kkj ij gh Hkqxrku

fd;k tkrk Fkk A jktdqekj eh.kk vf/kdka'kr% 'kjkc ihdj vkus yxk bl ij mls dbZ ckj 'kjkc ihdj u vkus dks dgk x;k

rFkk og 'kjkc ihdj Msfjd dzsu vkWijsVj dk dk;Z djrk rks lEiw.kZ LVkQ dks Mj yxrk Fkk fd dgha dksbZ nq?kZVuk ?kfVr u

gks tkos bl ckjs esa mls psrkouh Hkh nh xbZ Fkh rFkk Lo;a jktdqekj dks 'kjkc dh yr yxus ls og gh ukSdjh ij ugha vkrk

Fkk A jktdqekj us fdlh Hkh o"kZ esa 240 fnu dk;Z ugha fd;k A jktdqekj }kjk 'kjkc ihdj vkus o dzsu vkWijsVj dk dk;Z

djus ls fdlh Hkh le; cMk gknlk gksus dh laHkkouk cuh jgrh Fkh vkSj og Lo;a gh ukSdjh ij mifLFkr ugha gksrk Fkk foi{kh

}kjk mls lsok i`Fkd ugha fd;k x;k A blfy;s izkFkhZx.k dksbZ ykHk izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh ugha gS A

Dyse izkFkZuk i= ds leFkZu esa jktdqekj dh iRuh Jherh lfjrk us vius 'kiFk i= esa Dyse izkFkZuk ds rF;ksa dh

iqujkofrZ dh gS rFkk ;g izdV fd;k fd mlds ifr foi{kh laLFkku esa 01-03-2005 ls 02-08-2007 rd yxkrkj dk;Zjr Fks rFkk

fnuakd 03-08-2007 dks tc os M~;qVh ds fy;s mifLFkr gqvk rks mls fcuk dksbZ dkj.k crk, M~;qVh ij ysus ls bUdkj dj fn;k

rFkk ekSf[kd vkns'k ls lsok i`Fkd dj fn;k A viuh ftjg esa ;g dgk fd ukSdjh ij fudkyus dk eqdnek mlds ifr us gh

yxk;k Fkk A

foi{kh dh vkSj ls uklhj gqlSu o gjh'k dqekj dk 'kiFk i= izLrqr gqvk ftlesa mUgskaus foi{kh }kjk izLrqr tckc ds

rF;ksa dh iqujkofrZ dh dh gS rFkk ;g izdV fd;k fd jktdqekj eh.kk us dHkh Hkh foi{kh laLFkku esa fnuakd 01-03-05 ls 02-08-

07 rd fu;fer rkSj ij dk;Z ugha fd;k] cfYd mlds }kjk nSfud osru ds vk/kkj ij dk;Z fd;k x;k A jktdqekj 'kjkc dk

lsou djds vkus yxk ftl gsrq dbZ ckj mls ekbZUl eSustj o ekbZUl lqijokbZtj }kjk 'kjkc ihdj vkus ls euk fd;k rFkk

mls dbZ ckj psrkouh Hkh nh xbZ Fkh ,oa jktdqekj 'kjkc dh yr ds dkj.k gh dbZ ckj viuh M~;qVh ij mifLFkr ugha gksrk

Fkk A

bl izdj.k esa izkFkhZ i{k dh vkSj ls ;g crk;k x;k gS fd jktdqekj us foi{kh laLFkku esa fnuakd 01-03-2005 ls

02-08-2007 rd yxkrkj MSfjd dzsu vkijsVj ds in ij dk;Z fd;k Fkk A foi{kh dh vkSj ls izLrqr tckc o lk{; esa ;g

crk;k x;k fd jktdqekj eh.kk us dHkh Hkh foi{kh laLFkku esa fnukad 01-03-2005 ls 02-08-2007 rd fu;fer rkSj ij dk;Z ugha

fd;k] cfYd mlds }kjk nSfud osru ds vk/kkj ij dk;Z fd;k A bl izdkj Hkys gh jktdqekj us foi{kh laLFkku esa nSfud osru

ds vk/kkj ij dk;Z fd;k gks] cfYd mlds }kjk mDr vof/k esa foi{kh ds ;gka MSfjd dzsu vkWijsVj ds in ij dk;Z fd;k ;g

rF; rks lkfcr gks tkrk gSA blds vykok foi{kh laLFkku dh vkSj ls izn'kZ&2 izek.k i= tkjh fd;k mlesa Hkh ;g vafdr gS

fd jktdqekj eh.kk us fnukad 01-03-2005 ls 31-07-2007 rd MSfjd dzsu vkWijsVj ds in ij dk;Z fd;k Fkk A

tgka rd izkFkhZ dks fnuakd 03-08-2007 dks lsok i`Fkd djus dk iz'u gS] izkFkhZ i{k dh vkSj ls vius Dyse o 'kiFk

i= esa ;g dgk gS fd fnukad 03-08-2007 dks tc jktdqekj eh.kk foi{kh ds ;gka M~;qVh ij mifLFkr gqvk rks foi{kh us fcuk

dksbZ dkj.k crk, mls M~;qVh ij ysus ls bUdkj dj ekSf[kd vkns'k ls lsok i`Fkd dj fn;k A tcfd foi{kh dh vkSj ls ;g

lk{; izLrqr dh xbZ gS fd foi{kh laLFkku }kjk dHkh Hkh jktdqekj dks voS/k :i ls lsok i`Fkd ugha fd;k x;k] cfYd

jktdqekj Lo;a gh vR;f/kd 'kjkc dk lsou fd;s tkus dh yr iM tkus dh otg ls og ukSdjh ij mifLFkr ugh gksrk Fkk A

bl izdkj foi{kh }kjk ;g izdV fd;k x;k fd jktdqekj dks muds }kjk lsok i`Fkd ugha fd;k x;k] cfYd og Lo;a

gh 'kjkc dh yr iM tkus ds dkj.k ukSdjh ij mifLFkr ugha gksrk Fkk A bl lEcU/k esa uklhj gqlSu us viuh ftjg esa ;g

dgk fd izkFkhZ ds vuqifLFkfr ckcr dksbZ uksfVl ugha fn;k A izkFkhZ dks 'kjkc ihdj vkus vuq'kklu esa ugh jgus dk dksbZ

uksfVl ugha fn;k A gjh'k dqekj vjksjk us Hkh viuh ftjg esa bl rF; dsk Lohdkj fd;k gS fd izkFkhZ ds M~;qVh ij ugha vkus

ckcr mls uksfVl ugha fn;k Fkk A

tgka rd jktdqekj eh.kk ds }kjk 'kjkc ihdj M~;qVh ij vkus dk iz'u gS] foi{kh dh vkSj ls ;g Hkh crk;k x;k fd

jktdqekj eh.kk 'kjkc ihdj vkus yxk bl ckjs esa mls euk Hkh fd;k Fkk rFkk 'kjkc ihdj og dzsu vkWijsVj dk dk;Z djus ds

fy;s cSBrk rks LVkQ esa Mj yxus yx x;k Fkk rFkk dHkh Hkh dksbZ gknlk gksus dh laHkkouk cuh jgrh Fkh A

bl lEcU/k esa uklhj gqlSu us viuh ftjg esa ;g dgk fd izkFkhZ ds 'kjkc ihdj vkus ds ckjs esa fdlh us Hkh fy[khr

f'kdk;r dh gks rks mls irk ugha A ftl eSustj us izkFkhZ dks 'kjkc ihdj vkus dh ckr dgha mldk uke vkt ;kn ugh gS A

gjh'k vjksjk us Hkh viuh ftjg esa dgk fd og Li"V ugha crk ldrk fd izkFkhZ ,d efgus esa fdruh ckj 'kjkc ihdj vkrk Fkk

bl izdkj foi{kh dh vkSj ls tks lk{; is'k gqbZ gS mlesa uklhj gqlSu dks ;g Hkh irk ugha fd fdlh us izkFkhZ ds

'kjkc ihdj vkus dh f'kdk;r dh gks A gjh'k vjksjk ;g ugha crk ldrk fd izkFkhZ ,d efgus esa fdruh ckj 'kjkc ihdj

vkrk Fkk A blds vykok foi{kh dh vkSj ls ,slh dksbZ nLrkosth lk{; Hkh is'k ugha dh xbZ fd jktdqekj eh.kk 'kjkc ihdj

vkrk gks vkSj mls dksbZ psrkouh nh xbZ gks A

izkFkhZ i{k dh vkSj ls izn'kZ&2 izek.k i= iznf'kZr djk;k gS A ftlesa jktdqekj eh.kk dk muds ;gka fnukad 01-03-

2005 ls 31-07-2007 rd MSfjd dzsu vkWijsVj ds in ij dk;Zjr gksuk rFkk mDr vof/k esa gkMZ odZj fu"diV gksuk crk;k gSA

226

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

;fn jktdqekj eh.kk dks 'kjkc ihus dh yr gksrh vkSj oks vk;s fnu 'kjkc ihdj muds ;gka mifLFkr gksrk rks foi{kh laLFkku

bl izdkj dk izek.k i= tkjh ugha djrk A blds vykok gjh'k vjksjk us viuh ftjg esa ;g Lohdkj fd;k gS fd izkFkhZ ds

dk;Z esa dksbZ f'kdk;r ugha Fkh A

foi{kh dh vkSj ls ;g Hkh izdV fd;k x;k fd jktdqekj eh.kk dks dHkh ukSdjh ls ugha fudkyk vkSj og 'kjkc ihus

dh yr ds dkj.k ukSdjh ij mifLFkr ugha gksrk Fkk A bl ckcr foi{kh dh vkSj ls tks gktjh jftLVj is'k fd;k x;k mlls

;g izrhr ugha gskrk fd og jktdqekj ds vR;f/kd 'kjkc ihus dh yr ds dkj.k og Lo;a ukSdjh ij mifLFkr ugha gksrk Fkk A

tgka rd foi{kh laLFkku esa jktdqekj eh.kk }kjk vius fu;kstu dky esa izR;sd okf"kZd dky esa 240 fnu ls vf/kd

dk;Z fnol ij mifLFkr gksdj viuh lsok,a nsus dk iz'u gS A bl lEcU/k esa lfjrk eh.kk us viuh lk{; esa ;g dFku fd;k

fd mlds ifr vius lEiw.kZ fu;kstu dky ds nkSjku izR;sd okf"kZd dky esa 240 fnu ls vf/kd dk;Z fnol ij mifLFkr gskdj

viuh lsok,a vfiZr dh gS A uklhj vgen ls bl lEcU/k esa ftjg dh xbZ rks mlus viuh ftjg esa ;g dgk fd izkFkhZ ds

mifLFkfr iaftdk ds vuqlkj ,d lky esa 240 fnu ls vf/kd fnu gks jgs gks rks og ugha crk ldrk] tcfd ;g xokg

i<k&fy[kk gS rFkk foi{kh laLFkku esa ,dkmUVl eSustj ds in ij dk;Zjr gS] ;fn jktdqekj eh.kk }kjk vius fu;kstu ds

nkSjku fdlh Hkh o"kZ esa 240 fnu dk;Z ugha fd;k x;k gksrk] rks og bl rF; dks xyr crkrk fd jktdqekj eh.kk }kjk fdlh

Hkh o"kZ esa 240 fnu dk;Z fd;k gks A xokg gjh'k vjksjk us viuh ftjg esa igys rks bl rF; dks xyr crk;k fd izkFkhZ us

jsdkMZ ds vuqlkj izfr o"kZ 240 fnu dk;Z fd;k gks] fQj dgk fd mlus ,d ckj gh 240 fnu rd dk;Z fd;k A blds vykok

foi{kh ds ;gka la/kkfjr eLVjjksy ds vuqlkj Hkh ,slk izrhr ugha gksrk fd jktdqekj eh.kk us 240 fnu dk;Z ugha fd;k gks A

izn'kZ&2 izek.k i= ls Hkh ;g Li"V gksrk gS fd jktdqekj eh.kk us foi{kh laLFkku esa vius fu;kstu dky esa fujUrj dk;Z

fd;kA

bl izdkj foi{kh }kjk izLrqr lk{; ls ;g lkfcr ugha gksrk gS fd jktdqekj eh.kk 'kjkc ihus dk vknh gks rFkk og

'kjkc dh yr ds dkj.k Lo;a dk;Z ij mifLFkr ugha gksrk gks A jktdqekj eh.kk }kjk vius fu;kstu dky esa 240 fnu ls

vf/kd dk;Z fnol ij mifLFkr gskdj viuh lsok,a nh gS A foi{kh dh vkSj ls ,slh Hkh dksbZ lk{; ugha vkbZ fd jktdqekj

eh.kk fnuakd 03-08-2007 dks 'kjkc ihdj vk;k gks vkSj mls M~;qVh ij ugha fy;k gsk A foi{kh }kjk tkjh izek.k i= izn'kZ&2

ds vuqlkj jktdqekj eh.kk }kjk 01-03-2005 ls 31-07-2007 rd yxkrkj dk;Z fd;k tkuk izekf.kr gS rFkk foi{kh ds ;gka

la/kkfjr eLVjjksy ds vuqlkj jktdqekj dh fnukad 1 o 2 vxLr 2007 dh mldh mifLFkfr ntZ gS rFkk fnukad 03-07-2007

ls mldks vuqifLFkr crk;k x;k gS] ysfdu mldh vuqifLFkfr ckcr mls dksbZ uskfVl fn;k gks] ;g rF; lk{; ls izekf.kr

ugha gS A blfy;s mDr foospu ds vk/kkj ij ;g izdV gksrk gSfd jktdqekj eh.kk fnukad 03-08-2007 dks foi{kh ds le{k

M~;qVh ds fy;s mifLFkr gqvk rks foi{kh us fcuk dksbZ dkj.k crk;s ekSf[kd vkns'k ls lsok i`Fkd dj fn;kA

vc ;g ns[kuk gS fd bl voS/k lsok eqfDr ds fy;s izkFkhZ D;k jkgr izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh gS \

jktdqekj eh.kk }kjk foi{kh ds v/khu nks o"kZ ls vf/kd le; rd dk;Z fd;k x;k rFkk jktdqekj dks lsok i`Fkd

fd;s tkus ds ckn Hkh foi{kh ds ;gka mDr in dk dk;Z Fkk] bl lEcU/k esa gjh'k vjksjk us viuh ftjg esa ;g Lohdkj fd;k gS

fd izkFkhZ ds ckn gekjs ;gka ,d vU; O;fDr nSfud dzsu vkWijsVj dk dke djus yxkA jktdqekj eh.kk dks lsok i`Fkd fd;s

tkus ds ckn fnukad 14-09-2009 dks mldh e`R;q gks xbZ ;g rF; lk{; ls izdV gqvk gS A ,slh ifjfLFkfr esa jktdqekj dks

iqu% lsok esa j[kus dk vkns'k ugha fn;k ldrk gS vkSj ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr U;kf;d n`"VkUr 2004(3)

WLC(Raj.) Page 142 District Education Officer Vs. Babulal esa Hkh 240 fnu dh lsok ekurs gq, izfrdj fnyk;k tkuk

mfpr ekuk x;k bl izdkj jktdqekj eh.kk ds okfjlku dks Hkh mDr fl)kUr ds vk/kkj ij 1]00]000@&:i;s {kfriwfrZ fnyk;k

tkuk mfpr izrhr gksrk gSA

vr% Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk izsf"kr izlax fnukad 18@11@2008 dks mRrfjr djrs gq, iapkV bl izdkj ikfjr fd;k

tkrk gS fd &

fd foi{kh laLFkku esllZ v'kksdk feujYl] xkao o iksLV <syk.kk] rglhy [kSjokMk] ftyk mn;iqj }kjk Jfed Jh

jktdqekj eh.kk firk Jh eksxkjke eh.kk dks fnukad 03@08@2007 dks lsok ls i`Fkd djuk mfpr ,oa oS/k ugha gS A blfy;s

bl voS/k lsok eqfDr ds fy;s jktdqekj eh.kk ds okfjlku ¼ Jherh lfjrk] lqJh eksfudk] lqJh jatuk] fufru] lqJh [kq'kcw ½ dks

,d eq'r 1]00]000@& ,d yk[k :i;s izfrdj fnyk;k tkuk mfpr izrhr gksrk gS A

foi{kh iapkV izdk'ku ds nks ekg esa izkFkhZ dks mDr jkf'k dk Hkqxrku djs] vU;Fkk mDr jkf'k ij fu.kZ; dh fnukad ls

Hkqxrku rd 8 izfr'kr okf"kZd nj ls C;kt ns; gksxk A

iapkV izdk’kukFkZ Hkkjr ljdkj dks Hkstk tkosa A

iapkV vkt fnukad 27 uoEcj] 2018 dks [kqys U;k;ky; esa fy[kk;k tkdj lquk;k x;k A

v:.k dqekj nqcs] U;k;k/kh’k

नई दली, 27 दस बर, 2018

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

227

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ. 48

48

48

48.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस इंटरनेशनल िमनरल इPड&Jीज िलिमटेड के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4

औ ोिगक िववाद म औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय, उदयपुर के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 04/2009) को $कािशत करती

है जो केीय सरकार को 24.12.2018 को $ा; <आ था।

[सं. एल-29012/76/2008-आईआर(एम)]

डी. के. िहमांशु, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 27th December, 2018

S.O. 48.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 04/2009) of the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Udaipur now as shown in the

Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s. International Mineral

Industries Limited and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 24.12.2018.

[No. L-29012/76/2008-IR(M)]

D. K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.

vuqca/k

vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] mn;iqj ¼jktLFkku½ ihBklhu vf/kdkjh && Jh v:.k dqekj nqcs

izdj.k la[;k 04@2009 I.T.R.(C)

Jh Nxuyky firk ckcwyky cSjkxh

fuoklh lk/kq cLrh] Hkxokuxat] vtesj

---izkFkhZ

fo:)

esllZ bUVjus'kuy feujy b.MLLVªht fy-

tfj;s izcU/k funs'kd@ izcU/kd]

futZjuk] ftyk jktleUn

---foi{kh

mifLFkr %

izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls % Jh jkts'k fla?koh] vf/koDrk

foi{kh dh vkSj ls % Jh vkj-,l- pkSgku] vf/koDrk

iapkV

fnukad 29 vDrwcj] 2018

Hkkjr ljdkj ds Je foHkkx dh vf/klwpuk Øekad L-29012/ 76/2008(IR{M})New Delhi fnukad 15-07-2008 ds

}kjk fuEukafdr fookn bl U;k;ky; dks vf/kfu.kZ;kFkZ izsf"kr fd;k x;k &

‘‘Whether the action of the management of

M/s. International Mineral Industries Ltd.,

Nijarana, Distt. Rajsamand in terminating

the services of their workmen Shri Chaganlal

S/o Sh. Babulal w.e.f.07.10.2006 is Just and

legal ? If not, to what relief the Workman

is entitled to and from which date ?”

mDr vk’k; dk izlax izkIr gksus ij U;k;ky; }kjk izdj.k ntZ fd;k tkdj lEcfU/kr i{kdkjku dks uksfVl tkjh

fd;s x;sA ftl ij izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls fnukad 06-04-2009 dks Dyse fd;k x;k Fkk rFkk foi{kh dh vkSj ls fnukad 28-01-2010

dks tckc is'k fd;k x;k A

228

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

izkFkhZ }kjk izLrqr Dyse ds rF; la{ksi esa bl izdkj gS fd izkFkhZ dks foi{kh }kjk fnuakd 01-08-1998 dks dkj MªkbZoj

ds in ij fu;qDr fd;k tgka izkFkhZ us fnuakd 06-10-2006 rd yxkrkj dke fd;k o fnukad 07-10-2006 dks tc viuh M~;wVh

ds fy;s mifLFkr gqvk rks foi{kh us fcuk dksbZ dkj.k crk;s ekSf[kd vkns'k ls lsok i`Fkd dj fn;k A izkFkhZ dks lsok i`Fkd

djus ls iwoZ dksbZ vkjksi] psrkouh i= ugha fn;k u gh dksbZ uksfVl ;k uksfVl&is vkfn nh A izkFkhZ us foi{kh laLFkku esa vius

fu;kstu ds nkSjku izR;sd okf"kZd dky esa 240 fnu ls vf/kd dh lsok,a nh gS A izkFkhZ dks vuqfpr :i ls lsok i`Fkd dj

mlds LFkku ij u;k dkj MªkbZoj fu;qDr dj fn;k A blfy;s izkFkhZ us fnukad 07-10-2006 dks dh xbZ lsok eqfDr dks voS/k o

vuqfpr ?kksf"kr djus o izkFkhZ dks lHkh ykHkks lfgr lsok esa cgky djk;s tkus dk fuosnu fd;k A

foi{kh us vius tckc esa izkFkZuk i= ds rF;ksa dks vLohdkj djrs gq, ;g vafdr fd;k fd izkFkhZ dks fnukad 07-10-

2006 dks foi{kh }kjk fdlh Hkh vkns'k ls lsok eqDr ugha fd;k ] cfYd izkFkhZ fnuakd 07-10-2006 ;k mlds ckn vU; fdlh

fnukad dks dk;Z ij mifLFkr ugha gqvk A izkFkhZ foi{kh ds ilwUn fLFkr dk;kZy; ij MªkbZoj ds in ij fu;qDr Fkk rFkk

dk;kZy; esa dk;Z ugha gksus ls fnukad 05-09-2006 ds vkns'k ls foi{kh laLFkku dh futZuk fLFkr [knku ij LFkkukUrfjr fd;k

x;k Fkk rFkk izkFkhZ dks ;g fgnk;r nh xbZ Fkh fd og gsSoh eksVj Oghdy dk yk;lsUl cuok;s vkSj bl gsrq mls 7 fnu dk

loSrfud vodk'k Hkh fn;k x;k FkkA izkFkhZ fnukad 04-10-2006 ds ckn foi{kh laLFkku esa Hkh mifLFkr ugha gqvk ftl ij mls

fnuakd 02-12-2006 dks jftLVMZ lwpuk i= izsf"kr fd;k x;k bldh izkfIr ds ckn Hkh og mifLFkr ugha gqvk vkSj u gh viuh

vuqifLFkfr ckcr dksbZ Li"Vhdj.k fn;kA foi{kh }kjk izkFkhZ dks lsok i`Fkd ugha fd;k x;k] blfy;s dksbZ vkjksi i=]uksfVl

vkfn nsus dh vko';drk ugha Fkh A izkFkhZ us dHkh Hkh fu"Bk o bZekunkjh ls dk;Z ugha fd;k A

izkFkhZ us fdlh Hkh o"kZ esa 240 fnu ;k blls vf/kd dk;Z ugha fd;k A blfy;s izkFkhZ dk izkFkZuk i= [kkfjt fd;s tkus dk

fuosnu fd;kA

izkFkhZ us fnukad 22-09-16 dks viuk 'kiFk i= is'k fd;k rFkk ftjg gsrq vkxkeh is'kh nh xbZ] ysfdu fnukad 17-11-16

ls 24-10-2017 rd vusdks volj fn;s tkus ds ckn Hkh izkFkhZ ftjg gsrq mifLFkr ugha gqvk rFkk fnuakd 09-01-18 dks Hkh

mifLFkr ugh gqvk blfy;s izkFkhZ dh lk{; cUn dh xbZ A foi{kh dh vkSj ls Hkh dksbZ lk{; is'k ugha gqbZ A

i{kdkjku ds vf/koDrk dh cgl lquh xbZ A i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;k x;k A

izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls 2015 DNJ (SC) Page 297 Bhavnagar Municipal Corp. Vs. Jadeja Gopvubha U;kf;d n`"VkUr is'k

dj ;g rdZ fn;k x;k fd ;fn fu;kstd }kjk 240 fnu dk;Z djus ds lEcU/k esa nLrkost is'k ugha fd;s gS rks fu;kstd ds

fo:) foijhr mi/kkj.kk yh tkosxh A

blds foijhr foi{kh dh vkSj ls fuEukafdr U;kf;d n`"VkUr is'k fd;s x;s gS &

(1)

2005 LLR Page 737 (S.C.)

Manager RBI Vs. S. Mani and others

(2)

2013 LLR Page 726 (Delhi)

The Manager R.R.Foundation Vs. Pappu & Anr.

(3)

2014 LLR Page 282 (Allahabad)

Cambridge School Vs. State of U.P.

ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr mDr U;kf;d n`"VkUr esa ;g fl)kUr izfrikfnr fd;k gS fd Jfed vius

LVsVesUV vkQ Dyse esa fy;s x;s vfHkdFkuksa dk fof/k vuqlkj iqzQ ds tfj;s lkfcr djuk vko';d gS] ;fn izkFkhZ vius i{k dks

lkfcr djus esa vleFkZ jgrk gS rks ,slh fLFkfr esa foi{kh dh izfrj{kk ds lkfcr ugha gksus dh fLFkfr esa Hkh izkFkhZ dksbZ lgk;rk

izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh ugha gS rFkk ;fn izkFkhZ vius Dyse dks lkfcr ugh dj ikrk gS rks izfrj{kk esa jgh fdlh deh ds

vk/kkj ij izkFkhZ dksbZ lgk;rk izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh ugha gS A bykgkckn mPp U;k;ky; us mDr U;kf;d n`"VkUr esa ,sls gh

er O;Dr fd;s gS A fnYyh mPp U;k;ky; }kjk mDr U;kf;d n`"VkUr esa ;g fl)kUr ikfjr fd;k gS fd i=koyh ij miyC/k

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

229

fdlh Hkh nLrkost dks fof/k vuqlkj lkfcr fd;s fcuk bl rjg ds nLrkost ds vk/kkj ij fdlh Hkh rjg dh dksbZ jk; ugha

nh tk ldrh gS A

mDr foospu ds vk/kkj ij ;fn izkFkhZ us nLrkost is'k Hkh fd;s gS vkSj mUgS fof/k vuqlkj lkfcr ugha djk;k gS rks

,sls nLrkostks ij dksbZ er O;Dr ugha fd;k tk ldrk gS rFkk izkFkhZ us vius Dyse esa fy;s x;s vfHkopuksa dks fof/k vuqlkj

lkfcr ugha fd;k gS] blfy;s izkFkhZ dksbZ lgk;rk izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh ugh gS A izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls tks U;kf;d n`"VkUr is'k

fd;k gS] mlesa rks izkFkhZ us viuh mifLFkfr ds ckcr nLrkost dh QksVks izfr is'k dj mUgS lkfcr djk;k Fkk] tcfd gLrxr

izdj.k esa izkFkhZ dh vkSj ls vius }kjk izLrqr nLrkost dks lkfcr ugha djk;k gS A izkFkhZ }kjk izLrqr U;kf;d n`"VkUr ds rF;

gLrxr ekeys esa ykxw ugh gksrs gS] D;ksafd blesa rks Lo;a izkFkhZ us vius i{k dks lkfcr ugha fd;k gSA

izkFkhZ us ,slh Hkh dksbZ ekSf[kd ;k nLrkosth lk{; is'k ugha dh fd izkFkhZ fnukad 07-10-2006 dks foi{kh laLFkku esa

M~;qVh ds fy;s mifLFkr gqvk vkSj foi{kh us fcuk dksbZ dkj.k crk;s ekSf[kd vkns'k ls lsok i`Fkd dj fn;k gks A blfy;s

lk{; ds vHkko esa foi{kh }kjk izkFkhZ dks fnukad 07-10-2006 dks lsok i`Fkd fd;s tkus dk rF; Hkh lkfcr ugha gS A bl vk/kkj

ij izkFkhZ dksbZ jkgr ikus dk vf/kdkjh ugha gS A

vr% Hkkjr ljdkj }kjk izsf"kr izlax fnukad 15@07@2008 dks mRrfjr djrs gq, iapkV bl izdkj ikfjr fd;k tkrk

gS fd&

foi{kh laLFkku esllZ bUVjus'kuy feujy bUMLV~zht fyfeVsM] fu>juk] ftyk jktleUn }kjk Jfed Jh Nxuyky

firk ckcqyky dks fnukad 07-10-2006 ls lsok eqDr fd;k tkuk izekf.kr ugh gS A

vr% izkFkhZ dksbZ jkgr ikus dk vf/kdkjh ugha gSA

iapkV izdk’kukFkZ Je foHkkx] Hkkjr ljdkj dks Hkstk tkosa A

iapkV vkt fnukad 29-10-2018 dks [kqys U;k;ky; esa fy[kk;k tkdj lquk;k x;k A

v:.k dqekj nqcs] U;k;k/kh’k

नई दली, 27 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 49

49

49

49.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस आर०के० माब ल $ाइवेट िलिमटेड के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4

औ ोिगक िववाद म औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय, उदयपुर के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 55/2015) को $कािशत करती

है जो केीय सरकार को 27.12.2018 को $ा; <आ था।

[सं. जेड-16025/4/2018-आईआर(एम)]

डी. के. िहमांशु, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 27th December, 2018

S.O. 49.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 55/2015) of the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Udaipur now as shown in the

230

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s. R.K. Marbal Private

Limited and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 27.12.2018.

[No. Z-16025/4/2018-IR(M)]

D. K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.

vuqca/k

vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] mn;iqj

izdj.k la[;k 55 lu 2015 ITR (Central)

dj.k flag jkBkSM iq= Jh nwYgs flag fuoklh xksofy;k iksLV e.Mksy rglhy o ftyk jktleUn ¼jktLFkku½

&cuke&

egkizcU/kd] vkj-ds-ekcZy izkbZosV fyfeVsM] eksjoM] ftyk jktleUn¼jktLFkku½

08-09-2018

izkFkhZ dj.kflag e; vfHkHkk"kd Jh lqHkk"k Jhekyh mi0A foi{kh dh vksj ls vpy flag jkBkSM e; vfHkHkk"kd

Jh eksgEen 'kjhQ Nhik mifLFkr A i{kdkjku }kjk ,d izkFkZuk i= is'k dj fuosnu fd;k fd muds e/; yksd vnkyr dh

Hkkouk ls vkt jkthukek gks x;k gS eqrkfcd jkthukek ds izkFkhZ dh fu;qfDr fnuakd 16-4-1998 ls izkFkhZ dh lsokeqfDr fnuakd

26-03-2014 rd izfro"kZ dh lsok vof/k ds vk/kkj ij (Per Completed Years Of Service)¼dqy lsok vof/k 15 o"kZ 11 ekg 10

fnu dks 16 o"kZ ekurs gqos½ dk 30 fnu dk rRle; feyus okys Hkqxrku 9040@& dh nj ld ,Dlxzsfl;k Hkqxrku

1]44]640@& ds :i esa foi{kh fn;k tk;sxk A osru esa ewy osru ,p-vkj-,- o dUosUl Hkqxrku 'kkfey gksxk A ;k uksfVl

ihfj;M esa fn;s x;s osru nj ls Hkqxrku fd;k tk,xk A

mDr ,Dlxzsfl;k Hkqxrku #- 1]44]640@&o xzsP;qVh #- 50]123@& dqy Hkqxrku #-1]94]763@&ds vfrfjDr #i;s

20]137@&dqy feykdj 2]15]000 ¼v{kjs nks yk[k iUnzkg gtkj #i;s½ foi{kh] izkFkhZ dks ,d ekg ds vUnj Hkqxrku dj nsxkA

vU;Fkk mDr jkf'k ij 6 izfr'kr okf"kZd nj ls vkt fnuakd ls C;kt ns; gksxk A

blds vykok izkFkhZ dh foi{kh ls bl laca/k dksbZ cdk;k jkf'k ugha jgsxh rFkk fdlh izdkj dk lsok lac/kh ;k vU;

fookn 'ks"k ugha jgsxk A

jkthukek nksuksa i+{kdkjksa dks i<dj lqu;k o le>k;k x;k nksuksa i{kdkjksa us jkthukek lgh gksuk Lohdkj fd;kA izkFkhZ

d.kZflag dks mlds vfHkHkk"kd Jh lqHkk"k Jhekyh rFkk foi{kh Jh vpyflag jkBkSM] izcU/kd H.R dh vf/koDrk

Jh eksgEen 'kjhQ Nhik us igpkuk dhA jkthukek i`Fkd ls rLnhd fd;k x;k A layXu i=koyh jgs A jkthukes ds vk/kkj ij

nksuksa i{kdkj ikcUn jgsxsaA

¼dsfUnz;½ vtesj }kjk tkjh i= Øeakd AJ-5(75) 2014-RLC fnuakd 9] tqykbZ 2014 ,ao mlds lkFk layXu izek.k

i= ds vk/kkj ij ;g izdj.k 2(A) I.A. Act ds rgr~ is'k fd;k x;k Fkk A

vr% iapkV izdk'kukFkZ leqfpr ljdkj dks Hkstk tkos A

i=koyh QSly 'kqekj gksdj ckn rdehy nkf[ky n¶rj gks A

v:.k dqekj nqcs] U;k;k/kh'k

नई दली, 27 दस बर, 2018

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ. 50

50

50

50.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस आर. के. माब ल $ाइवेट िलिमटेड के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4

औ ोिगक िववाद म औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय, उदयपुर के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या 04/2014) को $कािशत करती

है जो केीय सरकार को 27.12.2018 को $ा; <आ था।

[सं. जेड-16025/4/2018-आईआर(एम)]

डी. के. िहमांशु, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 27th December, 2018

S.O. 50.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 04/2014) of the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Udaipur now as shown in the

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

231

Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s. R.K. Marbal Private

Limited and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 27.12.2018.

[No. Z-16025/4/2018-IR(M)

D. K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.

vuqca/k

vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] mn;iqj

izdj.k la[;k 04 lu 2014 ITR(Central)

fnyhi flag iq= Jh Hkaojflag jktiwr fuoklh ckxksy rglhy nslwjh ftyk ikyh ¼jktLFkku½

cuke

egkizcU/kd] vkj-ds- ekcZy izkbZosV fyfeVsM] eksjoM] ftyk jktleUn ¼jktLFkku½

30-07-2018

mHk;i{k ds vfHkHkk"kdx.k mi-A

i{kdkjku us yksd vnkyr dh Hkkouk ls jkthukek is'k fd;k] tks i`Fkd ls rLnhd fd;kA 'kk- i=koyh jgs A

i=koyh jkthukek QSly 'kqekj gksdj ckn rdehy izfo"B ys[k Hk.Mkj gks A lwpuk ljdkj dks Hksth tkos A

v:.k dqekj nqcs] U;k;k/kh'k

नई दली, 27 दस बर, 2018

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ.

का. आ. 51

51

51

51.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस एयरपोट अथॉRरटी ऑफ इंिडया के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म िन3द4

औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय सं.-1, नई दली के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या

142/2016) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 24.12.2018 को $ा; <आ था।

[सं. एल-11011/11/2016-आईआर(एम)]

डी. के. िहमांशु, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 27th December, 2018

S.O. 51.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 142/2016) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court No.1, New

Delhi now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of

M/s. Airport Authority of India and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 24.12.2018.

[No. L-11011/11/2016-IR(M)]

D. K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

IN THE COURT OF SHRI AVTAR CHAND DOGRA : PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT No. 1, DWARKA COURTS COMPLEX : NEW DELHI

ID No. 142/2016

Shri G.A. Rudrappa through

The General Secretary,

Indian Airport Kamgar Union (IAKU),

CHQ Office : Qtr.No.B-14-, Pocket A,

INA Colony, New Delhi 110023.

…Workman/Claimant

Versus

The Chairman,

Airport Authority of India,

Rajiv Gandhi Bhawan,

232

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Safdarjang Airport,

New Delhi 110003.

… Management/ Respondent

AWARD

This Award shall dispose of a reference which was made to this Tribunal by the Appropriate Government vide

letter No.L-11011/11/2016/IR(M) dated 13.07.2016 under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of

Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(in short the Act) for adjudication of an industrial dispute, terms of which

are as under:-

‘Whether the refusal of the management of Airport Authority of India to extend the benefit of the workman

Shri G.A. Rudrappa for attending the meeting on 2.3.2009 at Mumbai in view of the decision of the Hon’ble

High Court in W.P.(C) 283/2015 is justified ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to ?’

2.

Both parties were put to notice and the claimant G.A. Rudrappa filed statement of claim. As per the averments

made in the claim petition, claimant G.A.Rudrappa is General Secretary of Indian Airport Kamgar Union (IAKU) - a

registered Trade Union operating in the establishments of Airport Authority of India (AAI) & representing the workers of

AAI throughout the country and functioning for the welfare & interest of the employees of AAI. The AAI had leased

out Chatterpati Shivaji Internatiional Airport to M/s GVK on the basis of agreement which is called as Operation

Management & Development Agreement (OMDA) w.e.f. 3/5/2006. Due to implementation of aforesaid agreement, the

workers employed with AAI started facing various problems and the claimant Union raised an industrial dispute which

was adjudicated upon by the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal No.2, Mumbai and interim order dated 15/1/2009 was

passed, thereby some relief to the workers was provided. AAI challenged the same before Hon’ble High Court at

Mumbai in a W.P. No 2085 of 2009. During hearing, Hon’ble High Court directed that an attempt should be made by the

parties to settled the matter amicably by mutual discussions. Consequent upon the said direction of Hon’ble High Court,

Regional Executive Director of AAI (Western Region), Mumbai convened a meeting for 2/3/2009 at 2.30 p.m. at

Mumbai. M/s K.V. Kini & Co., Advocates & Solicitors of the AAI vide letter dated 27/2/2009 communicated to the

Advocate of the Union about the date & time of the said meeting and requested him to instruct his client to attend the

aforesaid meeting. Ms. Gayatri Devi, Advocate of the Union asked the General Secretary of the claimant Union to attend

the meeting. The claimant informed the Controlling Officer viz. the Airport Director of AAI, Hyderabad about the said

meeting and sought permission to leave the station on 28/2/2009 vide his application dated 27/2/2009.

3.

It is alleged that the claimant being General Secretary of the Union attended the said meeting on 2/3/2009 at

Mumbai and made request vide his application dated 19/3/2009 to the Director of AAI, Hyderabad to grant him the

benefits attached to the official tour for attending the said meeting. In the meanwhile the AAI transferred the workman

from Hyderabad to Madurai Airport where he joined on 18/12/2009. It is also alleged that the claimant submitted a

representation dated 12/5/2010 to the Regional Executive Director of AAI at Chennai and in reply thereto, the Airport

Controller, Madurai Airport informed him vide letter dated 6/7/2010 that his request could not be agreed to since grant of

special casual leave for attending court is not within the AAI leave regulation and thereby his claim for official benefits

for attending the said meeting was rejected. Feeling aggrieved, the claimant sent his request dated 18/8/2010 to the

Chairman, AAI through proper channel for grant of Special Casual leave as well as benefits of Tour & TA/DA etc.,

which was returned to him by the Airport Controller, Madurai vide his memo dated 20/8/2010 with an advice to take up

the matter directly as General Secretary with AAI Management and hence, he directly sent a letter dated 6/9/2010 to the

Chairman but to no response. Thereafter he approached the Conciliation Officer which culminated into the present

reference. Prayer has been made for passing an Award of giving him all the benefits of tour on equal footings as granted

to the General Secretary of Airport Authority Employees Union.

4.

Management has resisted the claim of the Workman and filed written reply, taking preliminary objections that

this Tribunal has no territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate the claim petition as no cause of action arose at Delhi and

admittedly the writ petition was filed by the Management before Hon’ble High Court at Mumbai. The claimant is not

entitled to any relief inasmuch as Indian Airport Kamgar Union (IAKU) is not a recognized Trade Union of the

Management and as per Airport Authority (Leave) Regulations, 2003 there is no provision for granting special casual

leave to the workmen of the non recognized Union for attending courts. It is also alleged that the claimant is neither a

member of the recognized Union of AAI, nor he is representing the workers of AAI throughout the country and that there

is no privity of contract between IAKU and the Management. There was no written or verbal direction of Hon’ble High

Court for grant of such facilities to the claimant. It is further alleged that the claimant was neither on official tour, nor

any such approval was ever granted to him by the Management. Prayer has been made for dismissal of the claim

petition.

5.

Rejoinder was filed on behalf of the workman/claimant, whereby the case as set up in the claim petition has

been reiterated and allegations made in the written statement have been denied.

6.

On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed on 1/8/2017 :-

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

233

i)

Whether the claim is not maintainable in view of the preliminary objections ?

ii)

In terms of reference ?

7.

The Claimants in support of his case examined himself WW1 and tendered his affidavit Ex.WW1/A & relied

on the documents Ex.WW1/1 to Ex.WW1/14, whereas Management examined one Shri I.P. Aggarwal, Asstt. General

Manager (HR), AAI who tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.MW1/A

Issue No.1 :

8.

Learned A/R for the Management strenuously argued that this Tribunal has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain

the claim petition inasmuch as no cause of action arose at Delhi and admittedly the writ petition was filed by the

Management before Hon’ble High Court at Mumbai, the meeting was convened at Mumbai and the workman/claimant at

the relevant time was not posted here in Delhi. However, during the course of arguments he conceded that the

Head/Principal Office as well as Human Resource (Personnel department) office of AAI is located at Delhi. Even the

final representation/request letter by the claimant regarding grant of Special Casual leave and other benefits was made to

the Chairman, whose office is also situated here in Delhi. Further, all policy decision in respect of administrative matters

of the AAI are taken by the Head Office. In view of all these and the fact that the reference has been received by this

Tribunal from the Appropriate Government, I am afraid to accept the contention of learned A/R for the Management that

this Tribunal has no territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute.

9.

During the course of arguments, learned A/R for the Management submitted that there was no espousal of

cause of action since the claim made by the claimant is not sponsored or espoused by a Union of the workers, rather the

claimant himself claiming to be the General Secretary of IAKU – unrecognized Union has filed, signed and verified the

claim petition whereas he has raised a cause/dispute of his own i.e. an individual workman. As such, the claimant has no

locus standi to file the present claim petition, without there being espousal and it can not be termed as industrial dispute.

10.

Per contra, learned A/R for the Workman/claimant has strenuously argued that the claimant G.A. Rudrappa

happens to be the General Secretary of the claimant Union IAKU which Union is functioning for the welfare & benefit of

the workers and as such the claimant was a protected workman of the Management during the year 2009. Being General

Secretary of the claimant Union, the claim petition filed by G.A. Rudrappa/ claimant is maintainable.

11.

I may mention that the procedure for reference of an “Industrial Dispute” under sub-section (2) of Section 10 of

the Act, has been narrated in Part-I of the Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957. Rule 4 of the said Rules clearly

provides as under :-

4. Attestation of application – The application and the statement accompanying it shall be signed –

(a) in the case of an employer……………….

(b) in the case of workmen, either by the President and Secretary of a Trade Union of the workmen, or by

five representatives of the workmen duly authorised in this behalf at a meeting of the workmen held for

the purpose;

(c ) in the case of an individual workman, by the workman himself or by any officer of the trade union of which

he is a member or by another workman in the same establishment duly authorised by him in this behalf;

Provided that such workman is not a member of different trade union.)

Definition of “industrial dispute” has been carved out in Section 2(k) of the Act and same is reproduced hereunder for the

sake of convenience :-

2(k) “industrial dispute” means any dispute or difference between employers and employers, or between

employers and workmen, or between workmen and workmen, which is connected with the employment or

non employment or the terms of employment or with the conditions of labour, of any person”

Law in relation to “industrial dispute” is well settled, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Workman of Dharampal

Premchand (Saughandhi) Vs. Dharampal Premchand (Saughandhi), (1965) 1 LLJ 668 SC, has held that :-

“For the purpose of Section 2(k) it must be shown that (1) the dispute is connected with employment or non

employment of a workman; (2) the dispute between a single workman and his employer was sponsored or

espoused by the union of workman or by a number of workmen. The phrase “the union” merely indicates the

Union to which the employee belongs even though it may be a Union of a minority of the workmen; (3) the

establishment had no union on its own and some of the employees had joined the Union of another

establishment belonging to the same industry. In such a case it would be open to that Union to take up the cause

of the workmen if it is sufficiently representative of those workmen, dispute the fact that such Union was not

exclusively of the workmen working in the establishment concerned.”

In renowned case of “Workmen of Indian Express Newspaper Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Management of Indian Express Newspaper

Pvt. Ltd., “an outside Union” was held to be sufficiently representative to espouse the cause.

12.

It is manifest from the above decision that in order to give jurisdiction to refer the dispute to this Tribunal for

adjudication, it was essential for the workman/claimant to show that his individual cause/dispute, was sponsored or

espoused by a Union of the workmen. Apparently, there is nothing on record to suggest that the claimant’s

234

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

cause/dispute for grant of special casual leave and other benefits of TA/DA etc. is/was espoused by IAKU Union

(though it is unrecognized by the Management herein). The claimant G.A. Rudrappa, seeking relief for himself, has

himself signed & verified the claim petition, though he has also affixed the seal of General Secretary of IAKU under his

signatures. Neither in the pleadings nor in his affidavit, he has stated that he was seeking relief not as an individual but

that of Member of the Union. However, he has neither filed on record any resolution of five representatives of the

workmen/Union (IAKU) duly authorised in this behalf at a meeting held for the purpose, nor the present claim

petition is signed jointly by the President & General Secretary so as to comply with the provisions of Rule 4 of Industrial

Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957. Hence, it can not be said that the cause of the claimant has been espoused by the Union

(IAKU) or else.

13.

In the light of the aforesaid rulings and the fact that there is no espousal to the cause/dispute of the

workman/claimant herein, this Tribunal has no hesitation to hold that the claim petition being not covered under the

definition of “industrial dispute” is not maintainable. Accordingly, this issue is decided in favour of the Management and

against the claimant herein.

Issue No.2 :

13.

From the pleadings of the parties and evidence adduced on record, it is manifest that in relation to an industrial

dispute between the parties, interim order dated 15/1/2009 was passed by CGIT, Mumbai, thereby some relief to the

workers was provided. AAI challenged the same before Hon’ble High Court at Mumbai in a W.P. No 2085 of 2009.

During hearing, Hon’ble High Court directed that an attempt should be made by the parties to settle the matter amicably

by mutual discussions. Consequent upon the said direction of Hon’ble High Court, Regional Executive Director of AAI

(Western Region), Mumbai convened a meeting for 2/3/2009 at 2.30 p.m. at Mumbai. M/s K.V. Kini & Co., Advocates

& Solicitors of the AAI vide letter (Ex.WW1/3) dated 27/2/2009 communicated to the Ms. Gayatri Singh, Advocate of

the IAKU as well as to Ms. Jane Cox Advocate for Airport Kamgar Union, about the date & time of the said meeting

and requested him to instruct his client to attend the aforesaid meeting (not more than two members of each of the

Union) as to find out the possibility of settlement talks.. It is claimed by the claimant that Ms. Gayatri Devi, Advocate

of the IAKU asked General Secretary of the claimant Union (i.e. to him) to attend the meeting. The claimant vide his

application dated 27/2/2009 (Ex.WW1/4) informed the Controlling Officer viz. the Airport Director of AAI, Hyderabad

about the said meeting and had simply sought permission to leave the station on 28/2/2009 (A/N) for the purpose of

attending the meeting on 2/3/2009. It is pertinent to mention here that vide his request letter dated 27/2/2009

(Ex.WW1/4), the claimant had no where sought for Special Casual Leave, nor had stated that he will be claiming T

A/DA etc, if any, as per rules.

14.

It is undisputed fact that the claimant herein had attended the meeting at Mumbai on 2/3/2009 in the capacity of

General Secretary of IAKU and besides him, four other office bears of the same Union/IAKU namely K.S.Prajapati –

Regional Secretary, Mahesh Gumgaonkar, Branch Secretgary, Srikant Pant, Asstt. General Secretary and P.K.

Bandopadhya= President of IAKU had attended the said meeting, which fact is apparent from the very first page of the

minutes/record note of discussion of the said meeting (Ex.WW1/5). Thus, it is evident that five office bearers of IAKU

had attended the said meeting, though it was specifically mentioned in the letter Ex.WW1/3) that not more than two

members of each of the Unions should attend the meeting.

15.

It is also not in dispute that vide his application dated 19/3/2009 (Ex.WW1/6), addressed to the Director of AAI,

Hyderabad, the claimant had requested for grant of benefits attached to official tour /meeting which he attended on

2/3/2009 at Mumbai. It is noteworthy that the claimant had made no request for grant of Special Casual leave, rather he

had simply requested for grant of benefits attached to the said official tour and had not disclosed as to how (either by Air

or by Train) he travelled and what expenses he had actually incurred for the same. Even if it is presumed for the sake of

arguments, that it was an official meeting convened by the side of the Management at Mumbai, yet invitation was meant

only for two office bearers of IAKU. But there is no explanation from the side of the claimant as to why five office

bears of IAKU had attended the said meeting.

16.

It is also not in dispute that the claimant had sent his request dated 18/8/2010 (Ex.WW1/10) addressed to the

Chairman, AAI through proper channel for grant of benefits of attached to official Tour & TA/DA etc., which was

returned to him by the Airport Controller, Madurai vide his memo dated 20/8/2010 with an advice to take up the matter

directly as General Secretary with AAI Management because he had attended the meeting in his capacity as General

Secretary of IAKU & not as Sr.Supdt(FS) and hence, he directly sent a letter dated 6/9/2010 (Ex.WW1/3) to the

Chairman but to no response.

17.

Perusal of the record shows that the Management had issued certain Guidelines under the cover of office order

dated 22/11/2002 (Ex.WW1/14 (colly.) for providing certain facilities to the Recognised (majority elected) Union

vis-à-vis office accommodation, furniture, telephone facilities, Notice Board, TA/DA for attending official

meetings/conferences convened by the Management.

18.

Learned A/R for the claimant placed reliance on the decisions in the case of UOI Vs. Paschim Railway

Karamchari Parishad Union (Special Civil Application No.8069 of 1997 – decided by Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat

at Ahmedabad and Indian Airlines Ltd. Vs.Indain Airlines Technical Assist ants Union W.A.848/1994 – dated on

12/6/1996, decided by Hon‘ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, to stress that unrecognized Union is also entitled to same

privileges which are accorded to the Recognized (Majority elected) Union.

19.

Per contra, learned A/R for the Management submitted that the Management is rules & regulations governing

the Management organization does not provide for payment of any such benefits to non-recognised union and as such

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

235

claim of the claimant/workman is misconceived. Moreover, the claimant had attended the meeting at Mumbai alongwith

four other office bearers of IAKU, though only two of them were required to attend the meeting.

20.

There is no dispute about preposition of law that

“The Trade Union Act confers certain rights on the Registered Union to ventilate the grievance of the members

of its union. The Management is obliged to hear them and resolve its disputes as far as possible without

resorting to the conciliation & adjudicatory process Though the Management is not obliged to recognize the

unrecognized (minority elected) Unionbut at the same time it can not refuse to hear the grievances voiced

by it in respect of service conditions of its members. The Management is expected to conduct itself in a fair

and reasonable manner in the interest of industrial peace and harmony. Therefore reconginising the Union for

the limited purpose of negotiation and settlement in respect of its members, can not be construed as recognition

under the Code of Discipline On the other hand, it improves the labour-management relations and paves the

way for achieving optimum output. There is no provision under the Industrial Disputes Act or Trade Union Act,

prohibiting the management from negotiating, discussing or entering into settlement with the unrecognized

union. It is only in cases where the demand of unrecognized union is already seized of by the recognized union

such a demand would not be maintainable….

Further that, unrecognized Union is also entitled to same privileges which are accorded to the Recognized

(Majority elected) Union.

However, in the instant case, the claim of the claimant/workman does not appear to be justifiable, inasmuch as there is no

explanation from the side of the claimant as to why five office bears of IAKU had attended the meeting at Mumbai,

whereas only two of them were required to attend the same. Vide his first request letter dated 27/2/2009 (Ex.WW1/4), the

claimant had no where sought for Special Casual Leave, nor had stated that he will be claiming T A/DA etc, if any, as per

rules rather he had sought permission to leave station. Further, vide his application dated 19/3/2009 (Ex.WW1/6), the

claimant had made no request for grant of Special Casual leave, rather he had simply requested for grant of benefits

attached to the said official tour. Neither in his application as well as subsequent representations made to the Chairman

nor in the claim petition filed before this Tribunal, the workman/claimant disclosed as to how (either by Air or by Train)

he travelled and what expenses he had actually incurred for the same. No document about the expenses incurred for the

same has been filed on record. The meeting was attended by the claimant on 2nd March, 2009. Final request

letter/representation was made by him to the Chairman, AAI on 6/9/2010 but to no avail, whereas the claimant/workman

approached the Conciliation Officer only in the year 2016, that is after gap of six years. This shows that there is belated

raising of claim by the workman /claimant. There is no pleadings or evidence from the side of the claimant to show that

he ever raised any grievance during the period after September, 2010 till 2016 before any forum, about grant of Special

Casual Leave and benefits attached to the official tour. It would not be out of place to mention here that IAKU had

moved the Hon’ble High Court by filing W.P (Civil) No. 6446/2013 concerning the election of the recognized Trade

Union of the Airport Authority of India, held on 29/1/2013 wherein the Airports Authority “Employees Union (AAEU)

was declared elected as the recognized(majority) union of AAI”. The said writ petition was dismissed by Hon’ble High

Court vide order dated 17/3/2016. It appears that thereafter workman/claimant again agitated his claim for grant of

Special Casual Leave & benefits of TA/DA etc before Conciliation Officer. This fact also strengthen my view that the

claim of the workman/claimant is belated one and has been made beyond reasonable period, besides the same is

unspecified in terms of money which is sought to be reimbursed by the Management. All these peculiar facts and

circumstances of the case lead this Tribunal to conclude that claim of the workman for grant of Special Casual Leave and

benefit of TA/DA etc. for attending the meeting on 2/3/2009 at Mumbai, is unjust and improper at this belated stage.

Relief :

In view of my findings on issue No.1 and 2 above, this Tribunal has no hesitation to hold that the claimant is not

entitled to any relief whatsoever, firstly because there is no espousal to his claim and lastly his claim being belated is not

justifiable. The award is accordingly passed.

Date : 06.12.2018

AVTAR CHAND DOGRA, Presiding Officer

नई दली, 27 दस बर, 2018

का.

का.

का.

का. आ.

आ.

आ.

आ. 52

52

52

52.—औ ोिगक िववाद अिधिनयम 1947 (1947 का 14) क धारा 17 के अनुसरण म केीय सरकार

मेसस दली इंटरनेशनल एयरपोट िलिमटेड एवं अय के $बंधतं/ के संब0 िनयोजक2 और उनके कम कार2 के बीच अनुबंध म

236

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

िन3द4 औ ोिगक िववाद म केीय सरकार औ ोिगक अिधकरण एवं 6म यायालय सं. 1, नई दली के पंचाट (संदभ सं8या

32/2013) को $कािशत करती है जो केीय सरकार को 24.12.2018 को $ा; <आ था।

[सं. जेड-16025/4/2018-आईआर(एम)]

डी. के. िहमांशु, अवर सिचव

New Delhi, the 27th December, 2018

S. O. 52.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 32/2013) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court

No. 1, New Delhi now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the

management of M/s. Delhi International Airport Ltd. And other and their workman, which was received by the Central

Government on 24.12.2018.

[No. Z-16025/4/2018-IR(M)]

D.K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

IN THE COURT OF SHRI AVTAR CHAND DOGRA : PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT No.1, DWARKA COURTS COMPLEX : NEW DELHI

ID No. 32/2013

Shri Ram Kishan,

S/o. Shri Chander Prakash,

R/o. E-2344 Block,

Gurgaon 122017 (Haryana).

… Workman/Claimant

Versus

1. M/s. Delhi International Airport Ltd.,

New Uddan Bhawan, Terminal No.III,

IGI Airport, New Delhi 110037.

2. M/s. Biman Bangldesh Airlines Ltd.,

317, 320-321, Indra Prakash Building,

Bara Khamba Road,

New Delhi.

….Management

AWARD

This award shall decide a claim petition filed by the workman/ claimant Ram Kishan under Section 2-A of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(in short the Act) with the averments that the claim petition, the workman was appointed

by Management No.2 M/s Biman Bangladesh Airlines as Accounts Assistant on 16/4/2010 initially on daily wage basis

vide appointment letter dated 16/4/2010 but was deputed at Indira Gandhi International Airport as Traffic Officer. In

view of his satisfactory work and conduct, his services were regularized vide letter dated 15/11/2010 and since then he

had working with the Management No.2 on a monthly salary of Rs.14,300/- . It has been alleged that though the

workman was appointed for a job of perennial nature but unlawful terms & conditions to renew his employment after

three years were mentioned in the letter dated 15/11/2010. It is pleaded that job of the workman was of operation,

clerical and manual. Though he had been appointed as Accounts Assistant but he worked as Traffic Officer and that is

why Management had got issued him Airport Entry Pass to work as Traffic Officer at IGI Airport. One of the officers of

the Management wanted the workman to do some unlawful act and when he denied to do so, the said Officer got annoyed

and threatened the workman of victimization of service and thereafter he started harassing the workman/claimant and the

said Officer got the workman transferred from IGI Airport to Biman City Office at Barakhamba Road, New Delhi vide

letter dated 12/6/201. The claimant was made to sit idle throughout his duty hours and sometimes upto 8 PM without

allowing him to have tea or lunch etc. and as such the workman became patient of hypertension. On 10/7/2012 while the

claimant as on duty, his conditions got deteriorated in the office where office boy helped him in getting auto-rickshaw for

his house. On reaching home, his family members took the workman to Kapoor Clinic where he remained under

treatment w.e.f. 11/7/012 to 2/8/2012. When on 3/8/201`2 he reported for duty alongwith medical certificate and

application, the Management refused to receive the same and did not allow him to perform duty. As such, the claimant

sent his medical certificate and application through courier on 3/8/2012. He also served a demand notice dated

23/8/2012 upon the Management. It is alleged that termination of service of workman is in gross violation of Section 25-

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

237

F of the Act. The workman approached the Conciliation Officer who took up the matter on 22/11/2012, 21/12/12 and

19/2/2013 but no settlement could be arrived at and hence, he filed the present claim petition. It is also alleged that the

workman is unemployed from the date of termination of his service as he could not get any job despite his best efforts

and is facing economic hardship. He has prayed for reinstatement into service with continuity of service and full back

wages and all consequential benefits.

2.

The claim petition has been resisted by the Management No.1 who filed its written statement and took

preliminary objections inter-alia that the the workman/claimant is not its employee and on the contrary it has been

admitted by the claimant that he was appointed by Management No.2 and his salary was paid by Management No.2..

Prayer has been made that Management No.1 be deleted from the array of the parties in the claim petition

3.

Management No.2 also resisted the claim of the workman, filed written statement and took preliminary

objections inter-alia that since the appointment of the workman was on contractual basis, therefore in terms of Section

2(00)(bb) of the Act, the present dispute is not sustainable, as termination of such a contractual employee does not fall

within the ambit of retrenchment. However it is admitted that the workman was appointed by the Management No.2 as

Accounts Assistant on 16/4/2010 initially on daily basis. It has been denied that due to his satisfactory work and

conduct, the workman was regularized in service w.e.f. 15/11/2010 vide letter dated 15/11/2010. The service contract of

the workman was terminated on 24/7/2012 in terms of clause 5 of the contract letter dated 15/11/2010 and he was offered

the salary upto the period 24/7/2012 alongwith salary of two weeks’ in lieu of notice period and was directed to deposit

the property of the Management viz. ID card and entry/security pass, uniform, office keys etc. which the workman was

holding during the course of his contractual employments with the Management but the workman did not comply with

the same. It has been denied that the workman worked as Traffic Officer or that Officer of the Management ever asked

him to perform some unlawful and immoral traffic act or that he was mentally harassed and tortured by the Management.

Since the contractual term of the workman had come to an end on 24/7/2012 , there was no occasion for him to report for

duty alongwith medical certificate on 3/8/2012. It is alleged that the claimant is not entitled to claim back wages or

reinstatement into service as he had voluntarily accepted contractual employment. Prayer has been made that present

dispute is not tenable and no dispute award be passed against the claimant.

4.

On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed on 16/5/2013 :-

(1) Whether action of termination of service of the claimant by M/s Biman Bangladesh Airlines Ltd. falls

within sub clause (bb) of clause (oo) of Section 2 of the Industrial Disptues Act, 1947 ?

(2) Whether claimant is entitled to relief of reinstatement in service ?

5. The Claimant in support of his case examined himself as W.W.1 and tendered his affidavit Ex.WW1/A alongwith

documents Ex.WW1/1 to WW1/3.

6.

On the other hand, the Management in order to rebut the case of the claimant examined Mohd. Mofizul Islam,

Operations Manager as MW1 who who also tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.MW1/A and relied on the

documents Ex. WW1/M-1 to Ex.WW1/M-7

7.

I have heard Shri Maya Ram, A/R for the claimant; Shri Ramesh Thakur, A.R for Management No1 and Shri

Subhash Bakshi, Deputy General Manager of Management No.2. and have also gone through the evidence adduced on

record by the parties.

Issue No.1 and 2 :

8.

Both these issues are being taken up together for the purpose of discussion and they can be conveniently

disposed of.

9.

From the pleading of the parties and evidence adduced on record, it is evident that the claimant herein was

appointed by the Management No.2 M/s Biman Bangldesh Airlines as Accounts Assistant initially on 16/8/2010 on daily

wage basis and in fact the Management No.1 M/s DIAL has got no privity of contract with the claimant/workman in

respect of his employment, inasmuch as Management No.2 alone was the controlling and paying authority and this is so

apparent from the document Ex.WW1/3 viz. appointment-cum-regularization letter.

10.

A/R for the workman/claimant submitted that services of the claimant were regularized by the letter dated

15/11/2010 (Ex.WW1/3) to a post of perennial nature, as his work and conduct was found to be satisfactory by the

Management from 16/8/2010 onwards and further that while he being unwell & under treatment remained on leave

w.e.f. 11/7/012 to 2/8/2012, he reported for duty alongwith medical certificate and application on 3/8/2012, the

Management refused to receive the same and did not allow him to perform duty. As such action of the Management in

terminating his services is illegal.

11.

Per contra, A/R for the Management submitted that appointment of the workman was purely on contractual

basis for a period of three years and the Management terminated the services of the workman vide letter dated 24/7/2012,

in terms of clause (5) of the agreement/contract letter dated 15/11/2010 (Ex.WW1/3). As such, the Management was

well within its rights to disengage the services of the workman/claimant at any time and as such, there is no violations of

the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act . In fact, the Management had issued termination letter dated 24/7/2012

(Ex.WW1/M-1) to the claimant/workman and same is within the purview of Section 2(oo)(bb) of the Act.

12.

To ascertain the truth, It will be worthwhile to refer to the evidence adduced on record by the parties, in the light

of the appointment letter dated 15/11/2010, relevant extracts of which are reproduced hereunder :-

238

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

“Subject : Regularization of service as “Accounts Assistant”

Dear Mr. Kishan,

The management of Biman Bangladesh Airlines Ltd. has decided to appoint your as “Accounts Assistant for a

contractual period of 3 (three) years under the following terms & conditions :-

1. Your consolidated monthly remuneration will be Rs.14,300/-

2. Your employment will be renewed after satisfactory completion of three years of service including six

months of apprenticeship period.

3. …………….

4. …………………

5. Both the parties (Biman and/or employee) reserve the right to revoke the contract through serving 2 (two)

weeks’ notice in advance. However, Biman reserves the right to terminate your service forthwith on

payment of notice pay.

6. You will be entitled to enjoy 14 days leave per year after completion of one year service. Any unutilized

leave will not be accumulated for the next year.

7. Your appointment will be effective from 16th April, 10. ’’

13.

Though the claimant WW1 specifically denied the suggestion that letter Ex.WW1/M-1 was served upon him on

24/7/2012 whereby his contractual appointment was terminated, however the Management did not file on record any

document like postal receipt or acknowledgement etc. to show that the said termination letter dated 24/7/2012 was

actually served upon the claimant. On the contrary, it is the specific case of the claimant/workman that he happened to

be on medical leave w.e.f. 11/7/2012 to 2/8/2012 and that on 3/8/2012 when he reported for duty alongwith medical

certificate and application, Management did not allow him to perform duty. Sick leave application of the workman for

the said period has been produced on record by the Management itself as Ex.WW1/M-2. The said leave application

dated 3/8/2012 is on the prescribed proforma of the Management and bears the signatures of the workman/claimant. In

the face of this document Ex.WW1/M-2, the version of the workman/claimant is believable and it appears that the

Management has cooked up a false story and fabricated the termination letter dated 24/7/2012, inasmuch as had the

Management disengaged the services of the workman through termination letter dated 24/7/2012 there was no question

for the workman/claimant to submit his leave application Ex.WW1/M-2 on 3/8/2012 alongwith the medical certificate

Ex.WW1/M-7, so produced by the Management. As per the contract/appointment letter Ex.WW1 the claimant/workman

was entitled to enjoy 14 days leave per year and he had already put in service for about two years.

14.

The workman/claimant also denied the suggestions of the Management that letter Ex.WW1/M-4 was sent to him

by the Management alongwith a cheque of Rs.18,590/- (Ex.WW1/M-5), wherein his postal address written thereon is

correct. He also denied the suggestion that he refused to accept the said letter Ex.WW1/M-4 when it was handed over

to him by the postal authorities. Despite that the Management has not filed any document about the service of the said

letter Ex.WW1/M-4 upon the workman. Moreover, this letter is dated 15/4/2013 whereas the cheque Ex.WW1/M-5 is

dated 16/4/2013. It appears that the said letter was issued by the Management, only after the claimant/workman had filed

the claim petition and notice of the same was received by the Management for hearing dated 17/4/2013, when

Authorised representative of the Management had put in appearance before this Tribunal.

15.

At the time when the services of the claimant were terminated w.e.f. 3/8/2012 or 24/7/2012 as the case may be,

the workman/claimant had already served the Management for about two years. The appointment cum regularization

letter Ex.WW1/3 clearly goes to show that the appointment though on contract basis, was made for three years. It is not

the case of the Management that the workman was employed for any specific project/scheme and that is why the

Management had shut down its business/operations in the year 2012 when the services of the claimant were

terminated/disengaged. MW1 Mohd. Mofizul Islam –witness of the Management admitted that Management Airlines

was operational but not in Delhi, in the year 2012, 2013 and 2014 intermittently. He also admitted that Airways Bills

Ex.MW1/W-1 and MW1/W-2 are of the Management company. Same pertains to the period July, 2014 which shows

that the Management company was in operation even in July, 2014. The Management has not led any evidence to show

that the work or the post to which the claimant was employed itself ceased to exist when the services of the claimant

were disengaged/terminated. In the given circumstances, this Tribunal is unable to accept the contention of the

Management that the order of retrenchment/termination is within the purview of Section 2(oo)(bb) of the Act, inasmuch

as contractual employment appears to have been resorted to as a mechanism to frustrate the claim of the employee to

become regular or permanent against a job of regular and perennial in nature. In S.M. Nilajkar Versus Telecom,

District Manager, Karnataka, AIR 2003 SC 3553, their lordships of Hon’ble Supreme Court interpreted Section

2(oo)(bb) of the Act and laid down the following propositions :-

“12. Retrenchment in its ordinary connotations is discharge of labour as surplus though the business or

work itself is continued, it is well settled by a catena of decisions that labour laws being beneficial

pieces of legislation are to be interpreted in favour of the beneficiaries in case of doubt or where it is

possible to take two views of a provision. It is also well settled that the Parliament has employed the

expression “the termination by the employer of the service of a workman for any reason whatsoever”

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

239

while defining the term retrenchment which is suggestive of the legislative intent to assign the term

retrenchment, a meaning wider than what it is understood to have in common parlance. There are four

exceptions carved out of the artificially extended meaning of the term ‘retrenchment’ and therefore,

termination of service of a workman so long as it is attributable to the act of the employer would fall

within the meaning of ‘retrenchment’ do hors the reason for termination. To be excepted from within

the meaning of ‘retrenchment’ the termination of service must fall within one of the four excepted

categories. A termination of service which does not fall within the categories (a)(b),(bb) and (c) would

fall within the meaning of ‘retrenchment’.

13. The termination of service of a workman engaged in a scheme or project may not amount to

retrenchment within the meaning of Sub-clause (bb) subject to the following conditions being satisfied:

i)

that the workman was employed in a project or scheme of temporary duration.

ii)

the employment was on a contract and not as a daily wager simplicitor, which provided inter alia

that the employment shall come to an end on the expiry of the scheme or project; and

iii)

the employment came to an end simulateneously with the termination of the scheme or project

and consistently with the terms of the contract

iv)

the workman ought to have been apprised or made aware of the abovesaid terms by the

employer the commencement of employment. ’’

In K. Rajendran Versus Director, Project and Equipment Corporation of India Ltd., 1995-III LLJ (Suppl.) 240

Mad., the facts were that the petitioner was appointed as Messenger for 44 days at a time. He continued to work on

similar terms for about three years and the work was available on the date of termination of his service. While rejecting

the plea of the employer that termination of service was covered by clause (bb) of Section 2(oo), Hon’ble Madras High

Court held as under :-

“But there is nothing in sub-clause (bb) which enables an unscrupulous employer to terminate the service of the

workers on the ground of non-renewal of their contract even when the work for which they were employed

subsists. The exception as contained in Sub-clause (bb) will have to be strictly construed and clause (bb)should

be made applicable only to such cases where the work ceases with the employment or the post itself ceases to

exist. Clause (bb) can not be made applicable to a case when the employer resorts to contractual employment as

a device simply take it out of clause (oo) of Section 2 of the Act not-withstanding the fact that the work for

which the workmen are employed continues or the nature of duties which the workman was performing are still

in existence.”

In the light of aforesaid ruling and the facts of the case as discussed above, this Tribunal is the considered view that the

action of termination of services of the claimant by the Management No.2 Biman Bengladesh Airlines Ltd. does not fall

within the purview of sub clause (bb) of Section 2(oo) of the Act. 16) There is long line of decisions of Hon’ble Apex

Court as well as of various High Courts that provisions of Section 25-F of the Act are mandatory in nature and

termination of the workman from services in derogation of the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act will render action

of the Management Bank to be illegal and void under the law.

17.

Since there is no evidence on record that any valid notice was issued by the Management to the workman at the

time of termination or in lieu of such notice, any compensation has actually been paid to the claimant/workman, as such

action of the Management in terminating the services of the workman is held to be illegal and void.

18.

Now the residual question is whether the claimant/work is entitled to any incidental relief of payment of back

wages and/or reinstatement of service with full back wages. It is proved on record that claimant was continuously in the

employment of the Management since 15/11/2010 and prior to that he had been working on daily wage basis since

16/4/2010. There is no show cause notice or memo issued to the claimant/workman by the Management. Moreover, the

job of the workman being employed as Accounts Assistant is/was of perennial and regular nature relating the operation

and management activities of the Airlines of the Management. The claimant has specifically pleaded and deposed on

oath that he is unemployed from the date of termination of his services and he could not get any job despite his best

efforts. The Management has not led any evidence in rebuttal so as to show that the claimant is gainfully employed

somewhere.

19.

The Hon’ble Apex Court in case “Deepali Gundu Surwase v. Kranti Junior Adhyapak Mahavidyalaya”

reported as (2013) 10 SCC 324 has held as under :

“The propositions which can be culled out from the aforementioned judgments are :

i)

In cases of wrongful termination of service, reinstatement with continuity of service and back

wages is the normal rule.

240

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 5, 2019/PAUSA 15, 1940

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ii)

Ordinarily, an employee or workman whose services are terminated and who is desirous of

getting back wages is required to either plead or at least make a statement before the

adjudicating authority or the Court of first instance that he/she was not gainfully employed or

was employed on lesser wages. If the employer wants to avoid payment of full back wages,

then I has to plead and also lead cogent evidence to prove that the employee/workman wads

gainfully employed and was getting wages equal to the wages he/she wads drawing prior to

the termination of service. This is so because it is settled law that the burden of proof of the

existence of a particular fact lies on the person who makes a positive averments about its

existence. It is always easier to prove a positive fact than to prove a negative fact. Therefore,

once the employee shows that he was employed, the onus lies on the employer to specifically

plead and prove that the employee was gainfully employed and was getting the same or

substantially similar emoluments.”

20..

The Hon’ble Apex Court also held that different expressions are used for describing the consequence of

termination of a workman’s service/employment/engagement by way of retrenchment without complying with the

mandate of Section 25F of the Act. Sometimes it has been termed as ab initio void, sometimes as illegal per se, sometime

as nullity and sometimes as non est. Leaving aside the legal semantics, we have no hesitation to hold that termination of

service of an employee by way of retrenchment without complying with the requirement of giving one month’s notice or

pay in lieu thereof and compensation in terms of Section 25F (a) and (b) has the effect of rendering the action of the

employer and nullity and the employee is entitled to continue in employment as if his service was not terminated. (Anoop

Sharma Vs. Executive Engineer, Public Health Division No.1 Panipat (2010) 5 SCC 497).

21.

A Bench of three Judges of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Tin Works Private Limited v.

Employees of Hindustan Tin Works Private Limited (1979) 2 SCC 80 held that relief of reinstatement with continuity of

service can be granted where termination of service is found to be invalid. It would mean that the employer has taken

away illegally the right to work of the workman contrary to the relevant law or in breach of contract and simultaneously

deprived the workman of his earnings. If thus the act of employer is found to be totally illegal and arbitrary, in that

eventuality the workman is required to be reinstated, with full back wages. Plain common sense also dictates that the

removal of an order terminating the services of workmen must ordinarily lead to the reinstatement of the services of the

workmen alongwith payment of back wages.

22.

However, Hon’ble Apex Court in the case General Manager, Haryana Roadways Vs. Rudan Singh,

reported as 2005 SCC (L&S) 716 observed as under :-

“8. There is no rule of thumb that in every case where the Industrial Tribunal gives a finding that the termination

of service was in violation of Section 25-F of the Act, entire back wages should be awarded. A host of factors

like the manner and method of selection and appointment i.e. whether after proper advertisement of the vacancy

or inviting applications from the employment exchange, nature of appointment namely, whether ad hoc, short

term, daily wage, temporary or permanent in character, any special qualification required for the job and the like

should be weighed and balanced in taking a decision regarding award of back wages. One of the important

factors which has to be taken into consideration is the length of service, which the workman had rendered

with the employer. If the workman has rendered a considerable period of service and his services are

wrongfully terminated, he may be awarded full or partial back wages keeping in view the fact that at this age

and the qualification possessed by him he may not be in a position to get another employment. However,

where the total length of service rendered by a workman is very small, the award of back wages for the

complete period i.e. from the date of termination till the date of the award, which our experience shows is

often quite large, would be wholly inappropriate. A regular service of permanent character cannot be

compared to short or intermittent daily wage employment though it may be for 240 days in a calander year.”

27.

Yet in another latest case of Bholanath Lal and others Vs. Shree Om Enterprises (P) Ltd.,

Manu/DE/1922/2018 (decided on 10/5/2018), Hon’ble High Court of Delhi while considering the question of

illegal termination and reinstatement held as under :-

“The cases in which the competent court or tribunal finds that the employer has acted in gross violation of the

statutory provisions and/or the principles of natural justice or is guilty of victimizing the employee or workman,

then the court or tribunal concerned will be fully justified in directing payment of full back wages. In such

cases, the superior courts should not exercise power under Article 226 or 136 of the Constitution and interfere

with the award passed by the Labour Court, etc. merely because there is a possibility of forming a different

opinion on the entitlement of the employee/workman to get full back wages or the employer’s obligation to pay

the same The courts must always keep in view that that in the cases of wrongful/illegal termination of service,

the wrongdoer is the employer and the sufferer is the employee./workman and there is no justification to give a

premium to the employer of his wrongdoings by relieving him of the burden to pay to the employee/ workman

his dues in the form of full back wages.”

¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3(ii)º

Hkkjr dk jkti=k % tuojh 5] 2019@ikS"k 15] 1940

241

A similar view has been taken in the case of Delhi Jal Board Vs. Vimal Kumar (decided on 5-4-2018)

MANU/de/1322/2018 wherein service of a casual driver was terminated without any notice or payment of one month’s

salary in lieu of such notice. The Industrial Tribunal answering the reference held the action of the management to be

illegal and in violation of Section 25-F of the Act. The Award was upheld by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi by observing

as under :-

“In view of the above discussion, I am unable to discern any illegality or infirmity in the impugned Award,

dated 29th May, 2003, of the Labour Court, to the extent that it holds the termination of the services of the

respondent, by the petitioner, to be illegal and unlawful. I am entirely in agreement with the finding, of the

Labour Court, that the services of the respondent were retrenched in violation of Section 25-F of the ID Act and

that, therefore, he was entitled to be reinstated in service with all consequential benefits. In view of the fact that

going by the age of the respondent as disclosed in the counter affidavit filed before this Court, he would, today,

be only 50 years of age, and also in view of the fact that the termination of his services as SCM Driver was not

on account of any deficiency or shortcoming detected in the manner of discharge by the respondent, of his duties

as such, I am of the opinion, that the facts of the present case, do not warrant any interference with the direction,

of the Labour Court, to the petitioner to reinstate the respondent in service with the benefit of continuity of

service. The petitioner is, therefore, directed to reinstate the respondent in service forthwith.

Inasmuch as the respondent has not been rendering any service to the petitioner since the date of his

termination, however, the back wages payable to the respondent would be limited to 50 per cent of the wages

which he would have drawn he had continued to serve the petitioner…..”

23.

Having regard to the legal position as discussed above and the fact that the claimant was performing duty to a

post of regular and perennial nature, this Tribunal is of the firm view that the claimant herein is entitled for

reinstatement into service on the same post, with 50 per cent back wages, iinasmuch as termination of the

claimant/workman is per-se illegal, and the claimant/workman is not gainfully employed anywhere since after his

termination by the Management No. 2. Award is passed accordingly against Management No. 2 M/s. Biman Bengladesh

Airlines Ltd.

Date : 15.11.2018

AVTAR CHAND DOGRA, 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. ALOK

KUMAR

Digitally signed

by ALOK KUMAR

Date: 2019.01.22

15:45:47 +05'30'