5832 GI/202
(2975)
रजिस्ट्री सं. डी.एल. (एन) 04/0007/2003—05
REGD. NO. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05
xxxGIDHxxx
xxxGIDExxx
प्राजिकार से प्रकाजित
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
साप् ताजिक
WEEKLY
सं. 46]
नई दिल् ली, दिसम् बर 6—दिसम् बर 12, 2020, िजनवार/ अग्रिायण 15— अग्रिायण 21, 1942
No. 46] NEW DELHI, DECEMBER 6 – DECEMBER 12, 2020, SATURDAY/AGRAHAYANA 15–AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942
इस भाग में जभन् न ृष् सं् या िी िाती िज जिससे दक यि ृष क संकलन के प ृ में र ा िा सके
Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation
भाग II— ण् ड 3—उृ- ण् ड (ii)
PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)
भारत सरकार के मंत्रालयों (रक्षा मंत्रालय को छोड़कर) द्वारा िारी दकए गए सांजवजिक आिेि और अजिसूचनाएं
Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India
(Other than the Ministry of Defence)
जवत्त मंत्रालय
(जवत्तीय सेवाएं जवभाग)
नई दिल्ली, 5 अक् तूबर, 2020
का.आ. .1049—केंद्रीय सरकार, रािभाषा (संघ के िासकीय प्रयोिनों के जलए प्रयोग) जनयम, 1976
(1987 में य ा संिोजित) के जनयम 10 के उृ जनयम (4) के अनुसरण में रा् रीय कषजष और ग्रामीण जवकास बैंक और
नेिनल इंश्योरेंस कम्ृनी जलजमटेड के सूचीबद्ध कायाालयों को अजिसूजचत करती िज, जिनके 80% से अजिक
कमाचाररयों ने हिंिी का कायासािक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर जलया िज : -
सी.जी.-डी.एल.-सा.-19122020-223791
CG-DL-W-19122020-223791
2976 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
क्र.सं.
जवत्तीय संस्ट् ा का नाम
कायाालयों की सं्या
1.
रा् रीय कषजष और ग्रामीण जवकास बैंक
9
2.
नेिनल इंश्योरेंस कम्ृनी जलजमटेड
1
कुल
10
[फा. सं. 11016/2/2017-हिं.(अजि.)]
रािीव कुमार, सिायक जनिेिक (रािभाषा)
रािभाषा जनयम 1976 के जनयम 10 (4) के अंतगात अजिसूजचत दकए िाने वाले कायाालयों की सूची
1.
रा् रीय कषजष और ग्रामीण जवकास बैंक
'यूफेट करमीिृेनजबहल्डंग'
2 और 3 मंजिल प् लॉट नं.22(2)
िन ेती, जिलांग– 793003
मेघालय
2.
रा् रीय कषजष और ग्रामीण जवकास बैंक
िी.एस.रोड, दिसृुर
गुवािाटी- 721006
असम
3.
रा् रीय कषजष और ग्रामीण जवकास बैंक
एनएससीबीमु् यालय प्रिासजनक जबहल्डंग
चौ ी मंजिल, ेरमिल,
सकुालररोड
िीमाृुर– 797112
नागालैंड
4.
रा् रीय कषजष और ग्रामीण जवकास बैंक
ओम जनवास, चचा रोड
गंगटोक- 737101
जसदिम
5.
बैंकरग्रामीण जवकास संस्ट् ान
बोलृुरलॉि,
ृो.ऑ. बोलृुर
जिला –बीरभूम– 731204
बोलृुर
6.
रा् रीय कषजष और ग्रामीण जवकास बैंक
ृुन् नेनरोड, स्ट् टेच् यू
जतप वनंतृुरम– 695001
केरल
7.
रा् रीय कषजष और ग्रामीण जवकास बैंक
जिल् ृाजनगम भवन
ग्राउंडफ्लोर, ेिूरबागान,
हिंिर िोटल के ृास
ृो.ऑ. कुिाबन,
अगरतला– 799 006
जत्रृुरा
2.
रा् रीय कषजष और ग्रामीण जवकास बैंक
रामिलुनरोड (उत् तर)
बंगावन,
आइिॉल– 796014
जमिोरम
9.
रा् रीय कषजष और ग्रामीण जवकास बैंक
1-1-61, आरटीसीक्रास रोड
मुिीराबाि
िजिराबाि – 500 020
तेलंगाणा
10.
नेिनल इंश्योरेंस कम्ृनी जलजमटेड,
दिल्ली क्षेत्रीय कायाालय -4,
कन्नेक्टस जबहल्डंग, 8वां तल,
भवभूजत मागा, नई दिल्ली-02.
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
2977
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Department of Financial Services)
New Delhi, the 5th October, 2020
S.O. 1049.— In pursuance of sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Languages (Use for official
purposes of the Union) Rules, 1976 (as amended in 1987), the Central Government, hereby notifies the listed
Offices of National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development and National Insurance Company limited,
more than 80% of the staff whereof have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi:-
Serial
No.
Name of the Financial Institution
Number of Offices
1.
National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development
9
2.
National Insurance Company limited
1
Total
10
[F. No. 11016/2/2017-OL(Noti.)]
RAJIV KUMAR, Assistant Director (OL)
List of Offices to be notified under Rule 10(4) of Official Language Rule 1976
1.
National Bank for Agriculture and Rural
Development
'U PhetKharmihpen Building'
2nd and 3rd floor,
Plot No.28(2), Dhankheti
Shillong- 793003
Meghalaya
2.
National Bank for Agriculture and Rural
Development
G.S.Road, Dispur
Guwahati – 781006
Assam
3.
National Bank for Agriculture and Rural
Development
NSCB Head Office Administration Building
4th floor, Circular Road, Khermahal,
Dimapur – 797112
Nagaland
4.
National Bank for Agriculture and Rural
Development
Om Niwas, Church Road
Gangtok- 737101
Sikkim
5.
Bankers' Institute of Rural Development
Bolpur Lodge
P.O.Bolpur
District Birbhum- 731204
Bolpur
6.
National Bank for Agriculture and Rural
Development
Punnen Road, Statue
Thiruvananthapuram- 695001
Kerala
7.
National Bank for Agriculture and Rural
Development
Shilpa Nigam Bhaban,
Ground Floor, Khejur Bagan
Near Ginger Hotel
P.O. Kungaben
Agartala- 799006
Tripura
8.
National Bank for Agriculture and Rural
Development
Ramhlun Road (North)
Bawngkawn
Aizawl- 796014
Mizoram
9.
National Bank for Agriculture and Rural
Development
1-1-61, RTC 'X' Road
Musheerabad,
Hyderabad – 500 020
Telangana
10. National Insurance Company limited,
Delhi Regional Office 4,
Konnectus Building, 8th Floor,
803 B , Tower C, Bhavbhuti Marg,
Opposite New Delhi Railway Station.
2978 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
नई दिल्ली, 5 अक् तूबर, 2020
का.आ. 1050.—केंद्रीय सरकार, रािभाषा (संघ के िासकीय प्रयोिनों के जलए प्रयोग) जनयम, 1976
(1987 में य ा संिोजित) के जनयम 10 के उृ जनयम (4) के अनुसरण में भारतीय स्ट् टेट बैंक के सूचीबद्ध
कायाालयों/िा ाओं को अजिसूजचत करती िज, जिनके 20% से अजिक कमाचाररयों ने हिंिी का कायासािक ज्ञान प्राप्त
कर जलया िज : -
क्र.सं.
बैंक का नाम
कायाालयों / िा ाओं की सं्या
1.
भारतीय स्ट् टेट बैंक
143
कुल
143
[फा. सं. 11016/2/2017-हिं.(अजि.)]
रािीव कुमार, सिायक जनिेिक (रािभाषा)
रािभाषा जनयम 1976 के जनयम 10(4) के अंतगात अजिसूजचत दकए िाने वाले कायाालयों/िा ाओं की सूची
1.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक,
प्रिासजनक कायाालय 3
जद्वतीय तल, प्रिासजनक कायाालय,
अहिंसा भवन, नई दिल्ली-110060
2.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
क्षेत्रीय व्यवसाय कायाालय 4,
ए-ब्लॉक, तषतीय तल,
संसि मागा, नई दिल्ली-110001
3.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
क्षेत्रीय व्यवसाय कायाालय 3
ृीतम ृुरा, नई दिल्ली-110034
4.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक,
क्षेत्रीय व्यवसाय कायाालय 2,
तषतीय तल, प्रिासजनक कायाालय,
अहिंसा भवन, नई दिल्ली-110060
5.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक,
क्षेत्रीय व्यवसाय कायाालय 1
जद्वतीय तल, 23,
निफ़गढ़ रोड -110015
6.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सोनीृत िा ा
ृी. बजग 33 सोनीृत गुर, मंडी जिला-
रोितक,
सोनीृत, िररयाणा -131001
7.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
राम कष्ण ृुरम िा ा,
सेक्टर 1, ब्लॉक 7,आर के ृुरम,
नई दिल्ली-110022
8.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक,
ांझावाला िा ा
ांझावाला गााँव,
नई दिल्ली -110081
9.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक,
िीटी रोड बिालगढ़ िा ा
सोनीृत, िररयाणा-131021
10.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सुब्रतो ृाका िा ा
एयर फोसा,
डब्लूएसी सुब्रतो ृाका,
दिल्ली कैंट, नई दिल्ली-110010
11.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िकूर बस्ट्ती िा ा
1067, रानीबाग माकेट,
नई दिल्ली-110034
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
2979
12.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ृंिाबी बाग िा ा
2/85, क्लब रोड, ृंिाबी बाग,
नई दिल्ली-110026
13.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
आिािृुर िा ा
न्यू सब्िी मंडी, आिािृुर,
नई दिल्ली-110033
14.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
बािली िा ा
रर ाला रोड बािली,
नई दिल्ली-110042
15.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िलालृुर िा ा
िलालृुर, सोनीृत,
िररयाणा-131103
16.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
भातगााँव िा ा
भटगााँव, सोनीृत,
िररयाणा -131022
17.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िरर नगर िा ा
सी-47, िररनगर,
क्लॉक टावर,
नई दिल्ली-110064
18.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सुभाष नगर िा ा
सुभाष नगर, डी-1,
अिय एन्क्लेव सुभाष,
नई दिल्ली -110027
19.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
एसएमई िा ा नारायणा
59 कम्यूजनटी सेंटर,
नारायणा इंडजस्ट्रयल एररया,
नई दिल्ली-110028
20.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
एडीबी सोनीृत िा ा
रेल्वे रोड, सोनीृत,
िररयाणा-131001
21.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ृीबीबी ृीतमृुरा िा ा
ृीबीबी वजिाली, ृीतमृुरा,
नई दिल्ली-110034
22.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
गन्नौर मंडी िा ा
छोटी मंडी गौिाला,
सोनीृत, िररयाणा-131101
23.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
एसएमई िा ा नेतािी सुभाष प्लेस
एच-4, विामान नॉ ा एक्स प्लाज़ा,
प्र म तल, नई दिल्ली-110034
24.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
रोजिणी, नई दिल्ली सेक्टर-9 िा ा
िीृल प्लाज़ा जबहल्डंग,
डी.सी.चौक दिल्ली-110085
25.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
एटलस साइदकल सोनीृत िा ा
146 आर, मॉडल टाऊन,
सोनीृत, िररयाणा-131001
26.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िकूरृुर (दिल्ली) िा ा
डी ब्लॉक, िकुरृुर, दिल्ली -110034
27.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
चौ ंडी (नई दिल्ली) िा ा
चौ ंडी,
नई दिल्ली -110018
28.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
्याला िा ा
्याला दिल्ली -110018
2980 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
29.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ििााँगीरृूरी िा ा
ए-ब्लॉक, ििााँगीरृूरी,
दिल्ली -110033
30.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
मंगोलृूरी िा ा
लोकल िॉहृंग सेंटर,
ओ -ब्लॉक, मंगोलृुरी,
नई दिल्ली-110083
31.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सुल्तानृूरी िा ा
बी ब्लॉक, सुल्तानृुरी,
नई दिल्ली-110086
32.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
रघुवीर नगर िा ा
रघुवीर नगर, नई दिल्ली -110027
33.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सीओडी िकूरबस्ट्ती िा ा
ऑर्डानेंस जडृोट,
िकुरबस्ट्ती, दिल्ली -110056
34.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
एसएमई िा ा वज़ीरृुर आई ई
बी-76, वज़ीरृुर इंडस्ट्रीयल क्षेत्र,
नई दिल्ली-110052
35.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िीटी करनाल रोड इंडस्ट्रीयल कॉम्प्लेक्स
िा ा कोड
िीआई -23,िीटी करनाल रोड
इंडस्ट्रीयल कॉम्प्लेक्स, नई दिल्ली-
110033
36.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
इंद्रलोक िा ा
313/10 बी इंद्रलोक,
नई दिल्ली-110035
37.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ज्वालाृुरी िा ा
िे िे कॉलोनी, ए-ब्लॉक,
कैंृ नं. 4, नई दिल्ली-110087
38.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ज्वालिरी िा ा
ृजिम जविार, नई दिल्ली-110063
39.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सजमृुर िा ा
मंदिर मोिल्ला मेन रोड,
समयृुर, नई दिल्ली-110042
40.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
नरेला िा ा
बवाना रोड, नरेला दिल्ली,
दिल्ली-110040
41.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
केिवृुरम िा ा
सी 7, सेंटरल माकेट,
प्र म तल,
केिव ृुरम,
दिल्ली -110035
42.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
मुंडका िा ा
गााँव एवं ृोस्ट्ट- मुंडका,
नई दिल्ली-110041
43.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
जतरकी कलान िा ा
रटकरी कलान,
नई दिल्ली-110041
44.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ृल्ला िा ा
गााँव एवं ृोस्ट्ट -ृल्ला ,
दिल्ली -110036
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
2981
45.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ेरा ुिा िा ा
गााँव एवं ृोस्ट्ट - ेरा ुिा,
नई दिल्ली-110082
46.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
मोतीलाल नेिप स्ट्ृोर्टसा स्ट्कूल राय िा ा
मोतीलाल नेिप स्ट्ृोर्टसा,
स्ट्कूल गााँव -राय, सोनीृत,
िररयाणा-131029
47.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
र ोिा िा ा
सोनीृत रोड,
र ोिा बस स्ट्टैंड के ृास,
सोनीृत, िररयाणा-131402
48.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ृू ुिा िा ा
गााँव - ृू ुिा,
नई दिल्ली -110039
49.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ल िा ा
गााँव एवं ृोस्ट्ट-ल लेि-गोिाना,
जिला - सोनीृत,
िररयाणा-131001
50.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
लरसौली िा ा
जिला - सोनीृत,
िररयाणा-131039
51.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
श्रीनगर कॉलोनी िा ा
बी 1/10, अिोक जविार,
फेि-I, नई दिल्ली-110052
52.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
री ाला िा ा
गााँव एवं ृोस्ट्ट- री ाला,
नई दिल्ली-110085
53.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
बवाना (दिल्ली) िा ा
नरेला रोड,
नई दिल्ली-110039
54.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
मिजलस ृाका िा ा
ए-11, मिजलस ृाका,
दिल्ली-110033
55.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
मािरा िबास िा ा
मािरा िबास (दिल्ली),
नई दिल्ली-110081
56.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
र िाना रोड (लिरारा) िा ा
र िाना रोड लिरारा,
सोनीृत, िररयाणा-131001
57.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
जचताना िा ा
गााँव-जचताना,
ृोस्ट्ट- मिरा सोनीृत,
िररयाणा-131024
58.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सावन ृाका िा ा,
के-4, सावन ृाका,
दिल्ली -110052
59.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
जवकासृुरी िा ा
िी-3, , जवकासृुरी,
नई दिल्ली-110018
60.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ृजिम जविार िा ा
डीडीए िॉहृंग सेंटर, ए-1,
ृजिम जविार,
नई दिल्ली -110063
2982 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
61.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
मीरा बाग िा ा
ए 336, आउटर ररंग रोड,
मीरा बाग, नई दिल्ली-110087
62.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
केसोृुर िा ा
ए-5, डब्लूज़ेड -2/1ए,
साजिबृुरा, नई दिल्ली-110018
63.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
जिला कोटा, रोजिणी िा ा
जिला कोटा, रोजिणी,
अन्तररक्ष अृाटामेंट के ृास,
नई दिल्ली -110085
64.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
दिल्ली कॉलेि ऑफ इंिीजनयररंग िा ा
बवाना रोड,
नई दिल्ली-110042
65.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िाजलमार बाग िा ा
बी टी-35 , िाजलमार बाग,
नई दिल्ली-110088
66.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िास्त्री नगर िा ा
ई 2/ 234-235, िास्त्री नगर,
नई दिल्ली-110052
67.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
अिोक जविार िा ा
िीत जबहल्डंग, 11 सेंरल माकेट,
अिोक जविार फेस-1,
नई दिल्ली-110052
68.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
कोिट एन्क्लेव ृीतमृुरा िा ा
369 कोिाट एंक्लव, ग्राउंड फ्लोर,
ृीतमृुरा, नई दिल्ली-110034
69.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ृीतमृुरा नागलोई िा ा
530/2 , नागलोई चौक,
निफ़गढ़ रोड, नांगोलोई,
नई दिल्ली-110041
70.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
रोजिणी सेक्टर-12 िा ा
िाउस सं-69-70, ृॉकेट नं-एफ-22 ,
िी एफ, सेक्टर- रोजिणी,
नई दिल्ली-110025
71.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
रोजिणी सेक्टर-11िा ा
ृासकान जबहल्डंग गगा रेड सेंटर,
सेक्टर-11, रोजिणी,
नई दिल्ली-110085
72.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
रोजिणी सेक्टर-24 िा ा
सीएस /ओसीएफ नं. 7
(बेस्ट्ट मेगा मॉल),
प्र म तल, सेक्टर 24, रोजिणी,
नई दिल्ली-110085
73.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
टजगोर गाडेन िा ा,
बी-20-21, िॉहृंग सेंटर,
टजगोर सेंटर, टजगोर गाडेन,
नई दिल्ली-110027
74.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
उत्तरी ृीतमृुरा दिल्ली िा ा
एफयू -1, उत्तरी ृीतमृुरा,
दिल्ली-110088
75.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
गोिाना िा ा
िुकान सं-84, नई अनािमंडी,
सोनीृत, िररयाणा-124301
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
2983
76.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
डीबीआरसी यूजनवर्साटी ऑफ साइंस एंड
टेक्नोलोिी मु ाल िा ा
मु ाल, सोनीृत,
िररयाणा-131039
77.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
एसएमई सीसीसी िीटी करनाल रोड िा ा
बी-248, प्र म तल,
डेरवाल नगर,
नई दिल्ली-110009
78.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
आरएसीृीसी नेतािी सुभाष ृजलेस िा ा
ृला बेस्ट्ट िाइट आई ृीतमृुरा,
दिल्ली-110034
79.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
एसएमई सीसीसी िा ा
नरायणा इंडजस्ट्रयल एररया,
नई दिल्ली-110028
80.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
रोजिणी सेक्टर 18 िा ा
रोजिणी ृॉकेट एच-3,
नई दिल्ली-110085
81.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
गुरु िरदकिन नगर िा ा
एम-125, गुरु िरकष्ण नगर,
नई दिल्ली-110041
82.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िेल रोड िररनगर िा ा
एएल -6, एल ब्लॉक,
नई दिल्ली-110064
83.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िस्ट्तसाल जवकासृुरी िा ा
ए-8, जवकासृुरी,
नई दिल्ली-110018
84.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
स्ट्काब नो िा ा
प्लॉट नं.89, ब्लॉक बी,
विीरृुर इंडजस्ट्रयल एररया,
दिल्ली-110052
85.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
राय इंडजस्ट्रयल एररया िा ा
टीृी1, सेक्टर-38,
एचएसआईआईडीसी के ृास,
सोनीृत, िररयाणा-131029
86.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
गणेि नगर िा ा
1/20, जतलक नगर लाल बत्ती के ृास,
नई दिल्ली-110019
87.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
जमयााँवाजल नगर िा ा
9 ृजिम एनक्लेव,
नई दिल्ली, 110087
88.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
वेस्ट्ट एवेन्यू ृंिाबी बाग िा ा
2/52, ृंिाबी बाग वेस्ट्ट एवेन्यू,
नई दिल्ली-110026
89.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ृु्ृांिजल एन्क्लेव िा ा
बी-96, ृु्ृांिजल एन्क्लेव,
नई दिल्ली -110034
90.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िे ब्लॉक रािौरी गाडेन िा ा
िे9/34 रािौरी गाडेन,
नई दिल्ली-110027
91.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
माया एन्क्लेव मायाृुरी िा ा
डी-2/डी-3, मायाृुरी फेि-II,
लाल बत्ती के सामने,
2984 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
माया एनक्लेव,
नई दिल्ली-110064
92.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
नािरी जिला सोनीृत िा ा
गााँव एवं ृोस्ट्ट-नािरी सोनीृत,
िररयाणा-131003
93.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सेक्टर-14 सोनीृत िा ा
प्लॉट सं 1, 2, टी.ृी. स्ट्कीम सोनीृत,
िररयाणा-131001
94.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
जमनी सेदक्रटेररयट सोनीृत िा ा
नई डी.सी. जबहल्डंग, गोिाना रोड,
सोनीृत, िररयाणा-131001
95.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
रािृूताना राइफल्स िा ा
भारत सरकार, एम/ओ जडफेंस,
रािृूतना राइफल, नई दिल्ली-110010
96.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सजिृुर िा ा
गााँव एवं ृोस्ट्ट -सजिृुर,
सोनीृत, िररयाणा-131402
97.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
मोिाना जिला सोनीृत िा ा
गााँव एवं ृोस्ट्ट: मोिना,
सोनीृत, िररयाणा-131001
98.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
अजलृुर िा ा 240, नेिप एनक्लेव,
नई दिल्ली-110036
99.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
राििानी एन्क्लेव ृीतमृुरा िा ा
प्लॉट नं. 2, रोड 44,
ृीतमृुरा, नई दिल्ली-110034
100.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िंकर जविार िा ा
आईएचदकउ मोड(आमी) सीए,
राव तुला राम मागा,
नई दिल्ली-110010
101.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सेक्टर 8 िीृाली चौक रोजिणी िा ा
प्लॉट नं. 9, ृॉकेट ए1,
सेक्टर 8 (िीृाली चौक के ृास) रोजिणी,
नई दिल्ली-110085
102.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सबीआई इन टच
गुरु गोजबन्ि हसंि मागा िा ा
बीएच 7 िालीमार बाग ृूवा,
दिल्ली-110088
103.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
एसबीआई इन टच
जिवािी एन्क्लेव िा ा
िीएन -3, जिवािी एनक्लेव,
नई दिल्ली-110027
104.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ए एल माकेट िालीमार बाग िा ा
एएल ब्लॉक, डीडीए िॉहृंग कॉम्प्लेक्स,
िालीमार बाग, दिल्ली -110052
105.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
रोजिणी नई दिल्ली िा ा
ब्लॉक नं. ई -2/25, ग्राउंड फ्लोर,
सेक्टर-7, नई दिल्ली-110085
106.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
एमएसएमई िा ा
प्र म तल, अग्रवाल चेतन प्लाज़ा,
प्लॉट सं-1, 2,
लोकल िॉहृंग सेंटर,
ृॉकेट, सेक्टर ए 9, नरेला,
दिल्ली -110040
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
2985
107.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
रटकरी ुिा िा ा
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक,
िाटों वाली गली,
रेिन कोटा कायाालय के ृास,
रटकरी ुिा, नई दिल्ली -110040
108.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
जविाल एनक्लेव िा ा
ए-30 , जविाल एनक्लेव,
नई दिल्ली-110027
109.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सेक्टर-14, रोजिणी िा ा
सेक्टर 14 एक्सटेंिन,
नई दिल्ली-110085
110.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
एनआईई फेज़-I िा ा
प्र म तल,
नरायणा इंडजस्ट्रयल इस्ट्टेट फेि 1,
जिला- नई दिल्ली (110028)
111.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
एमसीबी लारेंस रोड िा ा
5 कम्यूजनटी सेंटर, लारेंस रोड,
जिला -दिल्ली -110035
112.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
रेलवे रोड सोनीृत िा ा
रेलवे रोड, सोनीृत,
िररयाणा-131001
113.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सेक्टर-5 रोजिणी िा ा
रोजिणी, दिल्ली -110085
114.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
डीएवी स्ट्कूल कैंृस िा ा
िरबारी लाल, डीएवी स्ट्कूल,
बीएन ब्लॉक, िाजलमार बाग,
दिल्ली-110088
115.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िीएमवी कॉलेि िा ा
मु ाल रोड, िी वी एम गल्सा कॉलेि,
सोनीृत, िररयाणा-131001
116.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
नजिनल माकेट िा ा ृजिम एन्क्लेव िा ा
प्लॉट सं. 2 एवं 3,
लोकल िॉहृंग कॉम्प्लेक्स,
ब्लॉक एफ, प्र म तल,
नेिनक माकेट के सामने,
ृजिम एन्क्लेव-110087
117.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
गोिाना िा ा
वडोिरा रोड, जिला-सोनीृत,
िररयाणा-131301
118.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िी.टी.रोड मूर ल िा ा
िी.टी. रोड, जिला- सोनीृत ,
िररयाणा -131027
119.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
मोडेल टाउन सोनीृत िा ा
ृुराने कोटा के ृास, रोितक रोड,
सोनीृत, िररयाणा-131001
120.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
एसएमई कुंडली िा ा
िंजत रोड, कुंडली, सोनीृत,
िररयाणा-131028
121.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ृू कलान िा ा
ब्लॉक कंिािवाला ृू कलान,
नई दिल्ली-110041
2986 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
122.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
कराला िा ा
कराला, नई दिल्ली -110081
123.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
रमा माकेट िा ा
ृीतमृुरा नई दिल्ली -110034
124.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
बिमाजलक िा ा
ृोस्ट्ट-ृी एस राय,
सोनीृत, िररयाणा-131029
125.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िगसी िा ा
अगसी, तिसील-गोिाना,
जिला- सोनीृत, िररयाणा -124319
126.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िोनती ब्लॉक नई दिल्ली िा ा
गााँव -िाऊन्ती,
नई दिल्ली-110081
127.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
गढ़वाल िा ा
गााँव एवं ृोस्ट्ट- गढ़वाल,
जिला- सोनीृत,
िररयाणा-131030
128.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सोनीृत जमजन सेक्टर िा ा
जमजन सेक्रेटररयट,
सोनीृत, िररयाणा-131001
129.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
वाई.एस. मॉडेल स्ट्कूल िा ा
फेि - I, बुि जविार,
नई दिल्ली-110086
130.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
रोजिणी नई दिल्ली िा ा
सीएससी -II, सेक्टर-13,
डीडीए माकेट, प्र म तल,
रोजिणी, दिल्ली -110034
131.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
गन्नौर िा ा
छोटीमंडी, रेलवे. आरडी.
गन्नौर, सोनीृत,
िररयाणा-131101
132.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
आरएसीृीसी, नारायणा इंडजस्ट्रयल एररया
िा ा
दिल्ली 59, कम्यूजनटी सेंटर,
नारायणा इंडजस्ट्रयल एररया,
नई दिल्ली-110028
133.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
दिल्ली नरेला िा ा
डी160डी160, प्र म तल,
एफसी -IV,
डीएसआईआईडीसी, इंडजस्ट्रयल कॉम्प्लेक्स,
नरेला, दिल्ली -110001
134.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
गोिाना(एएम) िा ा
अनाि मंडी, गोिाना,
सोनीृत, िररयाणा-136128
135.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
नई दिल्ली (अिोक जविार) िा ा
िजि नगर एक्सटेंिन,
अिोक जविार, फेि 3,
नई दिल्ली (अिोक जविार),
दिल्ली -110052
136.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
नई दिल्ली (जवकासृुरी) िास्ट्टसल एररया
िा ा
जवकासृूरी (िास्ट्टसल एररया),
नई दिल्ली -110018
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
2987
137.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सरगा ाल िा ा
आ.सं. 577,
ृीडब्लूडी रोड,
गााँव एवं ृोस्ट्ट-सरग ल ,
जिला-सोनीृत,
िररयाणा -131305
138.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
गोिाना जमजन सेक्टर िा ा
नई जबहल्डंग,
सोनीृत रोड,
गोिाना, िररयाणा-131301
139.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
नांगलोई िाट िा ा
के-61, अध्याृक नगर,
मु्य निफ़गढ़ रोड,
नारायण िमाकांटा नांगलोई के ृास,
नई दिल्ली-110041
140.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ईस्ट्ट ृंिाबी मागा िा ा
28/12, ईस्ट्ट ृंिाबी बाग,
नई दिल्ली-110026
141.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सेक्टर-8 आर.सी.कॉम्प्लेक्स रोजिणी िा ा
ृी.बी. नं. 10005,
बालािी प्लाज़ा,
सेक्टर-8, रोजिणी, दिल्ली-110085
142.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
विीरृुर िा ा
आर.िी. जसटी सेंटर,
बी-ब्लॉक एलएससी,
लॉरेंस रोड, दिल्ली-110035
143.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
अवतार एन्क्लेव ृजिम जविार िा ा
प्लॉट नं. 182, अवतार एनक्लेव,
ृजश् चम जविार, नई दिल्ली-110063
New Delhi, the 5th October, 2020
S.O. 1050.— In pursuance of sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Languages (Use for official
purposes of the Union) Rules, 1976 (as amended in 1987), the Central Government, hereby notifies the listed
Offices/ Branches of State Bank of India, more than 80% of the staff whereof have acquired the working
knowledge of Hindi:-
Serial
No.
Name of the Bank
Number of Offices/Branches
1.
State Bank of India
143
Total
143
[F. No. 11016/2/2017-OL(Noti.)]
RAJIV KUMAR, Assistant Director (OL)
LIST OF OFFICES/ BRANCHES TO BE NOTIFIED UNDER RULE 10(4) OF
OFFICIAL LANGUAGE RULES 1976
1.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 3
2ND FLOOR ADMIN OFFICE AHINSA
BHAWAN,
NEW DELHI 110060
2.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE
4 A-BLOCK, 3 RD FLOOR
PARLIAMENT STREET,
NEW DELHI 110001
3.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE 3
PITAM PURA,
NEW DELHI-110034
4.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE 2
3RD FLOOR ADMIN OFFICE AHINSA
BHAWAN,
NEW DELHI 110060
2988 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
5.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE 1
2ND FLOOR,23,
NAJAFGARH ROAD-110015
6.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SONIPAT BRANCH
P. BAG 33 SONEPAT GUR MANDI
DIST:ROHTAK, SONIPAT,
HARYANA-131001
7.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
RAM KRISHNA PURAM
NEW DELHI BRANCH
SECTOR 1,
BLOCK 7,
RK PURAM,
NEW DELHI-110022
8.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
KHANJAWALA BRANCH
KANJHAWALA VILLAGE,
NEW DELHI-110081
9.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
G.T. ROAD BAHALGARH BRANCH
SONIPAT,
HARYANA-131021
10.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SUBROTO PARK BRANCH
AIRFORCE WACSUBROTO PARK ,
DELHI CANTT,
NEW DELHI-110010
11.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SHAKUR BASTI BRANCH
1067, RANIBAGH MARKET,
NEW DELHI-110034
12.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
PUNJABI BAGH BRANCH
2/85, CLUB ROAD,
PANJABI BAGH,
NEW DELHI-110026
13.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
AZADPUR BRANCH
NEW SUBJI MANDI AZADPUR,
NEW DELHI-110033
14.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
BADLI BRANCH
RITHALA ROAD BADLI,
NEW DELHI-110042
15.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
HALALPUR BRANCH
HALALPUR,
SONIPAT,
HARYANA-131103
16.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
BHATGAON BRANCH
BHATGAON,SONIPAT,
HARYANA-131022
17.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
HARINAGAR BRANCH
C-47, HARINAGAR,
CLOCK TOWER,
NEW DELHI-10064
18.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SUBHASH NAGAR BRANCH
SUBHASH NAGAR, D-1,
AJAY ENCLAVE SUBHASH,
NEW DELHI-110027
19.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SME BRANCH NARAINA IND. AREA
59 COMMUNITY CENTRE,
NARAINA INDUSTRIAL AREA,
NEW DELHI-110028
20.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
ADB, SONEPAT BRANCH
RAILWAY ROAD,
SONEPAT,
HARYANA-131001
21.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
P B B PITAMPURA BRANCH
P B B VAISHALI PITAMPURA
NEW DELHI-110034
22.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
GANNAUR MANDI BRANCH
CHOTI MANDI GAUSHALA, SONIPAT
HARYANA-131101
23.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SME BRANCH,
NETAJI SUBHASH PALACE BRANCH
H-4,VARDHMAN NORTH EX PLAZA,
1ST FLOOR,
NEW DELHI-110034
24.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
ROHINI DELHI SECTOR-9 BRANCH
DEEPAL PLAZA BUILDING,
D.C.CHOWK DELHI-110085
25.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
ATLAS CYCLE INDUSTRIES
SONEPAT BRANCH
146 R, MODEL TOWN,
SONEPAT, HARYANA-131001
26.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SHAKURPUR (DELHI) BRANCH
D BLOCK, SHAKURPUR,
DELHI-110034
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
2989
27.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
CHAUKHANDI (NEW DELHI)
BRANCH CHAUKHANDI,
NEW DELHI-110018
28.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
KHYALA BRANCH
KHYALA DELHI-110018
29.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
JAHANGIRPURI BRANCH
A- BLOCK, JAHANGIRPURI,
DELHI-110033
30.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
MANGOLPURI BRANCH
LOCAL SHOPPING CENTRE,
O-BLOCK, MANGOLPURI,
NEW DELHI-110083
31.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SULTANPURI BRANCH
B BLOCK, SULTANPURI,
NEW DELHI-10086
32.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
RAGHUBIR NAGAR BRANCH
NEW DELHI-110027
33.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
C.O.D.SHAKUR BASTI BRANCH
ORDINANCE DEPOT,
SHAKURBASTI, DELHI-110056
34.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SME BRANCH,
WAZIRPUR IND ESTATE,
B-76, WAZIRPUR IND. AREA,
NEW DELHI-110052
35.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
G.T.KARNAL ROAD IND. COMPLEX
BRANCH
GI-23, G.T.KARNAL ROAD,
INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX,
NEW DELHI-110033
36.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
INDERLOK BRANCH
313/10B INDERLOK, DELHI,
NEW DELHI-110035
37.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
JAWALAPURI BRANCH
JJ COLONY, A-BLOCK,
CAMP NO. 4,
NEW DELHI-110087
38.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
JAWALA HERI VILLAGE BRANCH
PASCHIM VIHAR,
NEW DELHI-110063
39.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SAMEPUR BRANCH
MANDIR MOHALLA MAIN ROAD,
SAMEPUR DELHI, NEW DELHI-110042
40
STATE BANK OF INDIA
NARELA BRANCH
BAWANA ROAD,
NARELA DELHI, DELHI-110040
41.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
KESHAVPURAM BRANCH
C 7, CENTRAL MARKET FIRST
FLOOR KESHAV PURAM,
DELHI-110035
42.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
MUNDKA BRANCH
VILLAGE AND PO MUNDKA,
NEW DELHI-110041
43.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
TIKRI KALAN BRANCH
TIKRI KALAN,NEW DELHI-110041
44.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
PALLA BRANCH
DELHI VILLAGE AND P.O.PALLA,
DELHI-110036
45.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
KHERA KHURD BRANCH
VILL AND PO KHERA KHURD,
NEW DELHI-110082
46.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
MSNL OF SPORTS RAI BRANCH
MOTILAL NEHRU SPORTS,
SCHOOL VILLAGE RAI,
SONEPAT, HARYANA-131029
47.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
KHARKHODA BRANCH
SONIPAT ROAD NEAR BUS STAND
KHARKHODA, SONEPAT,
HARYANA-131402
48.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
POOTH KHURD BRANCH
POOTH KHURD VILLAGE,
NEW DELHI-110039
49.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
LATH BRANCH
V.P.O. LATH TEH-GOHANA,
DISTT-SONEPAT,
HARYANA-131001
50.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
LARSOULI BRANCH
DISTT-SONEPAT,
HARYANA-131039
2990 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
51.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SRI NAGAR COLONY BRANCH
B 1/10, ASHOK VIHAR,
PHASE I, NEW DELHI-110052
52.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
RITHALA BRANCH
VILLAGE AND POST RITHALA,
NEW DELHI-110085
53.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
BAWANA(DELHI) BRANCH
NARELA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110039
54.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
MAJLIS PARK BRANCH
A-11, MAJLIS PARK,
DELHI-110033
55.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
MAJRA DABAS BRANCH
MAJRA DABAS (DELHI),
NEW DELHI-110081
56.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
RATHDANA ROAD BRANCH
RATHDANA ROAD LAHRARA,
SONEPAT,
HARYANA-131001
57.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
CHITANA BRANCH
VILL-CHITANA,
PO MAHRA, SONEPAT,
HARYANA-131024
58.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SAWAN PARK BRANCH
K-4, SAWAN PARK,
DELHI-110052
59.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
VIKASPURI BRANCH
G-3, VIKASPURI, NEW DELHI-110018
60.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
PASCHIM VIHAR BRANCH
DDA SHOPPING CENTRE, A-1,
PASCHIMVIHAR, NEW DELHI-110063
61.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
MEERA BAGH BRANCH
A 336, OUTER RING ROAD,
MEERA BAGH, NEW DELHI-110087
62.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
KESHOPUR BRANCH
A-5, WZ-2/1A, SAHIBPURA,
NEW DELHI-110018
63.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
DISTRICT COURT ROHINI BRANCH
DISTRICT COURT ROHINI, NEAR
ANTARIKSH APAR,
NEW DELHI-110085
64.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
DELHI COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
BRANCH BAWANA ROAD,
NEW DELHI-110042
65.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SHALIMAR BAGH BRANCH
BT-35, SHALIMAR BAGH,
NEW DELHI-110088
66.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SHASTRI NAGAR BRANCH
E 2/234-235, SHASTRI NAGAR,
NEW DELHI-110052
67.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
ASHOK VIHAR BRANCH
JEET BUILDING, 11 CENTRAL
MARKET, ASHOK VIHAR PHASE-I,
NEW DELHI-110052
68.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
KOHAT ENCLAVE PITAMPURA
BRANCH 369 KOHAT ENCLAVE,
GR FLOOR, PITAMPURA,
NEW DELHI-110034
69.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
NANGLOI BRANCH
530/3 NANGLOI CHOWK,
NAJAFGARH ROAD,
NANGLOI,
NEW DELHI-110041
70.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
ROHINI SEC-12 BRANCH
HOUSE NO 69-70, POCKET NO,
F-22 G F, SEC- ROHINI,
NEW DELHI-110085
71.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
ROHINI SECTOR-11 BRANCH
PASCON BHILDING GARG TRADE
CENTRE, SECTOR-11, ROHINI,
NEW DELHI-110085
72.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
ROHINI SEC 24 BRANCH
CS/OCF NO.7 (BEST MEGA MALL)
1ST FLOOR SEC 24 ROHINI,
NEW DELHI-110085
73.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
TAGORE GARDENBRANCH
B-20-21, SHOPPING CENTRE,
TAGORE CENTRE, TAGORE
GARDEN,
NEW DELHI-110027
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
2991
74.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
UTTARI PITAMPURA
DELHI BRANCH STATE BANK OF
INDIA,
FU-1,
UTTARI PITAMPURA
DELHI, DELHI-110088
75.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
GOHANA BRANCH
SHOP NO.84,
NEW ANAJMANDI SONEPAT,
HARYANA-124301
76.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
D.C.R.U.S.T. MURTHALBRANCH
MURTHAL, SONIPAT,
HARYANA-131039
77.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SMECCC GT KARNAL ROAD
BRANCH
B-248, 1ST FLOOR DERAWAL
NAGAR.
NEW DELHI-110009
78.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
RACPC NETAJI SUBHASH PLACE
BRANCH RACPC NETAJI SUBHASH
PLACE,
PEARL BEST HEIGHT I
PITAMPURA,
DELHI-110034
79.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SMECCC NARAINA BRANCH
NARAINA INDUSTRIAL AREA,
NEW DELHI-110028
80.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SECTOR-18 ROHINI BRANCH
ROHINI POCKET H-3,
NEW DELHI-110085
81.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
GURU HARKRISHAN NAGAR
BRANCH
M-125 GURU HARKRISHAN NAGAR,
NEW DELHI-110041
82.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
JAIL ROAD HARI NAGAR BRANCH
AL-6, L BLOCK,
NEW DELHI-110064
83.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
HASTSAL VIKAS PURI BRANCH
A-8 VIKAS PURI,
NEW DELHI-110018
84.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SCAB NORTH BRANCH
PLOT NO 89 BLOCK B, WAZIRPUR
INDUSTRIAL AREA, DELHI-110052
85.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
RAI INDUSTRIAL AREA BRANCH
TP1, SECTOR-38, NEAR HSIIDC,
SONEPAT, HARYANA-131029
86.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
GANESH NAGAR BRANCH
1/20, NEAR TILAK NAGAR RED
LIGHT,
NEW DELHI-110019
87.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
MIANWALI NAGAR BRANCH
9 PASCHIM ENCLAVE,
NEW DELHI-110087
88.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
WEST AVENUE PANJABI BAGH
BRANCH
2/52, PANJABI BAGH,
WEST AVENUE,
NEW DELHI-110026
89.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
PUSHPANJALI ENCLAVE BRANCH
B-96, PUSHPANJALI ENCLAVE,
NEW DELHI-110034
90.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
J-BLOCK RAJOURI GARDEN
BRANCH
J 9/34 RAJOURI GARDEN,
NEW DELHI-110027
91.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
MAYA ENCLAVE MAYAPURI
BRANCH
D-2/D-3, MAYAPURI PHASE-II,
OPPOSITE RED LIGHT,
MAYA ENCLAVE,
NEW DELHI-110064
92.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
NAHRI SONEPAT BRANCH
VILLAGE & POST-NAHRI SONEPAT
HARYANA-131003
93.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SECTOR 14, SONEPAT BRANCH
PLOT NO 1,2
T.P. SCHEME SONEPAT
HARYANA-131001
94.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
MINI SECRETARIATE SONEPAT
BRANCH NEW D.C. BUILDING,
GOHANA ROAD,
SONEPAT HARYANA-131001
2992 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
95.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
RAJPUTANA RIFLES BRANCH
GOVT OF INDIA M/O DFENCE,
RAJPUTANARIF, NEW DELHI-110010
96.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SAIDPUR BRANCH
VILLAGE AND POST SAIDPUR,
SONEPAT, HARYANA-131402
97.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
MOHANA (DISTT-SONEPAT)
BRANCH
VILL & POST:MOHANA,
SONEPAT HARYANA-131001
98.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
ALIPUR DELHI BRANCH
240 NEHRU ENCLAVE,
NEW DELHI-110036
99.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
RAJDHANI ENCLAVE
PITAMPURA BRANCH
PLOT NO. 2, ROAD 44,
PITAMPURA.
NEW DELHI-110034
100.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SHANKAR VIHAR BRANCH
IHQ MOD(ARMY) CA,
RAO TULA RAM MARG,
NEW DELHI-110010
101.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SECTOR 8 DEEPALI CHOWK
BRANCH
PLOT NO 9, POCKET-A1,
SECTOR 8 (NEAR DEEPALI CHOWK)
ROHINI NEW DELHI-110085
102.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SBI INTOUCH GURU GOBIND SINGH
MARG BRANCH
BH 7 SHALIMAR BAGH EAST,
DELHI-110088
103
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SBI INTOUCH SHIVAJI ENCLAVE
BRANCH
GN-3, SHIVAJI ENCLAVE,
NEW DELHI-110027
104.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SHALIMAR BAGH DELHI BRANCH
AL BLOCK , DDA SHOPPING
COMPLEX, SHALIMARBAGH,
DELHI-110052
105.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
ROHINI BRANCH
BLOCK NO E-2/25,
GROUND FLOOR, SECTOR-7,
NEW DELHI-110085
106.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
MSME BRANCH
1st FLOOR, AGGARWALCHETAN
PLAZA ,
PLOT NO 1, 2,
LOCAL SHOPING CENTRE,
POCKET 2, SECTOR A9, NARELA,
DELHI-110040
107.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
TIKRI KHURD BRANCH
JATON WALI GALI,
NEAR RATION QUOTA OFFICE,
TIKRI KHURD,
NEW DELHI-110040
108.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
VISHAL ENCLAVE BRANCH
A-30, VISHAL ENCLAVE,
NEW DELHI-110027
109.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SECTOR-14 ROHINI NEW DELHI
SECTOR 14 EXTN,
NEW DELHI-110085
110.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
NIE PHASE -1 BRANCH
1ST FLOOR,
NARAINA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE
PHASE 1, DISTT NEW DELHI-110028
111.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
MCB LAWRENCE ROAD BRANCH
COMMUNITY CENTRE,
LAWRENCE ROAD DISTT.
DELHI-110035
112.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
RAILWAY ROAD SONEPAT BRANCH
RAILWAY ROAD,
SONEPAT, HARYANA-131001
113.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SECT-5 ROHINI BRANCH
ROHINI, DELHI-110085
114.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
DAV SCHOOL CAMPUS BRANCH
DARBARI LAL,
DAV SCHOOL, BN BLOCK,
SHALIMAR BAGH,
DELHI-110088
115.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
GMV COLLEGE BRANCH
MURTHAL ROAD,
GVM GIRLS COLLEGE,
SONEPAT,
HARYANA-131001
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
2993
116.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
NATIONAL MARKET BRANCH
PASCHIM ENCLAVE
PLOT NO 2 & 3,
LOCAL SHOPPING COMPLEX,
BLOCK F, 1ST FLOOR
OPPOSITE NATIONAL MARKET,
PASCHIM ENCLAVE, DELHI-110087
117.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
GOHANA BRANCH
BARODA ROAD,
DISTT. SONEPAT,
HARYANA-131301
118.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
G.T. ROAD MURTHAL BRANCH
GT ROAD DIST-SONEPAT,
HARYANA-131027
119.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
MODEL TOWN SONEPAT BRANCH
NEAR OLD COURTS, ROHTAK ROAD,
SONEPAT, HARYANA-131001
120.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SME KUNDLI BRANCH
JANTI ROAD, KUNDLI,
SONEPAT,HARYANA-131028
121.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
POOTH KALAN BRANCH
BLOCK KANJAHWALA POOTH
KALAN, NEW DELHI-110041
122.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
KARALA BRANCH
STATE BANK OF INDIA,
KARALA, NEW DELHI-110081
123.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
RAMA MARKET BRANCH
PITAMPURA
NEW DELHI-110034
124.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
BADMALIK BRANCH
PO-PS RAI , SONEPAT,
HARYANA-131029
125.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
JJAGSI BRANCH
AGSI, TEHSIL-GOHANA,
DISTT-SONEPAT,
HARYANA-124319
126.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
NEW DELHI JOUNTI BLOCK BRANCH
JOUNTI VILLAGE,
NEW DELHI-110081
127.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
GHARWAL BRANCH
VPO-GHARWAL,
DISTT-SONEPAT,
HARYANA-131030
128.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SONEPAT MINI SECTT BRANCH
MINI SECRETARIAT,
SONIPAT, HARYANA-131001
129.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
Y.S. MODEL SCHOOL BRANCH
PHASE I, BUDH VIHAR,
NEW DELHI-110086
130.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
ROHINI BRANCH
CSC-II, SECTOR-13,
DDA MARKET, FIRST FLOOR,
ROHINI, DELHI-110034
131.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
GANNAUR BRANCH
CHOTIMANDI,
RYL. RD.GANAUR,
SONEPAT, HARYANA-131101
132.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
RACPC, NARAINA INDUSTRIAL
AREA BRANCH
DELHI59, COMMUNITY CENTRE,
NARAINA INDUSTRIAL AREA,
NEW DELHI-110028
133.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
DELHI NARELA BRANCH
D160D160, 1ST FLOOR,
FC-IV,DSIDC INDUSTRIAL
COMPLEX,
NARELA, DELHI-110001
134.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
GOHANA (AM) BRANCH
ANAJ MANDI, GOHANA,
SONEPAT, HARYANA-136128
135.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
ASHOK VIHAR BRANCH
SHAKTI NAGAR EXTENSION,
ASHOK VIHAR, PHASE 3,
NEW DELHI -110052
136.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
HASTSAL AREA BRANCH
VIKASPURI (HASTAL AREA),
NEW DELHI-110018
137.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SARAGTHAL BRANCH
H.NO.577, PWD ROAD,
VILL & POST-SARAGTHAL,
DISTT-SONIPAT,
HARYANA-131305
2994 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
138.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
GOHANA MINI SECTT BRANCH
NEW BUILDING,
SONEPAT ROAD GOHANA,
HARYANA-131301
139.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
NANGLOI JAT BRANCH
K-61, ADHYAPAK NAGAR,
MAIN NAJAFGARH ROAD,
NEAR NARAIN DHARAMKANTA,
NANGLOI,
NEW DELHI-110041
140.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
EAST PUNJABI BAGH BRANCH
28/12, EAST PANJABI BAGH,
NEW DELHI-110026
141.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SECTOR 8 R.C. COMPLEX ROHINI
BRANCH P.B. NO.10005, BALAJI
PLAZA,
SECTOR-8, ROHINI,
DELHI-110085
142.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
WAZIRPUR, DELHI BRANCH
R G CITY CENTRE BLOCK
B LSC LAWRENCE ROAD,
DELHI-110035
143.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
AVTAR ENCLAVE
PASCHIM VIHAR BRANCH
PLOT NO.182,
AVTAR ENCLAVE,
PACHIM VIHAR,
NEW DELHI-110063
नई दिल्ली, 5 अक् तूबर, 2020
का.आ. 1051.—केंद्रीय सरकार, रािभाषा (संघ के िासकीय प्रयोिनों के जलए प्रयोग) जनयम, 1976
(1927 में य ा संिोजित) के जनयम 10 के उृ जनयम (4) के अनुसरण में भारतीय स्ट् टेट बैंक के सूचीबद्ध िा ाओं को
अजिसूजचत करती िज, जिनके 20% से अजिक कमाचाररयों ने हिंिी का कायासािक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर जलया िज : -
क्र.सं.
बैंक का नाम
िा ाओं की सं्या
1.
भारतीय स्ट् टेट बैंक
32
कुल
32
[फा. सं. 11016/2/2017-हिं.(अजि.)]
रािीव कुमार, सिायक जनिेिक (रािभाषा)
रािभाषा जनयम 10(4) के अंतगात अजिसूजचत कराने के जलए िा ाओं की सूची
1.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
बरृाईगुड़ा िा ा
बरृाईगुड़ा मु्य रोड़,
जिला : कोराृुट
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन : 764043
2.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
आंबृुआ िा ा
नषहसंि बालािी जनवास,
आंबृुआ मु्य रोड़,
आंबृुआ
जिला : कोराृुट
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 7600107
3.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
बज्रकोट िा ा
बालुगााँ
जिला : ृुरी
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन : 752030
4.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
लोछाृड़ा िा ा
लोछाृड़ा रोड़,
ब्रह्मृुर
जिला : गंिाम
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन : 760001
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
2995
5.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
जबषमकटक िा ा
सल्ट कष्णा स्ट्रीट, जबषमकटक
जिला : रायगड़ा
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन : 765019
6.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
गुनुृुर बािार िा ा
गांिी ृजब्लक स्ट्कूल के सामने, गुनुृुर
जिला : रायगड़ा
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन : 765022
7.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
रटकीरी िा ा
(यूएआईएल कैंृस)
जिला : रायगड़ा
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन : 765015
8.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
दिगृिंडी िा ा
मु्य रोड़, दिगृिंडी
जिला :गंिाम
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन : 761012
9.
भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
कोंकरड़ा िा ा
जिला : गंिाम
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन : 761114
10. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
एसएमई िा ा
प्र म तल, जमराजनया टावर
गांिी मागा, अनुगुल
जिला: अनुगुल
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 759122
11. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
कुमुसी िा ा
प्लॉट सं्या - 2022, ढेंकानाल
जिला: ढेंकानाल
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 759019
12. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
एनटीृीसी (टीटीृीएस) कजम्ृस िा ा
िाउस नंबर-3R/2, सजक्टर-II
टीटीृीएस कजम्ृस, तालचेर
जिला: अनुगुल
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 759101
13. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ृीबीबी िा ा प्लॉट नंबर- 925
6 वां लेन, अमलाृड़ा
जिला: अनुगुल
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 759122
14. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
स्ट्टेिन बािार िा ा
प्लॉट नंबर. 74/7069
जिवम टावर, प्र म तल,
मजन रोड, ढेंकानाल
जिला: ढेंकानाल
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 759013
15. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
बड़ जत्रजबड़ िा ा
जिला-अनुगुल
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 759117
16. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
ृिमृुर िा ा वाया-राईसुयान
जिला-केंिुझर
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 752013
17. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सिरृड़ा िा ा
जिला-केंिुझर
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 752016
2996 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
18. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िुसूरी िा ा
जिला-भद्रक
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 756119
19. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िामझड़ी िा ा
जिला-बालेश्वर
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 756126
20. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
केंिुआृड़ा िा ा
जिला-भद्रक
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 756112
21. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
नीलजगरर िा ा रािनीलजगरी
जिला-बालेश्वर
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 756040
22. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
रुृसा िा ा
जिला-बालेश्वर
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 756022
23. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
बजलयाृाल िा ा
जिला-बालेश्वर
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 756026
24. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
बस्ट्ता िा ा मजन रोड, बस्ट्ता बािार
जिला-बालेश्वर
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन:756029
25. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
भूआसुणी िा ा कुसुमबंि
जिला-मयूरभंि
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 757092
26. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
कजप्तृिा िा ा
जिला-मयूरभंि
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 757040
27. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
श्यामा ूंटा िा ा
जिला-मयूरभंि
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 757049
28. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
भूषण स्ट्टील प्लांट िा ा
नरेंद्रृुर, कुसुृंगा, मेरामुंडुली
जिला: ढेंकानाल
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 759121
29. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
बोइंडा िा ा दकिोरगंि
जिला: अनुगुल
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 759127
30. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
जडजमररमुंडा, िा ा
दकिोरनगर, प्रिान कॉम्प्लेक्स,
ृुजलस स्ट्टेिन के सामने
रािदकिोरनगर
जिला: अनुगुल
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 759126
31. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
िमृड़ा िा ा
जिला : केंद्राृड़ा
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन : 754244
32. भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक
सििेव ूंटा िा ा
सििेव ूंटा ृुजलस स्ट्टेिन के सामने
जिला: बालेश्वर
राज्य: ओजडिा
जृन: 756001
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
2997
New Delhi, the 5th October, 2020
S.O. 1051.—In pursuance of sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Languages (Use for official
purposes of the Union) Rules, 1976 (as amended in 1987), the Central Government, hereby notifies the listed
Branches of State Bank of India, more than 80% of the staff whereof have acquired the working knowledge of
Hindi:-
Serial No.
Name of the Bank
Number of Breanches
1.
State Bank of India
32
Total
32
[F. No. 11016/2/2017-OL(Noti.)]
RAJIV KUMAR, Assistant Director (OL)
LIST OF BRANCHES TO BE NOTIFIED UNDER RULE 10 (4) OF OFFICIAL LANGUAGE
RULE, 1976
1.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
BAIPARIGUDA BRANCH
BAIPARIGUDA MAIN ROAD
DIST : KORAPUT
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 764043
2.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
AMBAPUA BRANCH
NRUSINGHA BALAJI NIWAS
AMBAPUA MAIN ROAD, AMBAPUA
DIST : GANJAM
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 760010
3.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
BAZARKOT BRANCH
VIA BALUGAON
DIST : PURI
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 752030
4.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
LOCHHAPADA BRANCH
LOCHHAPADA ROAD
BERHAMPUR
DIST : GANJAM
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 760001
5.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
BISAMKATAK BRANCH
SALT KRISHNA STREET
BISAMKATAK
DIST : RAYAGADA
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 765019
6.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
GUNUPUR BAZAR BRANCH
IN FRONT OF GANDHI PUBLIC SCHOOL
P.O.GUNUPUR
DIST : RAYAGADA
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 765022
7.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
TIKIRI BRANCH (UAIL CAMPUS)
DIST : RAYAGADA
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 765015
8.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
DIGAPAHANDI BRANCH
MAIN ROAD, DIGAPAHANDI
DIST : GANJAM
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 761012
9.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
KANKARADA BRANCH
DIST : GANJAM
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 761114
10.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SME BRANCH
1ST FLOOR, MEERANEEYA TOWER
GANDHI MARG
DIST : ANGUL
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 759122
11.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
KUMUSI BRANCH
PLOT NO- 8028, DHENKANAL
DIST : DHENKANAL
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 759019
12.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
NTPC (TTPS) CAMPUS BRANCH
HOUSE NO-3R/2, SECTOR-II
TTPS CAMPUS, TALCHER
DIST : ANGUL
2998 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 759101
13.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
PBB BRANCH
PLOT NO. 925, 6TH LINE,
AMALAPADA
DIST : ANGUL
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 759122
14.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
STATION BAZAR BRANCH
PLOT NO. 74/7069, SHIVAM TOWER,
1ST FLOOR, MAIN ROAD
DIST : DHENKANAL
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 759013
15.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
BADA TRIBIDA BRANCH
DIST - ANGUL
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 759117
16.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
PADMAPUR BRANCH
RAISUAN
DIST : KEONJHAR
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 758013
17.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SAHARPARA BRANCH
DIST : KEONJHAR
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 758016
18.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
DHUSURI BRANCH
DIST : BHADRAK
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 756119
19.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
JAMJHADI BRANCH
DIST : BALASORE
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 756126
20.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
KENDUAPADA BRANCH
DIST : BHADRAK
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 756112
21.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
NILAGIRI BRANCH
RAJ NILGIRI
DIST : BALASORE
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 756040
22.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
RUPSA BRANCH
DIST : BALASORE
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 756028
23.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
BALIAPAL BRANCH
DIST : BALASORE
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 756026
24.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
BASTA BRANCH
MAIN ROAD, BASTA BAZAR
DIST : BALASORE
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 756029
25.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
BHUASUNI BRANCH
KUSUMBANDH
DIST : MAYURBHANJ
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 757092
26.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
KAPTIPADA BRANCH
DIST : MAYURBHANJ
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 757040
27.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SHYAMAKHUNTA BRANCH
DIST : MAYURBHANJ
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 757049
28.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
BHUSAN STEEL PLANT BRANCH
NARENDERPUR
KUSUPANGA, MERAMUNDALI
DIST : DHENKANAL
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 759121
29.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
BOINDA BRANCH
KISHOREGANJ,
DIST : ANGUL
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 759127
30.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
DIMIRIMUNDA BRANCH
KISHORENAGAR, PRADHAN COMPLEX,
IN FRONT OF POLICE STATION
RAJKISHORENAGAR
DIST : ANGUL
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 759126
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
2999
31.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
JAMPARA BRANCH
DIST : KENDRAPADA
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 754244
32.
STATE BANK OF INDIA
SAHADEVKHUNTA BRANCH
NEAR P.S. SAHADEVKHUNTA
DIST : BALASORE
STATE: ODISHA
PIN : 756001
नई दिल्ली, 5 अक् तूबर, 2020
का.आ. 1052.—केंद्रीय सरकार, रािभाषा (संघ के िासकीय प्रयोिनों के जलए प्रयोग) जनयम, 1976
(1927 में य ा संिोजित) के जनयम 10 के उृ जनयम (4) के अनुसरण में यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया के सूचीबद्ध
िा ाओं को अजिसूजचत करती िज, जिनके 20% से अजिक कमाचाररयों ने हिंिी का कायासािक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर जलया िज
: -
क्र.सं.
बैंक का नाम
िा ाओं की सं्या
1.
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
218
कुल
218
[फा. सं. 11016/2/2017-हिं.(अजि.)]
रािीव कुमार, सिायक जनिेिक (रािभाषा)
रािभाषा जनयम 10(4) के अंतगात अजिसूचना िेतु िा ाओं की सूची एवं ृता
1
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
िुल्ल्िृुर िा ा
ग्राम व ृोस्ट्ट िुल्ल्िृुर
तिसील व ब्लॉक ि नीयां
जिला गािीृुर, उत्तर प्रिेि -275202
2
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
बजिलृुर िा ा
ग्राम व ृोस्ट्ट जतवारीृुर
तिसील मोिम्मिाबाि,
जिला गािीृुर
उत्तर प्रिेि -233227
3
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
मकिूमृुर िा ा
ग्राम व ृोस्ट्ट मकिूमृुर
तिसील सजिृुर
जिला गािीृुर
उत्तर प्रिेि - 233307
4
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
िायर िा ा ग्राम व
ृोस्ट्ट िायर ब्लॉक भािौरा
तिसील िमाजनया
जिला गािीृुर -232327
3000 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
5
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
मले ी िा ा
ग्राम मले ी
ृोस्ट्ट िमाागतृुर
जिला गािीृुर
उत्तर प्रिेि 233300
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, रायृुर
6
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जमड कॉृोरेट िा ा
ग्राउंड फ्लोर,
ऐिवयाा चैंबर
िी ई रोड, रायृुर 492001
7
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
चरोिा िा ा
ब्लॉक नं 8ए, प्लॉट नं. 9,
साउ वसुंिरा नगर,
िी ई रोड जभलाई 3
चरोिा 490025
2
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
मिारािा चौक िा ा
आनंि राि जबहल्डंग,
मिारािा चौक के समीृ
बोरसी रोड आििा नगर
िुगा -491001
9
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
यू एल ृी जभलाई िा ा
ग्राउंड फ्लोर
ब्लॉक नं 37,
वाकोडकर नर्सिंग िोम के समीृ
नेिप नगर वेस्ट्ट,
िुगा, जभलाई -490020
10
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
सीृट िा ा
नेिनल माल ृावर कॉृोरेिन के सामने
जबलासृुर मु्य रोड
सीृट, जबलासृुर -495006
11
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
नगरनार िा ा
माकेट रोड से एनएमडीसी गेट की तरफ,
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3001
तिसील नगरनार,
िगिलृुर -494341
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, ियृुर
12
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
िौलृुर िा ा
रािा ेड़ा बाइृास के नििीक
िी टी रोड,
िौलृुर, रािस्ट् ान
13
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
झोटवाड़ा िा ा
रामना ृूरी, कालवाड़ रोड
ियृुर, रािस्ट् ान -302102
14
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
न्यू सांगानेर रोड िा ा
प्लॉट नं 2, जववेक जविार,
न्यू सांगानेर रोड,
ियृुर रािस्ट् ान -302102
15
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
टोंक रोड ियृुर
प्लॉट नं के 7,
इन्कम टजक्स कॉलोनी
टोंक रोड, िुगााृुरा,
ियृुर रािस्ट् ान -302012
16
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जवद्यािर नगर िा ा
सेंरल स्ट्ृाइन,
ियृुर, रािस्ट् ान
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, ृटना
17
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जबजियााँ िा ा
सािेब टोला, चौरास्ट्ता रोड, जबजियान
जिला भोिृुर (आरा)
जबिार -202152
18
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
रहुई िा ा
डाकघर रहुई के नििीक
ृोस्ट्ट रहुई, जिला नालंिा,
जबिार 203119
3002 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
19
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
चंिौती िा ा
मगि कॉलोनी, रोड नं 11
फस्ट्टा िाउस, जसकररया मोड के नििीक,
ृोस्ट्ट चंिौती (गया),
जिला गया, जबिार -223001
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, प्रयागराि
20
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
बाबूगंि िा ा
मनकामेश्वर मंदिर के ृास
बाबूगंि बािार
ृोस्ट्ट बाबूगंि, तिसील फूलृुर
21
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
भरवारी िा ा
ृोस्ट्ट भरवारी,
जिला कौिाम्बी,
उत्तर प्रिेि -212021
22
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
मूरतगंि िा ा
िी टी रोड, मूरतगंि
तिसील चायल,
जिला कौिाम्बी,
उत्तर प्रिेि -212021
23
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
वजिा ास िा ा
ृोस्ट्ट िीरृुर (गोृीगंि)
जिला संत रजविास नगर,
उत्तर प्रिेि -221303
24
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
िंकरगढ़ िा ा
राम भवन चौरािा, िंकरगढ़
उत्तरप्रिेि -212102
25
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जसयारि िा ा
जसयारि मोड,
ग्राम एवं ृोस्ट्ट जसयारि
तिसील भिोिी,
जिला संत रजविास नगर- 221406
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3003
26
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
इटवा उृरवार िा ा
ृोस्ट्ट इटवा उृरवार बाल गोहवंि
ृेरोल ृंृ के सामने
ृोस्ट्ट मिारािगंि -221314
27
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
घुरृुर िा ा
ग्राम एवं ृोस्ट्ट घुरृुर,
तिसील बारा
इलािाबाि -212111
28
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
चुनार िा ा
सद्िुृुर मोिना ृोस्ट्ट चुनार
जिला जमिााृुर,
उत्तर प्रिेि -230304
29
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
िुजल्िृुर िा ा
ृोस्ट्ट ििर ृुर
ब्लॉक एवं तिसील ज्ञानृुर
संत रजविास नगर -221304
30
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
फूलृुर िा ा
कोतवाली रोड,
ृोस्ट्ट एवं तिसील फूलृुर -212402
31
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
्यों र िा ा
्यों र, बसवाृुर चौरािा
ग्राम ्यों र गुवाली ृोस्ट्ट माते ु
ब्लॉक अभोली
तिसील ज्ञानृुर -221404
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, समस्ट्तीृुर
32
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
अरेराि िा ा ,
अरेराि चौक ऑदफस अरेराि,
ृी
-
एस
– अरेराि,
ृूवी चंृारन, जबिार
33
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
अजियाृुर िा ा
3004 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
मााँ सरोि प्लाज़ा,ृोस्ट्ट अजियाृुर ,
मुिफ्फरृुर, जबिार – 842004
34
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
काली स्ट् ान-बेगूसराय िा ा
काजलस्ट् ान चौक,
ृोस्ट्ट-काली स्ट् ान ,
जिला – बेगुसराई ,
जबिार – 851101
35
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
िुरािा जमजसर भोरे िा ा
जमरगंि मेन रोड,
ृोस्ट्ट एवं ृीएस
-
भोरे,
जिला
-
गोृालगंि ,
जबिार – 841426
36
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
गुलाबबाग िा ा
राम मोजिनी चौक,
गुलाबबाग,ृुर्णाया
जबिार – 854326
37
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
घेघटा िा ा
गााँव+ृोस्ट्ट -घेघटा, ाना- छृरा, मुफ़सील, सारण ,
जबिार – 241301
38
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
झंझारृुर िा ा
मीरा कुंि रटबरेवाल लेन,
झंझारृुर रेलवे स्ट्टेिन ,
मिुबनी , जबिार – 847003
39
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
नवगजछया िा ा
ए
.
टी
.
-
मजन
रोड
,
ृोस्ट्ट
-
नवगजछया,ृी
.
एस
.
नवगजछया , भागलृुर ,
जबिार – 853204
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3005
40
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
मजरवा िा ा
जवकास माकेट,
मंझौली चौक मेन रोड,
मजरवा , जसवान ,
जबिार -841239
41
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
माली घाट िा ा
जवकास टावर बीएमृी 6,
िुगाा मंदिर मेन रोड,
मालीघाट , मुिफ्फरृुर ,
जबिार – 842001
42
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जमज़ााृुर – िरभंगा िा ा
जबभा ृजलेस,जनयर जमज़ााृुर चौक ,
िरभंगा , जबिार – 846004
43
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
रानी सकरृुरा िा ा
भास्ट्कर भवन,
इमली स्ट्टेिन के सामने,
ृो
+
गााँव
– रानीसकरृुरा
ृीएस – गंगौर ,
गजड़या , जबिार - 851204
44
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
रामृुर रत्नागर,
बजद्यना ृुर बलकुंडा,
िािीृुर, महुआ रोड,
ृी
.
ओ
-
बीरनल नसेन
,
वजिाली, जबिार – 844125
45
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
लौररया िा ा
एचृीसीएल कजम्ृस,
बगिा रोड मेन रोड,
लौररया , ृजिमी चंृारन ,
जबिार – 845453
3006 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
46
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जिविर िा ा
वाडा न .15 मजन रोड,ृोस्ट्ट जिविर,
जिविर, जबिार - 243329
47
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
सुगौली िा ा
सुगौली िा ा, स्ट्टेिन चौक,
बस स्ट्टैंड के जनकट, सुगौली,
बेजत्तया, जबिार – 845456
48
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
सूजतिारा राम िा ा
सूजतिारा ृो र,गााँव & ृोस्ट्ट –
सूजतिारा , सीतामढ़ी ,
जबिार – 843331
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, उियृुर
49
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
यूजनयन लोन ृॉइंट िा ा, उियृुर
ृिली मंजिल, हप्रंस प्लाज़ा
झालावाड़ रोड
जवज्ञान नगर कोटा -324005
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, ल नऊ
50
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
अल्लु नगर जडगुररया िा ा
अिालान प्लाज़ा
िरिोई बायृास,
आईआईएम रोड
ल नऊ -226020
51
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
क़जसरगंि िा ा
रानीबाग, क़जसरगंि,
बिराइच -271903
52
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
गोसाईगंि िा ा
तेिाृुर, गोसाईगंि
जिला फजिाबाि -227125
53
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
गौहसंिा िा ा
ग्राम व ृोस्ट्ट मल्लाृुर
जिला गोंडा -271001
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3007
54
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
डाभा सेमर िा ा
कोकाकोला फ़जक्टरी के ृास
फजिाबाि, इलािाबाि बायृास
ग्राम हुसजनगंि,
जिला फजिाबाि -222071
55
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
प्रानृुर िा ा
जचरकुरटया ृीर बाज़ार
बलरामृुर -271201
56
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जबिनौर िा ा
जबिनौर, ल नऊ -226002
57
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
यूजनयन लोन ृॉइंट, अलीगंि िा ा
िूसरी मंजिल, िारिा टावर,
कृूर ाला कॉम्प्लेक्स
अलीगंि, ल नऊ -226024
52
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
रुिौली िा ा
ृु्करृुरम स्ट्टेिन रोड
रुिौली,
जिला फजिाबाि -224140
59
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
सलेमृुर िा ा
प्रकािलोक कालोनी
िारिा अस्ट्ृताल के ृास
मोिान रोड, ल नऊ -227107
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, भोृाल
60
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
िुिालृुर िा ा
ृंचवटी ृररसर
रेलवे स्ट्टेिन गेट, फ्रीगंि
जृन -465333
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, गोर ृुर
61
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
िनी िा ा
िनी बािार, जसकरीगंि रोड
गोर ृुर, उत्तर प्रिेि -271232
3008 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
62
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
नटवा िा ा
अरािी सं्या 347
जनयर नटवा चौरािा
बांसृार, बझौली,
जिला मिारािगंि
उत्तर प्रिेि -273306
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, वाराणसी
63
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
क्षेत्र मिाप्रबंिक कायाालय
एस-2/632- ए चंद्रा चैंबसा
सेंरल िेल रोड,
जसकरौल -221002
64
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
अलीनगर िा ा,
मकान क्रमांक -32
मुगल चक,
मुगल सराय चंिौली
65
यूजनयन बैंक आफ इंजडया
एकौना िा ा,
ग्राम-एकौना,ृोस्ट्ट –अमाओं
सिबगंि, चंिौली
उत्तर प्रिेि - 232118
66
यूजनयन बैंक आफ इंजडया
गंगाृुर िा ा,
ग्राम-गंगाृुर ृोस्ट्ट –गंगाृुर
वाराणसी उत्तर प्रिेि - 221302
67
यूजनयन बैंक आफ इंजडया
ियाृुर िा ा,
ग्राम-ियाृुर
ृोस्ट्ट –अरािी लाइन
वाराणसी
उत्तर प्रिेि 221109
68
यूजनयन बैंक आफ इंजडया
तेिोृुर िा ा,
ग्राम-तेिोृुर, ृोस्ट्ट–नौबतृुर,
चंिौली उत्तर प्रिेि 232110
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3009
69
यूजनयन बैंक आफ इंजडया
ृलिीृट्टी िा ा,
ग्राम-ृलिीृट्टी , ृोस्ट्ट –भटौली
वाराणसी उत्तर प्रिेि 221208
70
यूजनयन बैंक आफ इंजडया
हृंडरा िा ा,
ग्राम-हृंडरा,
ृोस्ट्ट –हृंडरा
वाराणसी उत्तर प्रिेि -221206
71
यूजनयन बैंक आफ इंजडया
भट्टी िा ा,
अराज़ी क्र.- 1046,
1016, 1047 , 242 ,
भट्टी,वाराणसी
उत्तर प्रिेि -221009
72
यूजनयन बैंक आफ इंजडया
मुनारी िा ा,
ग्राम-मुनारी, ृोस्ट्ट –मुनारी
वाराणसी उत्तर प्रिेि -221008
73
यूजनयन बैंक आफ इंजडया
रामनगर िा ा,
ग्राम-रामनगर, ृोस्ट्ट –रामनगर, वाराणसी
उत्तर प्रिेि -221104
74
यूजनयन बैंक आफ इंजडया
लंका िा ा,
बी-, 17
-
ए
, सरस्ट्वती टोवर,
लंका, वाराणसी,
उत्तर प्रिेि - 221005
75
यूजनयन बैंक आफ इंजडया
सराय ृक्ववान िा ा,
ग्राम-सराय ृकवान , ृोस्ट्ट –संघती
चंिौली उत्तर प्रिेि - 232118
76
यूजनयन बैंक आफ इंजडया
सेवा िा ा, S-5/38-15-117,
3010 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
हवंिवाजसनी नगर, अिाली बाज़ार,
वाराणसी.चंिौली
उत्तर प्रिेि -232118
77
यूजनयन बैंक आफ इंजडया
जसरसी िा ा,
ग्राम माछीिान, ृोस्ट्ट जबसोरी
चंिौली उत्तर प्रिेि -232118
78
यूजनयन बैंक आफ इंजडया
अमरा िा ा,
ग्राम- अमरा ,ृोस्ट्ट- अमरा
चंिौली उत्तर प्रिेि -232105
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, िौनृुर
79
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
िगिीिृुर िा ा
ब्लॉक जसरकोनी, तिसील िौनृुर
जिला िौनृुर -222002
80
यूजनयन बैंक ओफ़फ़ंजडया
ता ाृुरब िा ा
ग्राम ृोस्ट्ट, ता ाृुरब,
ब्लॉक व तिसील िािगंि,
जिला िौनृुर,
उत्तर प्रिेि -223101
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, दिल्ली िजक्षण
81
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
उद्योग नगर िा ा
आई-12, डीएसआईडीसी इंडजस्ट्रयल काम्प्लेक्स ,
उद्योग नगर मेरो स्ट्टेिन के सामने,
उद्योग नगर ृोस्ट्ट नांगलोई, जडजस्ट्रक्ट दिल्ली
न्यू दिल्ली -110041
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, दिल्ली उत्तर
82
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
गौर जसटी िा ा
िॉृ न. 8,9,10,11,12,
सजक्टर 16 सी,
िेकेिी ृाम कोटा, गौर जसटी
83
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
नोएडा सेक्टर 51 िा ा
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3011
िमाा मार्काट िॉृ नो . 1&2,
जनयर रेड लाइट,
सेक्टर -51 नॉएडा,
गौतम बुद्ध नगर
84
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
नोएडा सेक्टर 143 िा ा
िॉृ न 138,139,140,141,142,
एकेबाना गली, गुलिन एकेबाना,
प्लॉट न GH-03/A,
सजक्टर 143 नोएडा
85
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
मयूर जविार फेि थ्री िा ा
अग्रवाल कोंडली प्लािा प्लाट नंबर 7,
जमक्स्ट्ड िाउहसंग स्ट्कीम एल एस सी १ ,
कोंडली
मयूर जविार -थ्री, दिल्ली
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, करनाल
86
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
नरवाना िा ा
दिलीृ चंि माकेट ,
अृोलो चौक के सामने
रेलवे रोड, नरवाना जिला,
जिला िीन्ि,
िररयाणा -126416
87
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
नारनौल िा ा
सजनी एन्क्लेव, बस स्ट्टैंड के ृास
नारनौल, जिला मिेंद्रगढ़
िररयाणा -123001
88
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
बावल िा ा
बनीृुर चौक, ियृुर रोड, बावल
ृोस्ट्ट बावल,
जिला रेवाड़ी,
िररयाणा -123501
89
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
र ौिा िा ा
3012 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
वाडा नंबर 9, दिल्ली रोड
सब्िी मंडी के जनकट,
र ौिा, सोनीृत,
िररयाणा -131402
90
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
हुडा सोनीृत िा ा
सेक्टर 14,
हुडा कॉम्प्लेक्स,
दिल्ली रोड
जिला सोनीृत,
िररयाणा -131001
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, रांची
91
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
टंडवा िा ा,
ग्राम- टंडवा, डाकघर- टंडवा
जिला - चतरा, झार ण्ड
जृन – 225321
92
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
रसोइया िमना िा ा ,
ग्राम + ृोस्ट्ट - रसोइया िमना
िुगाा मंदिर के ृास,
जिला – ििारीबाग ,
झार ंड -225405
93
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
ृाण्डु िा ा
ग्राम + ृोस्ट्ट - ृाण्डु, ब्लॉक – ृाण्डु, जिला –
ृलामू,
झार ंड ,जृन - 222124
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, कोल्िाृुर
94
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया ,
अिलकोट िा ा
3/2814/ िोंगडे काम्प्लेक्स ,
एस टी स्ट्टैंड, स्ट्टेिन रोड
ृो अिलकोट ,
जडजस्ट्रक्ट सोलाृुर ,
मिाराष्ट्र -413216
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3013
95
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
फलटण िा ा
जिवािी नगर, ररंग रोड
वाई सी कॉलेि के सामने,
प्लॉट नं 3320/1, फलटण, सतारा
मिाराष्ट्र -415523
96
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
वाई िा ा
लक्ष्मी िॉल 132/2 ए,
सोंगीरवाड़ी
वाई, तालुका वाई
सातारा,
मिाराष्ट्र -415415
97
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जिरवल िा ा
वास्ट्मती जबहल्डंग,
िाििीत चौक
एस टी स्ट्टैंड जिरवल,
सतारा मिाराष्ट्र -415415
98
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
यूएलृी सोलाृुर
िरि चैंबसा, 560/59,
साउ सिर बाज़ार, कैंृ सोलाृुर
मिाराष्ट्र -413003
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, अिमिाबाि
99
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
सीएमएस, अिमिाबाि
प्र म तल, सीएमएस, सेवा िा ा,
कागो मोटर के सामने,
सीिी रोड, जिला अिमिाबाि
गुिरात -320006
100
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जमड कॉृोरेट िा ा
भूतल, प्रेमचंि िाउस
172/1, आश्रम रोड
अिमिाबाि, गुिरात -320009
3014 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, मुंबई िजक्षण
101
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
कफ ृरेड िा ा
625 िी डी सोमानी मेमोररयल स्ट्कूल
िी डी सोमानी मागा, कफ ृरेड,
मुंबई -400 005
102
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
लालबाग िा ा
िॉृ नं 1,2 एवं 3, अनंत अृाटामेंट
मेघवाडी, डॉ एस एस राव रोड
लालबाग, मुंबई -400 012
103
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
लोअर ृरेल िा ा
यिवंत भवन, भूतल
िीृक टॉकीि, ृांडुरंग बुिकर मागा
लोअर ृरेल,
मुंबई -400 013
104
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
वडाला ृजिम िा ा
वडाला टेलीफोन एक्सचेंि ृररसर क्र 2
भूतल, िी डी आंबेडकर रोड
नायगांव वडाला (ृजिम),
मुंबई -400019
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, ृुणे
105
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ओतूर िा ा,
ओंकर िाइर्टस, ब्रिमनवाड़ा रोड,,
ग्राम ृंचायत जमलकत नंबर 4152,
ृोस्ट्ट ओतूर,
तालुका िुन्नर ृुणे,
मिाराष्ट्र-412409
106
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
कुरुली िा ा
समषजध् ि जबहल् डंग, िा. क्र.1945,
गेट नं. 07, मु.ृो. कुरुली, तालुका ेड,
जि. ृुणे, मिाराष्ट्र
जृन -410501
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3015
107
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
कान्िेसार िा ा
िॉृ क्र 6,7 व 8
अृर ग्राउंड फ्लोर,
कामर्िायल काम्प्लेक्स,
ेड ृबाल रोड,
ृुणे, जृन – 410505
108
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
राड़ी िा ा
िुकान न 3,
अरीसा एवेन्यू,
कोल्ते ृाटील डाऊनटाउन,
राड़ी, ृुणे,
मिाराष्ट्र-411014
109
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
डीएसके जवश्व िा ा
6, वसुिा, डीएसके जवश्व िायरी,
ृुणे
मिाराष्ट्र-411041
110
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ृुणे ररटेल आजस्ट्त-ृुणे कैंृ
2 ए, अरोरा टावसा 9,
मोलेदिना रोड,
ृुणे कजम्ृ,
जि.ृुणे ,
मिाराष्ट्र,
जृन - 411 001.
111
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
बालेवाड़ी िा ा
िॉृ क्र 1व 2,
श्री रेसीडेंसी ,
एस क्र 6/5/2,
बानेर - बालेवाड़ी रोड,
बालेवाड़ी, बाणेर,
ृुणे, मिाराष्ट्र- 411045
3016 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
112
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जमड कॉृोरेट िा ा
285, ताराबाघ सोसाईटी,
कोरेगााँव ृाका,
ृुणे मिाराष्ट्र – 411001
संृका : 020-26130089
113
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
यू एल ृी अिमिनगर
फरित टावर, प्लॉट नंबर 2,
ृुणे औरंगाबाि रास्ट्ता,
स्ट्टेिन रोड अिमिनगर ृुणे,
मिाराष्ट्र- 414001
114
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
सेवा िा ा ृुणे
ृीएमटी जबहल्डंग, स्ट्वारगेट,
ृुणे मिाराष्ट्र-411042
115
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
हसंिगढ़ रोड िा ा
प्लॉट क्र 41 िनलक्ष्मी सोसाइटी,
17/3 ऑफ हसंिगढ़ रोड
जिला ृुणे मिाराष्ट्र,
जिला ृुणे,
मिाराष्ट्र - 411 051
116
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
अंचलीय ले ा ृरीक्षा कायाालय
ृरवानी एस्ट्टेट, 229/3 िे. एन रोड,
भेवनी ृे , ृीबी नंबर-1602, ृुणे,
मिाराष्ट्र-411042
117
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
कोरेगांव ृाका िा ा
ताराबाग सोसाइटी,
कोरेगांव ृाका,ृुणे,
मिाराष्ट्र,जिला ृुणे,
मिाराष्ट्र - 411 001
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3017
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, चंडीगढ़
118
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
भटौली िा ा
गांव व डाक अिोली,
एसवीएसडी कॉलेि
जिमाचल प्रिेि
119
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
नारायणगढ़ िा ा
जमनी सजचवालय के सामने
चंडीगढ़ नािन रोड, नारायणगढ़
जिला अंबाला, िररयाणा
120
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ृालमृुर िा ा
गीतांिली कॉम्प्लेक्स मेन बाज़ार
स्ट्टेट बैंक के नििीक
ृालमृुर, कांगरा जिला
जिमाचल प्रिेि -176061
121
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
डबवाली िा ा
गांिी चौक, ृुरानी अनाि मंडी,
मंडी डबवाली,
जिला जसरसा, िररयाणा
122
यूजनयन बैंक ओफ़फ़ंजडया
गग्गल िा ा
िमािाला रोड
गग्गल गााँव
123
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
चंिेड़कलां िा ा
गााँव व जिला चंिेड़कलां
तिसील टोिाना
फतेिाबाि िररयाणा
124
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
िीवाना िा ा
गााँव व ृोस्ट्ट िीवाना, उृ-तिसील िा ल
तिसील टोिाना
जिला फतेिाबाि
125
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
बरवाला ृंचकुला िा ा
बंसल कॉम्प्लेक्स
बरवाला ृंचकुला
3018 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, िालंिर
126
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
िारीवाल िा ा
िी टी रोड,
नये बस स्ट्टैंड के ृास
िारीवाल,
जिला गुरिासृुर,
ृंिाब -143519
127
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
कलानौर िा ा
ग्राम ृोस्ट्ट कलानौर
ृंिाब नेिनल बैंक के सामने,
बटाला रोड,
जिला गुरिासृुर,
ृंिाब -143512
128
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ृट्टी िा ा
जमल्क जचहलंग सेंटर के ृास, वाडा नं. 2 मेन रोड,
ृट्टी तरण रोड
ृंिाब -143416
129
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
एसएसआई िालंिर िा ा
एम 5 इंडजस्ट्रयल एररया
िालंिर ृंिाब -144004
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, नाजसक
130
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
चालीसगांव िा ा
ग्राउंड फ्लोर,30/ए प्लाट नं. 3
अजभनव स्ट्कूल के समाने
भड़गोंव रोड, चालीसगाव,
चालीसगाव,
131
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
यू एल ृी औरंगाबाि
िॉृ क़ 3-4 कौस्ट्तुभ प्लाज़ा,
प्लॉट क़ 219 सम ा नगर,
औरंगाबाि
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, मुंबई (ृजिम)
132
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जवरार ृूवा िा ा
िॉृ न. 1, 2 & 3,
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3019
चोरगे टावसा, फूलृाड़ा रोड, जवरार ृूवा,
जिला- ाणे -401303
133
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जसप्ज़ मुंबई ओवरसीि िा ा
भूतल, यूजनट न. 007,
ब्लॉक न. 2,
सीप्ज़, कॉम्प्लेक्स,
िोगेश्वरी- जवक्रोली हलंक रोड,
मरोल अद्योजगक क्षेत्र, अंिेरी (ृू),
मुंबई - 400096
134
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ििानु िा ा
सं े बंगलो, अंबवािी, ईरानी रोड
ृोस्ट्ट- ििानु रोड,
उृमंडल – ििानु
जिला- ाणे ,
मिाराष्ट्र – 401602
135
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
यारी रोड िा ा
सा ाक िाइर्टस
जप्रयििानी सीएचएस जलमेटेड,
िालीमार बेकरी लेन,
ऑृोजिट- सीडबल्यूसी स्ट्कूल,
वसोवा, अंिेरी ृजिम - 400061
136
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
हलंक रोड िा ा
िॉृ न. 1,2,3,4
अग्रवाल इंदफजनटी िाइर्टस,
सीटीएस न. 149/बी,
ऑरलेम, मावे रोड,
ऑफ हलंक रोड,
मालाड ृजिम
– 400064
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, जत्रवेन्द्रम
137
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
एडमूलिल िा ा
कोजडयाडू भवन
3020 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
जनयर ृोस्ट्ट ऑदफस, अयूर
कोल्लम -691533
138
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
दकजलमनूर िा ा
एस प्लाज़ा, एम सी रोड,
दकजलमनूर
केरल -695601
139
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
चावडा िा ा
नंिनन जबहल्डंग नं 17/1095
चावडा ृंचायत कायाालय के सामने
कोल्लम, केरल -691523
140
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जतरुमला िा ा
िृा जवलास
मांगि जतरुमला, ृी ओ जत्रवेन्द्रम
केरल -695006
141
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
नलनजचरा िा ा
जबहल्डंग नं केृी III/230
नलनजचरा, ृीओ कुरुषादि िंक्िन
नलनजचरा जतरुवन्तृुरम
केरल -695015
142
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ृनचमुडु-वेल्लरिा िा ा
कषृा ृजलेस,
केएसआरटीसी बस स्ट्टैंड के सामने
वेल्लारिा, ृीओ केरल -695505
143
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ृॉलीमुक्कु िा ा
एसएस टावर, मिन नाड़ा
ृाजलमुक्कु , ृीओ कोल्लम
जडजस्ट्रक्ट केरल -695501
144
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
बलरामृुरम िा ा
कष्ण, एनएच रोड
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3021
बलरामृुरम
जत्रवेन्द्रम, केरल -695501
145
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
वट्टीयूरकावू िा ा
टी सी 6/404-1,
रुजक्मणी आकेड
जतरुवन्तृुरम,जिला,
केरल -695013
146
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
वेंमोंय िा ा
सेंट मजररस आ ोडॉक्स चचा
वेंमोंय ृीओ चेंगन्नूर,
केरल -629509.
147
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जवहषंिम िा ा
जमनी मंदिरम
ृुल्लूकोणाम, जवहषंिम,
ृी ओ जत्रवेन्द्रम
केरल -695521
148
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
कुण्डरा कोल्लम िा ा
ृु्ृमंगलम भवन,
एन िच 208
(क्यूएस रोड़),
कुण्डरा ृी.ओ., कोल्लम जिला,
केरल -691501
149
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
कलवूर िा ा
जछलोरा भवन, कलवुर उत्तर िंक्िन
एनएच 47, आलप्ृुषा, कलवूर
केरल -690521
150
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
कायम्कुलम िा ा
भवन सं्या 30/2032,
िषाा ृयाटन भवन,
आचाािेवी, ृुज यडम,
3022 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
कायम्कुलम, आलप्ृी जिला,
केरल -690502
151
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
कोजडअर िा ा
आििा टी सी
4/927(1), 4/927(2), जत्रवेन्द्रम,
केरल -695003
152
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
तजकाड िा ा
गंगोत्री जबहल्डंग, एयर रोड,
तजकाड, जतरुवनन्तृुरम
केरल -695014
153
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जतरुवनन्तृुरम ररटेल असेट िा ा
यूजनयन बैंक भवन एम िी रोड,
स्ट्टेचू िंक्िन
जतरुवनन्तृुरम (जत्रवेन्द्रम)
केरल -695001
154
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
नेडुमंगाड़ िा ा
सरस्ट्वती कॉम्प्लेक्स
नेडुमंगाड़, जतरुवनन्तृुरम
जिला, केरल -695541
155
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
नेय्यारट्टंकारा िा ा
एस एन डी ृी नेय्यारट्टंकारा
यूजनयन जबहल्डंग,
नेय्यारट्टंकारा ृोस्ट्ट ऑदफस
जत्रवेन्द्रम, केरल -695121
156
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ृुिप्ृुरा िा ा
जिवानी मीनारम,
कॉृोरेिन मंडी के सामने,
ृुिप्ृुरा
जतरुवनन्तृुरम,
केरल -695012
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3023
157
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ृ नाृुरम िा ा
प्लाजवलइल भवन, मेन रोड कोल्लम जिला
ृ नाृुरम
केरल -629695
158
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ृुनलूर िा ा
सारा िॉहृंग कॉम्प्लेक्स
टी बी िंक्िन
वालकोड ृो ओ ृुनलूर-ृ नाृुरम रोड
कोल्लम जिला, केरल -690331
159
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ृोतनकोड िा ा
एल्लाबीं टावसा,
सेक्टर क्र 472/13,
ृो नकोड-मंगलृुरम रोड
जतरुवनन्तृुरम
जिला-केरल -695524
160
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
मणकाड िा ा
केृीएन प्लाज़ा
मणकाड िंक्िन,
जतरुवनन्त्ृुरम,
केरल -695009
161
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
मानार िा ा
भवन सं्या 944/4,
लक्ष्मी भवन,
कुरट्टीसेरी, मानार
ृी ओ अलजप्ृ जिला,
केरल -629622
162
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
मावेजलकारा कुरुजतयाड िा ा
के आर यू एम भवन
ेिाकारा ृी ओ
आल्लजृ जिला,
मावेलीकारा,
केरल -690107
3024 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
163
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
वत्ताृारा करकुलम िा ा
लक्ष्मी िॉहृंग मॉल
वत्ताृारा ृी ओ
जत्रवेन्द्रम, केरल -695022
164
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
वकाला िा ा
ृीवीएम भवन,
टेंृल रोड वकाला ृी ओ
जतरुवनन्तृुरम जिला
मजिानाम, केरल -695141
165
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
वजलयामला िा ा , जचत्रा,
भारतीय अंतररक्ष जवज्ञान एवं प्रौद्योजगकी
संस्ट् ान,
प्रोद्योजगकी कजम्ृस वजलयामला नेडुमंगाड़
जतरुवनन्तृुरम जिला,
केरल -695547
166
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जश्रकारीयम िा ा मणिांजत भवन,
जश्रकारीयम आकुलन रोड
जतरुवनन्तृुरम
जिला केरल -695017
167
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
सेवा िा ा जतरुवनन्तृुरम
िूसरी मंजिल, यूजनयन बैंक भवन
ृो बॉक्स क्र 307, एम िी रोड, स्ट्टेचू िंक्िन,
जतरुवनन्तृुरम जिला
केरल -695001
168
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
िररप्ृाड िा ा
रेतनममा टावसा,
एन एच 47,
सरकारी अस्ट्ृताल के ृास
िररप्ृाड, केरल -690514
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, जविा ाृट्टनम
169
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
सृावरम िंक्िन िा ा
प्र म तल, डी नं 10/134,
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3025
जृ ाृुरम रोड
श्री िनुमान मंदिर के जनकट,
सृावरम िंक्िन
काकीनाड़ा 530005,
आंध्रा प्रिेि
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, चेन्नई
170
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ृोटा ब्लेयर िा ा
10, गांिी भवन,
अबेरिीन बािार,
ृोटा ब्लेयर
जिला अंडमान,
अंडमान जनकोबार द्वीृ समूि
जृन -744101
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, भुवनेश्वर
171
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
आ गढ़ िा ा
लॉ कॉलेि रोड,
ब्लॉक कॉलोनी,
आ गढ़
172
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
ओड़ागांव िा ा
टेम्ृल रोड ओड़ागांव, नयागढ़,
173
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
कुंिबनगढ़-िसृला िा ा
गोृीना माकेट कॉम्प्लेक्स,
प्लॉट नं. – 2324/3053,
िुगाा बािार,
िसृला ब्लॉक के ृास
174
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
कामाक्ष्यानगर िा ा
श्रीराम रेजसडेंसी, वाडा नंबर - 6,
कामाक्ष्यानगर
175
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
गोृालृुर िा ा
ृत् रा छक,
बािािुरृेटा,
बरिमृुर- 760007
3026 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
176
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
चंडीछक िा ा
नया बाज़ार छक, ृारािीृ रोड़
कटक- 753004
177
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
चावजलयागंि िा ा
नया बाज़ार छक, ृारािीृ रोड़
कटक- 753004
178
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
ियरामृुर िा ा
ियरामृुर ृंचायत ऑदफस,
भोगराई,
बालासोर - 756032
179
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
िलेश्वर िा ा
बड़ा बािार, िलेश्वर
बालेश्वर -756032
180
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
िािृुर रोड िा ा
चोरिा रोड,िािृुर रोड,
जिला-िािृुर,
उड़ीसा- 755019
181
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
तालचर िा ा
वाडा न॰ 12, िांजडिुआ छक
तालचर, अंगुल – 759100
182
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
नारायणृुर िा ा
जनयर श्रीरामृुर ग्राम ृंचायत
श्रीरामृुर,लक्षमीना ,राइबजनया,
बालासोर- 756032
183
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
ृट्टामुंडइा िा ा
बस स्ट्टजड के ृास
गिानना माकेट कॉम्प्लेक्स,
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3027
ृट्टामुंडइा,
केन्द्रृाडा- 754215
184
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
बालीचन्द्रृुर िा ा
ृोस्ट्ट ऑदफस बालीचंद्रृुर,
ृतारािृुर के ृास,
जिला िािृुर – 754205
185
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया,
बासुिेवृुर िा ा
ृोस्ट्ट ऑदफस रोड बासुिेवृुर,
भद्रक,
ओजडिा – 756162
186
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
भंिनगर िा ा
सरकारी अस्ट्ृताल के सामने,
भंिनगर
जिला- गंिाम,
ओड़ीिा-761 126.
187
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
मंगलृुर िा ा
ृोस्ट्ट ऑदफस मंगलृुर,
कजणकाृाड़ा के ृास,
जिला िािृुर,
ओड़ीिा- 754205
188
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
मकात नगर िा ा
एबीआईटी कजम्प्स सेक्टर-1,
सीडीए,
मकात नगर अजभनव जबडानासी, कटक,
ओड़ीिा- 753014
189
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
महुरा िा ा
सी वी रमन
इंिीनीयररंग कॉलेि कजम्ृस, िनला,
जिला - ुिाा, भुवनेश्वर,
ओड़ीिा- 752054
3028 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
190
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
रेमुना-िानुगंि िा ा
गणेश्वरृुर, िानुगंि, बालेश्वर
ओड़ीिा- 756019
191
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
रायरंगृुर िा ा
प्लॉट नंबर - 54/1066,
वाडा नंबर - 9, रायरंगृुर,
ओड़ीिा- 757043
192
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
लुईस रोड िा ा
प्लॉट नंबर 2262,
लूइस रोड, ुिाा,
भुवनेश्वर, ओड़ीिा- 751002
193
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
श्रीकोना िा ा
प्लॉट नं. 3237/6176 (ृी),
श्रीकोना,
िमलेट - जमिााृुर,
ओड़ीिा- 752025
194
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ििीि नगर िा ा
ओएसृीएच एंड डब्लूएक्स जलजमटेड. कम्ृॉउन्ड,
िनृ ृो. भोईनगर भुवनेश्वर,
जिला : ुिाा ओड़ीिा- 751022
195
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
सत्यबािी साक्षीगोृाल िा ा
एसबीआई के सामने मेन रोड.
ृो. साक्षीगोृाल
जिला :ृुरी
ओड़ीिा- 752014
196
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
हिंजिलीकट िा ा, रजश्म प्लािा,
चौिरी माकेट कांृलजक्स.
मेन रोड हिंजिलकट,
जिला: गंिाम
ओड़ीिा-761 102.
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3029
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, बेलगावी
197
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
गिग िा ा
श्री एस के कबािर जबहल्डंग
एृीएमसी याडा कॉम्प्लेक्स ‘प्रगजत’
एृीएमसी याडा रोड,
ृीओ गडग, जिला गडग,
कनााटक -522101
198
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
गुरजमटकल िा ा
1-5-15, मेन रोड, गुरजमटकल
जिला यािगीर,
कनााटक -525214
199
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
मुिोल कलबुगी िा ा
कोलकुंडा क्रॉस के नििीक,
मुिोल, तालुका सेडम
जिला कलबुगी
कनााटक -525312
200
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
मिान्तेिनगर िा ा
श्री ए बी गोवेकसा जबहल्डंग,
फ़स्ट्टा फ्लोर , अंिनेया नगर, अिोका कॉम्प्लेक्स,
सेक्टर 10 सीटीसी 6531-6534,
ृोस्ट्ट मलमारुजत एमएम एक्सटेंिन
जिला बेलगाम -590016
201
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
यािगीर िा ा
कलबूरगी टावसा,
न्यू जविान िौि के नििीक,
जचत्तृुर रोड,
जिला यािगीर,
कनााटक -525202
202
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
सजडाृुर यािगीर िा ा
प्लॉट नं 73/74,
मिावीर कॉलोनी,
3030 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
यािगीर रोड, सजडाृुर,
जिला यािगीर,
कनााटक -525221
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, बेंगलूरु
203
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
नरासृुरा िा ा
सवे नंबर 294/4, भूतल
बेल्लूर गााँव , नरसाृुरा िोबली,
कोलार -563133, कनााटक
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, कोयंबतूर
204
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
अजवनािी िा ा
15/72 ए-6
भारतीिासन स्ट्रीट,
कोवई मेन रोड, अजवनािी,
जिला कोयंबतूर -641654
205
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
उिगमंडलम िा ा
190/4 िजडफील्ड रोड,
िे एस कॉम्प्लेक्स
ृिली मंजिल, जिलबंक, ऊटी जिला नीलजगररि,
ताजमलनाडु -643001
206
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ज रुवानाकोजवल िा ा
2 नंबर वी एस नगर
चीनई रंक रोड, ज रुवानाकोजवल
जिला जतरुजचराृल्ली – 621005
207
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ृीलामेडु िा ा
नं 437 अजवनािी रोड
िांजत ज एटर के सामने,
ृीलामेडु कोयंबतूर -641004
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, कोजझकोड
208
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
जचत्तूर (ृालकाड जिला)
आर के जबहल्डंग,
जचत्तूर ृालिड़
जचत्तूर ृोस्ट्ट ृालिड़
केरल -672101
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3031
209
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
कल्ृेट्टा िा ा
मीनाक्षी कॉम्प्लेक्स,
कल्ृेट्टा ृोस्ट्ट वायनाड
केरला -673121
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, जवियवाड़ा
210
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
भवानीृुरम िा ा
फ्लजट सं 307, भवानी टावसा
स्ट्वाती रोड,
भवानीृुरम कष्णा जिला
जवियवाड़ा,
आंध्रा प्रिेि -520012
211
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
कुरुमद्दली िा ा
द्वार क्रमांक 4-111ए
वेिाृुरम रोड
अंिेयना स्ट्वामी मंदिर के ृास
जिला कष्णा -521157
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, एणााकुलम
212
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
एडाृल्ली टोल िा ा
टोल िंक्िन
एनएच 47 एडाृल्ली
एणााकुलम केरल -622024
213
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
कड़मकुडी िा ा
मड़जतल ृरमजबल िाउस
जृििला ृोस्ट्ट,
कोचीन -622027
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, जसलीगुड़ी
214
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
सेवक रोड िा ा
रेमबो िाउस (बेसमेंट)
ृोस्ट्ट जसलीगुड़ी,
जिला िार्िाहलंग
ृजिम बंगाल -734001
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, कोट्टायम
215
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय, कोट्टायम
तीसरा माला, अमला टावर,
आड़ेजचरा िंक्िन,
3032 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
तेल्लकम
ृी ओ, कोट्टायम -626016
216
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
एरुमेली िजक्षण िा ा
कल्लुकुलंगरा जबहल्डंग,
अरुमेली मुंडकायम रोड
प्राइवेट बस स्ट्टैंड के ृास,
एरुमेली ृोस्ट्ट कोट्टायम,
केरल -626509
217
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
ेनगना िा ा
आिीजलमूजत्तल कण्णवत्ता,
ृेरुम्बनची, ृोस्ट्ट-चंगनाचेरी
कोट्टायम, केरल -626536
218
यूजनयन बैंक ऑफ इंजडया
सान नृारा िा ा
ृी के आर जबहल्डंग,
ृूप्ृरा ृोस्ट्ट उडुन्बंचोला तालुका
सान नृारा, इडुिी,
केरल -625619
New Delhi, the 5th October, 2020
S.O. 1052.— In pursuance of sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Languages (Use for official
purposes of the Union) Rules, 1976 (as amended in 1987),the Central Government, hereby notifies the listed
Branches of Union Bank Of India, more than 80% of the staff whereof have acquired the working knowledge of
Hindi:-
Serial
No.
Name of the Bank
Number of Branches
1.
Union Bank Of India
218
Total
218
[F. No. 11016/2/2017-OL (Noti.)]
RAJIV KUMAR, Assistant Director (OL)
LIST OF BRANCHES FOR NOTIFICATION UNDER O.L. RULE 10(4)
Regional Office, Ghazipur
1
Union Bank Of India
vill.- Dullahpur Post-Dullahpur,
Block/Tehsil-Jakhania,
Dist-Ghazipur,
Uttar Pradesh Pin-275202
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3033
2
Union Bank of India
AT & PO Tiwaripur, Tehsil
Mohammadabad,
AT & PO Tiwaripur, Tehsil: Mohammadabad,
Uttar Pradesh- 233227
3
Union Bank of India
PO Makhdumpur, S.Dist. Saidpur,
Dist. Ghazipur,
Uttar Pradesh -233307
4
Union Bank of India
Sayer Branch
PO Sayer,
Block Bhadaura, S.
Dist. Zamania,
Uttar Pradesh – 232327
5
Union Bank of India
Village Malethi (Rural),Village
malethi,Po- dharmagathpur,
District- Ghazipur, 233300
Regional Office, Raipur
6
Union Bank of India
Mid Corporate Branch
Ground Floor
Aishwarya Chamber
GE Road,
Raipur -492001
7
Union Bank of India
Charoda branch
Block no. 8A, Plot no. 9,
South Vasundhra Nagar,
G.E. Road,Bhilai 3 Charoda
-490025 Bhilai
8
Union Bank of India
Maharaja chowk Branch
Anand raj bhuilding
Near Maharaja Chowk,
Borsi Road, Adarsh nagar,
Durg- 491001
9
Union Bank of India
ULP Bhilai
Ground Floor, Block no. 37,
Beside Wakodkar Nursing Home,
Nehru Nagar(W),
Bhilai -490020
10
Union Bank of India
Seepat Branch
In Front Of NTPC Material gate,
Bilaspur Main Road Seepat,
Bilaspur -495006
11
Union Bank of India
Nagarnar Branch
Road from Market to NMDC Gate,
Tehsil Nagarnar,
Distt Jagdalpur – 494341
3034 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Regional Office, Jaipur
12
Union Bank of India
Dholpur Branch
Near Raja Khera Byepass
G T Road, Byepass,
Dholpur, Rajasthan
13
Union Bank of India
Jhotwara, Jaipur Branch
Ramnath Puri
Kalwad Road Jaipur
Jaipur, Rajasthan -302102
14
Union Bank of India
New Sanganer Road branch
Plot No 8, Vivek Vihar,
New Sanganer Road
Jaipur, Rajasthan -302102
15
Union Bank of India
Tonk road Shakha
Plot No K-7,
Income Tax Colony
Tonk road, Durgapura
Jaipur, Rajasthan -302018
16
Union bank of India
Vidyadhar Nagar Branch
Central Spine, Jaipur
Rajasthan
Regional Office, Patna
17
Union Bank of India
Bihiya branch
Saheb Tola,
Chaurasta road,
Bihiya dist.Bhojpur (Arrah)
Bihar -802152
18
Union Bank of India
Rahui Branch
Near Rahui Post Office
PO Rahui
Dist.Nalanda,
Bihar -803119
19
Union bank Of India
Chandauti branch
Magadh colony,
Road No. 01,
first house,
Near Sikaria More
PO Chandauti, Dist Gaya
Bihar -823001
Regional Office, Prayagraj
20
Union bank of India
Babuganj Branch
Near mankameshwar Mandir
Babuganj Bazar
PO Babuganj,
Tah- Phoolpur
21
Union Bank of India
Bharvaari Branch
Post Bharwari,
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3035
Dist.Kaushambi
Uttar Pradesh -212201
22
Union Bank of India
Muratganj branch
G.T.Road Mooratganj
Tahsil chall
Dist.Kaushambi
Uttar Pradesh -212201
23
Union Bank of India
Vaidakhas Branch
Post Dheerpur (gopiganj)
Sant ravidas nagar
Uttar Pradesh -221303
24
Union bank of India
Shankargarh branch
Raam Bhavan Chouraha
Shankargarh,
Uttar Pradesh -212108
25
Union Bank of India
Siyaraha Mod
Village and post Siyaraha
Dist Sant Ravidas Nagar
-221406
26
Union Bank of India
Itwa Uparwar Branch
Post Itwa Uparwar
Opposite of Bal Govind Petrl Pump
Post Maharajganj -221314
27
Union Bank of India
Ghurpur Branch
Village & Post Ghurpur
Tahsil BARA,
Prayagraj -212111
28
Union Bank of India
Chunar Branch
Saddupur Mohana
Post Chunar ,
Dist Mirzapur,
Uttar Pradesh -231304
29
Union Bank of India
Dulhipaur Branch
Post Dashrathpur
Block & Tahsil Gyanpur
Sant Ravidas Nagar -221304
30
Union Bank of India
Fulpur Branch
Kotwali Road
Post and Tahsil Fulpur
-212402
31
Union Bank of India
Khyonkhar Branch
Baswapur Chouraha,
3036 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Village Khyonkhar Guwali
Post Matethu Block Abholi
Tahsil Gyanpur- 221404
Regional Office, Samastipur
32
Union Bank Of India
Areraj Branch
At- Areraj Chowk,
Po - Areraj,
Ps - Arearaj ,
East Champaran ,
Bihar – 845411
33
Union Bank of India
Ahiyapur branch
Maa saroz plaza,
Post Ahiyapur ,
Muzaffarpur
Bihar – 842004
34
Union Bank of India
Kali Sthan-Begusarai Branch
Kalisthan Chowk,
Post-Kalisthan,
District-Begusarai,
Bihar – 851101
35
Union Bank of India
Khajuraha Misir Bhore Branch
Mirganj Main Road,
Post A7, Ps-Bhore,
Dist.-Gopalganj ,
Bihar –841426
36
Union Bank of India
Gulabbag branch
Rammohini chowk,
Gulabbag,purnea ,
Bihar – 854326
37
Union Bank of India
Gheghta branch
Village+post- gheghta,
Thana-Chapra,Mufasil,
Saran, Bihar - 841301
38
Union Bank of India,
Meera kunj tibrewal lane,
Jhanjharpur Railway Station ,
Madhubani
Bihar - 847003
39
Union Bank Of India
Naugachhiya Branch
At- Main Road,
Po- Naugachhia,
Ps- Naugachhia ,
Bihar - 853204
40
Union Bank Of India
Mairwa Branch
Vikas Market,
Manjhauli Chowk
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3037
Main Road,
Mairwa , Siwan ,
Bihar – 841239
41
Union Bank of India
Mali ghat branch
Vikas tower bmp 6,
Durga mandir main road,
Malighat , Muzaffarpur ,
Bihar- 842001
42
Union Bank of India
Mirzapur-darbhanga branch
Bibha palace,
Near Mirzapur Chowk ,
Darbhanga ,
Bihar- 846004
43
Union Bank of India
Rani sakarpura branch
Bhaskar bhawan
In Front Of Imli Station,
Po+Vill-Ranisakarpura
Ps- Gangaur ,
Khagaria, Bihar- 851204
44
Union Bank of India,
Rampur Ratnagar,
Baidyanathpur Balkunda,
Hazipur, Mahua Road,
Po- Birnalakhansen ,
Vaishali , Bihar- 844125
45
Union Bank of India
Lauria branch
Hpcl Campus, Bagha Road,
Main Road, Bihar ,
West Champaran – 845453
46
Union Bank of India
Sheohar branch
Ward No 15 Main Road,
Po Seohar, Shivhar ,
Bihar – 843329
47
Union Bank of India –
SUGAULI, Station Chowk,
Near Bus Stand - Sugauli,
Sugauli Bettiah ,
Bihar – 845456
48
Union Bank of India
Sutihara ram branch
Sutihara pokhar,
Village & Post- Sutihara,
Sitamarhi , Bihar – 843331
Regional Office, Udaipur
49
Union Bank of India
Union Loan Point Branch
First Floor, Prince Plaza
Jhalawar Road
Vigyan Nagar; Kota -324005
3038 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Regional Office, Lucknow
50
Union Bank of India
Allu Nagar Deguria Branch
Arshlawn Plaza,
Hardoi Bypass,
IIM Road,
Lucknow -226 020
51
Union Bank Of India
Kaisarganj Branch
Ranibagh, Kaisarganj
Bahraich -271 903
52
Union Bank of India
Gosainganj Branch
Tezapur, Gosainganj
Dist. Faizabad -227125
53
Union Bank of India
Gausinha Branch
Village & Post Mallapur
Dist Gonda 271001
54
Union Bank of India
Dabha Semar Branch
Near Coca Cola Factory,
Faizabad Allahabad Bypass,
Village Husainganj
Dist. Faizabad -222071
55
Union Bank of India
Pranpur Branch
Chirkutiya Peer Bazar
Balrampur -271201
56
Union Bank of India
Bijnaur Branch
Bijnaur,
Lucknow -226002
57
Union Bank of India
Union Loan Point Branch
2nd floor,
Sharda Tower
Kapoorthlaa Complex
Aliganj, Lucknow -226024
58
Union Bank of India
Rudauli Branch
Pushkarpuram,
Station Road
Rudauli Dist.
Faizabad -224120
59
Union Bank of India
Salempur Branch
Prakashlok Colony
Near Sharda Hospital
Mohan Road,
Lucknow -227107
Regional Office, Bhopal
60
Union Bank of India
Shujalpur Branch
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3039
Panchawati kParishar
Near Railway Station Gate
Freeganj -465333
Regional Office, Gorakhpur
61
Union Bank of India
Khajani Branch
Khajani Bazar, Sikariganj Road
Gorakhpur UP -271232
62
Union Bank of India
Natawa Branch
Araji Sankhyaa 347,
Near Natawa Chauraha,
Banspaar, Bajhauli
Dist.Maharajganj,
UP -273306
Regional Office, Varanasi
63
Union Bank of India
Field General Managers Office
S-2/638 A Chandra Chambers
Central Jail Road,
Sikraul -221002
64
Union Bank Of India,
Alinagar Branch,
Survey No. 38,
Mughal Chak
Alinagar Mughalsarai
65
Union Bank Of India,
Ekauna Branch,
Vill-Ekauna,Post-Amaon
Sahabganj Chandauli,
U.P-232118
66
Union Bank Of India,
Gangapur Branch,
Vill-Gangapur,
Post- Gangapur
Varanasi , U.P-221302
67
Union Bank Of India,
Gangapur Branch,
Vill-Jayapur,
Post-Araji line
Varanasi , U.P-221109
68
Union Bank Of India,
Tejopur Branch,
Vill- Tejopur,
Post-Naubatpur
Chandauli , U.P-232110
69
Union Bank Of India,
Palahipatti Branch,
Vill- Palahipatti, Post-Bhatauli
Varanasi , U.P-221208
70
Union Bank Of India,
Pindra Branch,
Branch Code: 577570
Varanasi , U.P-221206
3040 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
71
Union Bank Of India,
Bhatti Branch,
Arazi. No-1046, 1016 , 1047 & 848 ,
Bhatti Varanasi
U.P-221209
72
Union Bank Of India,
Munari Branch,
Branch Code: 573833
Varanasi , U.P-221104
73
Union Bank Of India,
Ramnagar Branch,
Vill- Ramnagar ,
Post-Ramnagar
Varanasi , U.P-221104
74
Union Bank Of India,
Lanka Branch,
B-29/17, 17-a,
Saraswati Tower,,
Lanka
Varanasi , U.P-221104
75
Union Bank Of India,
Sarai Pakvan Branch,
Vill- Sarai Pakvan ,
Post-Sanghati
Chandauli Varanasi ,
U.P-232118
76
Union Bank Of India,
Service Branch,
S-5/38-15-16-17,1stFloor,
Vindhya Vasini Nagar,
Orderly Bazar Varanasi ,
U.P-221002
77
Union Bank Of India,
Sirasi Branch,
Vill- Rampur Machhihan,
Post- Bisori,
Chandauli Varanasi
U.P-232118
78
Union Bank Of India,
Amra Branch,
Vill- AMRA, Post- Amra ,
Chandauli Varanasi ,
U.P-232105
Regional Office, Jaunpur
79
Union Bank of India
Jagdishpur Branch
Block Sirkoni, Tehsil Jaunpur
Dist.Jaunpur
State UP -222022
80
Union Bank of India
Takhapurab Branch
Post Takhaa Purab,
Block tehsil,
Shahganj,
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3041
Dist.Jaunpur
Uttar Pradesh -223101
Regional Office, Delhi (South)
81
Union Bank of India
Udyog Nagar Branch
1-12, DSIDC Indl.Complex,
Nr Udyog Ngr Metro Stn.,
Udyog Nagar,
PO Nangloi, S. Dist. Delhi,
Dist Delhi,
New Delhi -110041
Regional Office, Delhi (North)
82
Union Bank Of India
Gaur City Branch
Shop No. 8,9,10, 11,12,
Sector 16C,
JKG Palm Court,
Gaur City -201009
83
Union Bank Of India
Noida Sector 51 Branch
Sharma Market Shop No. 1&2,
Near Red Light,
Sector -51 Noida,
Gautam Buddha Nagar,
Uttar Pradesh
84
Union Bank Of India
Noida Sector 143 Branch
Shop No. 138, 139, 140, 141, 142,
Ikebana Street,
Gulshan Ikebana,
Plot No. GH-03/A,
Sector 143, Noida 201309,
Uttar Pradesh
85
Union Bank Of India
Mayur Vihar -III
Aggarwal Kondli Plaza,
Plot No-7, Mixed Housing Scheme ,
LSC 1, Kondli, Mayur Vihar -III,
Delhi, Uttar Pradesh
Regional Office, Karnal
86
Union Bank of India
Narwara Branch
Dilip Chand Market,
Near Opollo Chowk,
Railway Road
Narwana, Dist.Jind,
Haryana -126416
87
Union Bank of India
Narnaul Branch
Saini Enclave, Near Bus Stand
Narnaul, Dist. Mahendragarh
Haryana 123001
88
Union Bank of India
Bawal Branch
Banipur Chowk,
Jaipur Road
PO Bawal, Dist.Rewari,
Haryana 123501
3042 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
89
Union Bank of India
Kharkhauda Branch
Near Subzi Mandi
Kharkhauda
Sonipat Haryana 131402
90
Union Bank of India
Huda Sonepat Branch
Sector 14, Huda Complex
Delhi Road,
Dist.Sonepat,
Haryana 123501
Regional Office, Ranchi
91
Union Bank of India,
Tandwa Branch,
Vill+ Post – Tandwa
Near Durga Mandir, District-Chatra, Jharkhand,
PIN – 825321
92
Union Bank Of India,
Rasoia Dhamna Branch
Vill+ Post - Rasoia Dhamna
Near Durga Mandir,
District –Hazaribag,
Jharkhand-825405
93
Union Bank Of India,
Pandu Branch,
Village+Post- Pandu,
Block- Pandu,
District –Palamu,
Jharkhand - 822124
Regional Office, Kolhapur
94
Union Bank of India
Akkalkot Branch
3/2814, Dhongade complex
Near ST Stand, Station road,
Akkalkot, solapur
Maharashtra -413216
95
Union Bank of India
Phaltan Branch,
Shivaji Nagar, Ring Road,
Oppy C College,
Plot No 3320/1
Phaltan, Satara
Maharashtra -415523
96
Union Bank of India
Wai Branch
Laxmi Hall 138/2, A
Songirwadi (Wai)
Taluka Wai, Satara
Maharashtra -415415
97
Union Bank of India
Shirwal Branch
Vasmati Building,
Shahajeet Chouk,
ST Stand Sjhirwal
Satara, Maharashtra -415415
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3043
98
Union Bank of India
ULP Solapur
Sharad Chambers
560/59, South Sadar Bazar Camp
Solapur, Maharashtra -413003
Regional Office, Ahmedabad
99
Union Bank of India
CMS
1st floor,
CMS Service branch
Opp.Cargo Motors,
CG Road,
Dist.Ahmedabad,
Gujrat -380006
100
Union Bank of India
Mid Corporate Branch
Ground Floor,
Premchand House
172/1, Ashram Road
Ahmedabad,
Gujarat -380009
Regional Office, Mumbai South
101
Union Bank of India
Cuffe Pared Branch
625 G D Somani Memorial School
G D Somani Marg,
Cuffe Pared
Mumbai -400 005
102
Union Bank of India
Lalbaug Branch
Shop No.1,2 and 3
Anant Apartment Meghwadi,
Dr S S Rao
Lalbaug Mumbai -400012
103
Union Bank of India
Lower Parel Branch
Yeshwant Bhavan,
Ground Floor
Deepak Talkies,
Pandurang Bhudkar marg,
Lower Parel
Mumbai -400013
104
Union Bank of India
Wadala West Branch
Wadala Telephone Exchange
Premises no. 2, ground floor
G.D.Ambedkar Road,
Naigaon, Wadala (W),
Mumbai -400019
Regional Office, Pune
105
Union Bank of India
Otur Branch
Onkaar Heights
Brahmanwada Road
Gram Panchayat Milkat No.4152
PO Otur, Tal.Junnar,
Pune, Maharashtra -412409
3044 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
106
Union Bank of India
Kuruli Branch
Samrudhi Building,
H No.1945, Gate No 07
At & post Kuruli,
Taluka Khed, Dist.Pune,
Maharashtra -410501
107
Union Bank of India
Kanhesaar Branch
Shop No.6, 7 and 8,
upper ground floor
Commercial Complex,
Khed Pabal Road
Taluka Khed, Dist.Pune,
Maharashtra -410505
108
Union Bank of India
Kharadi Branch
Shop No.3, Arrisa
Avenue Kolte Patil
Downtowan, Kharadi,
Pune, Maharashtra -411014
109
Union Bank of India
DSK vishv Branch
6 Vasudhaa, DSK Vishwa
Dhayari, Pune,
Maharashtra -411041
110
Union Bank of India
Pune Retail Asset – Pune Camp
2-A Arora Towers,
9 moledina Road,
Pune Camp, dist.Pune
Maharashtra -411001
111
Union Bank of India
Balewadi Branch
Shop No 1 & 2 Shree Residency
S No.6/5/2,
Baner Balewadi Road
Dist. Baner, Pune
Maharashtra -411001
112
Union Bank of India
Mid Corporate
1st floor, 285 Tarabaug Society,
Opp.Bund Garden,
Koregaon Park
Pune, Maharashtra -411001
113
Union Bank of India
ULP Ahmednagar
Farhat Tower, Plot No.8
Pune-Aurangabad road,
Station Road, Ahmednagar
Maharashtra
114
Union Bank of India
Service Branch Pune
PMT Building,
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3045
Swargate
Pune-Maharashtra -411051
115
Union Bank of India
Sinhgad Road Branch
Plot No.41,
Dhanlaxmi Soc.Sr.No.16/21
17/3, Off Sinhgad Road
Dist. Pune,
Maharashtra -411051
116
Union Bank of India
Zonal Audit Ofice
Parwani Estate
289/3, J N road,
bhawani Peth
PB No 1602,
Pune-Maharashtra -411042
117
Union Bank of India
Koregaon Park Branch
Tarabaug society
Koregaon Park,
Pune Dist.Pune
Maharashtra -411001
Regional Office, Chandigarh
118
Union Bank of India
Bhatouli Branch
Village & Post Ajouli
SVSD College,
Himachal Pradesh
119
Union Bank of India
Narayangarh Branch
Opp. Mini Secretariat
Near Subhash Chowk,
Chandigarh Nahan Road
Naraingarh,
Dist.Ambala,
Haryana
120
Union Bank of India
Palampur Branch
Geetanjali Complex,
mainBazar, Near SBI
Palampur,dist.Kangra,
Himachal Pradesh -176061
121
Union Bank of India
Dabwali Branch
Gandhi Chowk,
Old Anaj Mandi,
Dabwali, Dist.Sirsa,
Haryana -125104
122
Union Bank of India
Gaggal Branch
Dharamshala Road
Village Gaggal
123
Union Bank of India
Chaderkalan Branch
3046 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Village & Post Chaderkalan
Tahsil Tohana
124
Union Bank of India
Diwana Branch
VPO Diwana
Sub-Tehsil Jakhal,
Tehsil Tohana,
Dist. Fatehabad
125
Union Bank of India
Barwala Panchkula Branch
Bansal Complex
Barwala Panchkula
Regional Office, Jalandhar
126
Union Bank of India
Dhariwal Branch
GT Road, New Bus Stand
Dhariwal,
Dist.Gurdaspur,
Punjab -143519
127
Union Bank of India
Kalanaur Branch
Opp Punjab National Bank,
Batala Road
Dist.Gurdaspur,
Punjab -143512
128
Union Bank of India
Patti Branch
Newar Milk Chilling Centre,
Ward No.2,
Main road
(Patti Taran Road),
Dist.Taran Taran,
Punjab -143416
129
Union Bank of India
SSI Jalandhar Branch
M-5, Industrial Area,
Jalandhar,
Punjab -144004
Regional Office, Nasik
130
Union Bank of India
Chalisgaon Branch
Gr Floor, 30/A,
plot no 3
opp Abhinav School,
Bhadgaon Road ,
Chalisgaon
131
Union Bank of India
ULP Aurangabad
Shop NO 3-4 Kaustubh Plaza,
Plot no 219 Samarth Nagar,
Aurnagabad
Regional Office, Mumbai (West)
132
Union Bank of India
Virar East Branch
Shop no. 1,2 & 3,
Chorge Towers,
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3047
Phulpada Road,
Virar East,
Dist – Thane – 401303
133
Union Bank of India
Seepz Overseas
Ground Floor,
unit No. 007,
Block No. 2,
Seepz, Complex,
Jogeshwari-Vikroli Link Road,
Marol Industrial Area,
Andheri (E),
Mumbai- 400096
134
Union Bank of India
Dahanu Branch
Sankhe Bunglow,
Ambawadi, Irani Road,
PO Dahanu Road,
S-Dist – Dhanau
Dist- Thane
Maharashtra – 401602
135
Union Bank of India
Yaari Road Branch
Sarthak Heights
Priyadarshani CHS LTD.
Shalimar Bakery Lane,
Opp CWC School,
Versova, Andheri
West – 400061
136
Union Bank of India
Link Road, Maarve Branch
Shop No. 1,2,3,4
Agarwal Infinity heights, CTS No. 149/B, Orlem,
Marve Road, Off Link Road,
Malad West - 400064
Regional Office, Trivandrum
137
Union Bank of India
Edamulackal (Ayur) Branch
Kodiyattu Complex,
Anchal road
Kollam -691533
138
Union Bank of India
Kilimnoor Branch
S Plaza M.C.Road
Kilimanoor Junction
Kilimanoor,
Kerala -695601
139
Union Bank of India
Chavra Branch
Nandana Builing,
Building No.17/1095
In front of Chavara Panchayat Office,
Kollam,
Kerala -691583
3048 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
140
Union Bank of India
Thirumala Branch
Japa Vilas, Namgad,
Thirumala
PO Trivandrum,
Kerala -695006
141
Union Bank of India
Nalanchira Branch
Building No. KP III/230,
Nalanchira PO
Near Kurushadi Junction,
Nalanchira, Thiruvanthapuram
Kerala -695015
142
Union Bank of India
Panachamoodu Vellarada Branch
Kripa Palace,
Near KSRTC Bus Stand
Vellarada P O
Kerala -695505
143
Union Bank of India
Pallimukku Branch
Pallimukku Branch
SS Tower, Masdan Nada,
Pallimukku,
PO Kollam,
Dist.Kerala -691014
144
Union Bank of India
Balaramapuram Branch
Krishna, NH Road
Balaramapuram, Trivandrum
Kerala -695501
145
Union Bank of India
Vattiyoorkavu Branch
TC6/404-1, Rukmini Arcade,
Dist. Trivandrum,
Kerala -695013
146
Union Bank of India
Venmony Branch
St.Mary’s Orthodox Church
Venmony PO Chengannur
Kerala -689509
147
Union Bank of India
Vizhinjam Branch
Mini Mandiram
Pulloorkonam, Vizhinjam,
PO Trivandrum,
Kerala -695521
148
Union Bank of India
Kundra Kollam Branch
Pushpamangalam Bldg.,
NH 208 (QS Road)
PO Kundara, dist.,
Kollam, Kerala -691501
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3049
149
Union Bank of India
Kalvoor Branch
Chilora bldg.,
North of Kalavoor, Jn NH 47
Dist. Alappuzha,
Kalavoor, Kerala -690521
150
Union Bank of India
Kayamkulam Branch
Building no. 30/2032
Harsha Tourist Home,
Archadevi, Puthiyadam
Kayamkulam, dist.Alleppey
Kerala -690502
151
Union Bank of India
Kowdiar Branch
Adarsh TC 4/987(1), 4/987(2),
Trivandrum, Kerala -695003
152
Union Bank of India
Thycaud Branch
Gangothri building,
Air Road, Thuycaud,
Dist.Thiruvananthapuram,
Kerala -695014
153
Union Bank of India
Thiruvanthpuram Retail Asset Branch
Union Bank Bhavan
M G Road, Statue Junction
Thiruvanthpuram
(Trivandrum),
Kerala -695001
154
Union Bank of India
Nedumangad Branch
Saraswathy Complex
Nedumangad
Dist. Thiruvananthapuram
Kerala -695541
155
Union Bank of India
Neyyattinkara branch
SNDP Neyyattinkara
PO Trivandrum,
Kerala -695121
156
Union Bank of India
Poojappura Branch
Shivani Minaram,
Opp.Corporation Market,
Poojapura,
Thiruvananthapuram,
Kerala -695012
157
Union Bank of India
Pathanapuram Branch
Plavilayil buiding,
Main Road, Dist. Kollam
Pathanapuram,
Kerala -689695
3050 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
158
Union Bank of India
Punalur Branch
Sara Shopping Complex
T B Juncion, PO Valacode
Punalur Pathenpuram Road
Dist. Koltam,
Kerala -690331
159
Union Bank of India
Pothencode Branch
Ellarbee Towers,
Sector No.478/13,
Pothencode
Mangalapuram Road
Dist. Thiruvananthapuram
Kerala -695584
160
Union Bank of India
Manacaud Branch
KPN Plaza, Manacaud Junction
Thiruvananthaapuram
Kerala -695009
161
Union Bank of India
Mannar Branch
Building No.944/4,
Lakshmi Building, Kurattissery
Mannar PO Dist.Alleppey
Kerala -689622
162
Union Bank of India
Mavelikara Kurathiyad Branch
KRUM building
PO Thekkakara,
Dist.Alleppey
Mavelikara,
Kerala -690107
163
Union Bank of India
Vattapaaraa karkulam branch
Lakshmi shopping maal
Vattapara
PO Trivandrum,
Kerala -695028
164
Union Bank of India
Varkala Branch
PVM Building
Temple road, PO Varkala
Dist.Thiruvananthapuram
Maidanam,
Kerala -695141
165
Union Bank of India
Valiyamala Branch
Chitra,
India Institute Of Space Science &
Technology,
Campus, Valiyamal Nedumangad,
Dist.Thiruvananthapuram
Kerala -695547
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3051
166
Union Bank of India
Saareekariyam Branch
Manashanthi building
Sreekariyam, Akkulam road
Dist.Thiruvanathapuram,
Kerala – 695017
167
Union Bank of India
Service BranchThiruvanthpuram
2nd floor, Union Bank Bldg.
P Boc. No.307
MG Road, Statue Junction,
Dist.Trivandrum,
Kerala -695001
168
Union Bank of India
Harippad Branch
Ratnamma Towers,
NH 47, Near govt. Hospital
Harippad, Kerala -6906514
Regional Office, Vishakhapatnam
169
Union Bank of India
Sarpavaram Junction Branch
1st floor, D No.10/134
Pithapuram Road
Near Sri Hanuman Temple
Sarpavaram Junction,
Kakinada,
Andhra Pradesh -530005
Regional Office, Chennai
170
Union Bank of India
Port Blair Branch
10 Gandhi Bhavan
Aberdeen Bazar, Port Blair
Dist Andamaan,
Andaman & Nicobar Island ,
Pin -744101
Regional Office, Bhuvneshwar
171
Union Bank Of India,
Athagarh branch,
Law College Road,
Block Colony,
Athagarh
172
Union Bank Of India,
Odagaon Branch,
Law College Road,
Block Colony,Athagarh
173
Union Bank Of India,
Kunjabanagarh-Daspalla
Gopinath Market Complex,
Plot No. – 2324/3053,
Durga Bazar
(Near Daspalla Block)
174
Union Bank Of India,
Kamakshya Nagar Branch
Sriram Residency,,
Ward No - 6,
Kamakshya Nagar
3052 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
175
Union Bank Of India,
Gopalpur Branch
Patthara Chhak,
Bahadurpeta,
Berhampur- 760007
176
Union Bank Of India,
Chandichhak Branch
Nuabazar Chhak,
Paradeep Road
Cuttack- 753004
177
Union Bank Of India,
Gopalpur Branch
Nuabazar Chhak,
Paradeep Road
Cuttack- 753004
178
Union Bank Of India,
Jairampur Branch
Inside Jairampur
Panchayat, Bhograi,
Balasore- 756038
179
Union Bank Of India,
Jaleshwar BRANCH
Badabazar, Jaleswar
Balasore- 756032
180
Union Bank Of India,
Jajpur, Road Branch
Chorda Road, Jajpur Road
Jajpur,
Odisha- 755 019.
181
Union Bank Of India,
Talcher Branch
Ward No 18,
Handidhua Chak
Talcher, Angul- 759100
182
Union Bank Of India,
Narayanpur Branch
Near Srirampur Gram Panchayat
Srirampur,Laxminath,
Raibania,
Balasore- 756032
183
Union Bank Of India,
Pattamundai Branch
Gajanan Market Complex,
Near Bus Stand , Pattamunda,
Kendrapara – 754215
184
Union Bank Of India,
Balichandrapur BRANCH
Post Office Balichandrapur,
At Patarajpur,
Dist Jajpur- 754205
185
Union Bank Of India,
Basudebpur Branch
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3053
Post Office Road
Basudebpur Bhadrak,
Odisha – 756168
186
Union Bank Of India,
Bhanjanagar Branch
Opposite Govt Hospital,
Bhanjanagardist Ganjam,
Odisha - 761 126
187
Union Bank Of India,
Mangalpur Branch
Post Office Mangalpur
At Kanikapada, Dist Jajpur
Odisha – 754 205
188
Union Bank Of India,
Markatnagar Branch
Abit Campus Sector-1 Cda
Markatnagar Abhinav Bidanas
Cuttack, Odisha – 753014
189
Union Bank Of India,
Mahura Branch
C V Raman College of Engineering Campus, Janla,
Dist. Khurda,
Bhubaneswar,
Odisha – 752054
190
Union Bank Of India,
Remuna-Januganj Branch
At Ganeswarpur,
Januganj,Balasore,
Odisha – 756019
191
Union Bank Of India,
Rairangpur Branch
Plot No - 54/1066,
Ward No - 9,
Rairangpur,
Odisha – 757043
192
Union Bank Of India,
Lewis Road Branch
Plot No-2862,
Lewis Road, Khordha,
Odisha – 751002
193
Union Bank Of India,
Srikona Branch
Plot No.3837/6176 (P),
Srikona,
Hamlet-Mirzapur,
Odisha – 758025
194
Union Bank Of India,
Sahidnagar Branch
Compound of Osph & Wxltd,
Janapath Po: Bhoinagar
,Bhubaneswar,
District: Khordha
Odisha – 751022
3054 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
195
Union Bank Of India,
Satyabadi Sakhigopal Branch
Main Road Infront Of Sbi
Sakhigopal District: Puri
Odisha – 752014
196
197Union Bank Of India,
Hinjilcut Branch
Rashmi Plaza,
Chaudhury Market Complex,
Main Road, Hinjilcut,
Dist. Ganjam,
Odisha - 761 102
Regional Office, Belgaum
197
Union Bank Of India
Gadag Branch
6690/183, Mr.S K Kabadar's Bldg., APMC Yard Comp
'Pragati', APMC Yard Rd,
PO Gadag,Dist Gadag,
Karnataka
198
Union Bank Of India
Gurumitkal Branch
NO.1-5-15,MAIN ROAD,
GURUMITKAL, DIST YADGIR
199
Union Bank Of India
Mudhol Kulburgi Branch
Near Kolkunda Cross
Mudhol, Taluka Sedam
Dist. Kalburgi,
Karnataka 585318
200
Union Bank Of India
Mahantesh Nagar,
Mr.A.B Govekars Bldg,
1st Flr, Anjaneya Nagar,,
Ashoka Complex,
Sec 10,CTC 6531-6534,
,PO, Malmaruti
MM Extn.,Belgaum,
Karnataka
201
Union Bank Of India
Yadgir Branch
Kalburgi Towers,
Near New Vidhan Soudha,
Chittapur Road,
Yadgir, Dist Yadgir
202
Union Bank Of India
Saidapur (Yadgir) Branch
Plot No.73/74,
Mahaveer Colony,,
Yadgir Road, SAIDAPUR,
Yadgir District,
KARNATAKA
Regional Office, Bengluru
203
Union Bank of India
Narasapura Branch
Survey No.294/4,
ground floor
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3055
Narasapur, Hobli,
Kolar 563133 Karnataka
Regional Office, Coimbatore
204
Union Bank of India
Avinashi Branch
15/78 A-6 Bharthidasan Street,
Kovai Main Road,
Avinashi, dist.Coimbatore
205
Union Bank of India
Uthagamandalam Branch
190/4 Hadfield Road
J.S.Complex,
1st floor, Hillbund Ooty
Dist.Nilgiris
206
Union Bank of India
Thiruvanaikoil branch
No.2 V.S.,Nagar,
Chennai Trunck Road
Thiruvanaikivil
Dist. Tiruchirapalli -621005
207
Union Bank of India
Peelamedu branch
No. 437 Avanashi Road
Opp Shanti theatre, Peelamedu
Coimbatore,
Dist.Coimbatore -641004
Regional Office, Kozhikode
208
Union Bank of India
Chittur (Palakkad dist) Branch
R K Building,
Chittur Palakkad Road
Chittur PO Palakkad,
Kerala -678101
209
Union Bank of India
Kalpetta Branch
Meenakshi Complex,
Kalpetta Post
Wayanad ,
Kerala -673121
Regional Office, Vijaywada
210
Union Bank of India
Bhavanipuram Branch
flat no. 307, bhavani Towers
Swathi Road, Bhavanipuram,
Krishna Dist. Vijaywada
Andhra Pradesh -500012
211
Union Bank of India
Krumaddali Branch
Door No.4-111A
Vedhapuram road
Near Anjaneyaswami Temple
dist. Krishna -521157
Regional Office, Ernakulam
212
Union Bank of India
Edapalli Toll Branch
Tol junction, NH 47 Edapally
Ernakulam, Kerala -682024
3056 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
213
Union Bank of India
Kadamakudy Branch
Madathil Parambil House
Pizhala PO
Cochin -682027
Regional Office, Siligudi
214
Union Bank of India
Sevak Road Branch
Post Siligudi,
Dist. Darjiling,
West Bengal -734001
Regional Office, Kottayam
215
Union Bank of India
Regional Office,
Kottayam, 3rd floor
Amala Tower
Adichira Junction,
Thellakom PO
Kottayam -686016
216
Union Bank of India
Erumeli South Branch
Kallukulangara Building,
Erumeli Mundakayam Road,
Near Private Bus Stand,
Erumeli PO Kottayam -686509
217
Union Bank of India
Thengana Branch
Angilimoottil Kannavattaa
Perumbanachiy PO
Changanasseery
Kottayam Kerala -686536
218
Union Bank of India
Santhanpara Branch
PKR Building Pooppara PO
Udumbanchola Taluk
Santhanpara
Idukki, Kerla
नई दिल् ली, 2 दिसम् बर, 2020
का.आ. 1053.— रा् रीय आवास बैंक अजिजनयम, 1927 (1927 का 53) की िारा 6 की उृ-िारा (1) के
ंड (ड.) द्वारा प्रित्त िजियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन् द्रीय सरकार, एतद्द्वारा, श्री आनंि मिुकर के स्ट् ान ृर श्री
लजलत कुमार चन्िेल, आर् ाक सलािकार, जवत्तीय सेवाएं जवभाग, नई दिल्ली को तत्काल प्रभाव से और अगले आिेिों
तक, राष्ट्रीय आवास बैंक के जनिेिक मंडल में जनिेिक के ृि ृर जनयुि करती िज।
[फा. सं. 24/17/2010-आईएफ-II]
नेिा चौिान, उृ जनिेिक
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3057
New Delhi, the 8th December, 2020
S.O. 1053.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (e) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 6 of the
National Housing Bank Act, 1987 (53 of 1987), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Lalit Kumar
Chandel, Economic Advisor, Department of Financial Services, New Delhi as a Director on the Board of
Directors of National Housing Bank with immediate effect and until further orders vice Shri Anand Madhukar.
[F. No. 24/17/2010-IF.II]
NEHA CHAUHAN, Dy. Director
नई दिल् ली, 9 दिसम् बर, 2020
का.आ. 1054.—बीमा जवजनयामक और जवकास प्राजिकरण अजिजनयम, 1999 (1999 का 41) की िारा 4
द्वारा प्रित्त िजियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्द्वारा, श्री प्रमोि कुमार अरोड़ा, सजचव, (अंतरााष्ट्रीय
ृररचालन), भारतीय िीवन बीमा जनगम, कारृोरेट कायाालय, मुम्बई को ृि का कायाभार ग्रिण करने की तारी से
आरंभ में तीन वषा की अवजि के जलए अ वा बास वषा की आयु प्राप्त करने तक अ वा अगले आिेिों तक, िो भी
ृिले िो, चार ला रुृए प्रजतमाि (आवास और कार की सुजविा के जबना) के समेदकत वेतन ृजकेि ृर भारतीय
बीमा जवजनयामक और जवकास प्राजिकरण में ृूणाकाजलक जनिेिक (बीमांदककी) के ृि ृर जनयुि करती िज।
[फा. सं. आर-16011/02/2019-बीमा-I]
के. बी. नजय्यर, अवर सजचव
New Delhi, the 9th December, 2020
S.O. 1054.—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 4 of the Insurance Regulatory and
Development Authority Act, 1999 (41 of 1999), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Pramod Kumar
Arora, Secretary (International Operations), Life Insurance Corporation of India, Corporate office, Mumbai as
Whole-Time Member (Actuary) in the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India, on a
consolidated pay package of four lakh rupees per month (without facility of house and car), initially for a period
of three years, with effect from the date of assumption of charge of the post, or till attaining the age of sixty-two
years, or until further orders, whichever is the earliest.
[F. No. R-16011/02/2019-Ins.I]
K. B. NAYYAR, Under Secy.
जविेि मंत्रालय
(सीृीवी जडवीिन)
नई दिल्ली, 26 नवम् बर, 2020
का.आ.1055.—केन्द्रीय रािनजयक और कोंसुलीय अजिकारी (िृ एवं फीस) के अजिजनयम, 1942 की
िारा 2 के ंड (क) के अनुसरण में वजिाजनक आिेि ।
एतद्द्वारा, केंद्र सरकार भारत के िूतावास, कोृेनिेगन में श्री नीरि, सिायक अनुभाग अजिकारी को
दिनांक 26 नवंबर 2020 से सिायक कोंसुलर अजिकारी के तौर ृर कोंसुलर सेवाओं के जनवािन के जलए प्राजिकषत
करती िज।
[सं. टी-4330/08/2020]
जव्णु कुमार िमाा, जनिेिक (सी.ृी.वी.)
3058 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
(CPV Division)
New Delhi, the 26th November, 2020
S.O. 1055.—Statutory Order in pursuance of the clause (a) of the Section 2 of the Diplomatic and
Consular Officers (Oaths and fees) Act, 1948 (41 of 1948), the Central Government hereby authorizes Shri
Neeraj, Assistant Section Officer in Embassy of India, Copenhagen as Assistant Consular Officer to perform the
consular services with effect from 26 November 2020.
[No.T-4330/08/2020]
VISHNU KUMAR SHARMA, Director (CPV)
नई दिल्ली, 27 नवम् बर, 2020
का.आ. 1056.—रािनजयक और कोंसुलीय अजिकारी (िृ एवं फीस) के अजिजनयम, 1948 की िारा 2
के ंड (क) के अनुसरण में वजिाजनक आिेि ।
एति् द्वारा, केंद्र सरकार भारत के भारत के िूतावास, रबात में श्री अिीत कुमार, सिायक अनुभाग
अजिकारी को दिनांक 27 नवंबर, 2020 से सिायक कोंसुलर अजिकारी के तौर ृर कोंसुलर सेवाओं के जनवािन के
जलए प्राजिकषत करती िज।
[सं. टी-4330/01/2016]
जव्णु कुमार िमाा, जनिेिक (सी.ृी.वी.)
New Delhi, the 27th November, 2020
S.O. 1056.— Statutory Order in pursuance of the clause (a) of the Section 2 of the Diplomatic and
Consular Officers (Oaths and fees) Act, 1948 (41 of 1948), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Ajit
Kumar, Assistant Section Officer as Assistant Consular Officer in Embassy of India, Rabat to perform the
Consular services with effect from 27 November 2020.
[No.T-4330/01/2016]
VISHNU KUMAR SHARMA, Director (CPV)
कार्माक, लोक जिकायत त ा ृेंिन मंत्रालय
(कार्माक और प्रजिक्षण जवभाग)
नई दिल् ली, 8 दिसम् बर, 2020
का.आ. 1057. —केन् द्र सरकार, एतिद्वारा दिल् ली जविेष ृुजलस स्ट् ाृना अजिजनयम, 1946 (1946 का
25) की िारा 5 की उृ-िारा (1) सृर त िारा 6 द्वारा प्रित्त िजियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मध्य प्रिेि राज् य सरकार
के गषि जवभाग मंत्रालय, भोृाल की अंग्रेिी में िारी अजिसूचना, सं. एफ-12-78/2020/बी-1/िो, दिनांक
06.10.2020 के माध्यम से िारी सिमजत से, मनुआभान टेकरी, कोि-ए-दफ़ज़ा, भोृाल में दिनांक 30-04-2019
को एक नाबाजलग लड़की के बलात्कार एवं ित्या की घटना के संबंि में कोि-ए-दफ़ज़ा ाना, भोृाल (म.प्र.) में
भारतीय िंड संजिता (1860 का 45) की िाराएं 363, 366, 376 डीए, 302, 201 और लैंजगक अृरािों से
बालकों का संरक्षण अजिजनयम, 2012 (2012 का 32) की िाराएं 5(आर) और 6 के तित ििा मामला अृराि सं.
276/19 से िुड़े अृराि(िों) का अन्वेषण त ा ऐसे अृरािों से िुड़े या उससे संबद्ध दकसी िु्प्रयास, िु्प्रेरणा
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3059
और/अ वा षड्यंत्र एवं/अ वा उसी संव्यविार में दकए गए या उन्िीं तथ्यों से उत्ृन्न दकसी अन्य अृराि का अन्वेषण
करने के जलए दिल्ली जविेष ृुजलस स्ट् ाृना के सिस्ट्यों की िजियों और क्षेत्राजिकार का जवस्ट्तार समस्ट्त मध्य प्रिेि
राज्य में करती िज।
[फा. सं. 228/22/2020-एवीडी-II]
संिय कुमार चौरजसया, अवर सजचव
MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS
(Department of Personnel and Training)
New Delhi, 8th December, 2020
S.O. 1057.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 5 read with section 6 of
the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (25 of 1946), the Central Government with the consent of the
State Government of Madhya Pradesh, vide Notification issued in English, No. F-12-78/2020/B-1/TWO
dated 06-10-2020 of Home Department Mantralaya, Bhopal, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the
members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole state of Madhya Pradesh for investigation into
the offence(s) relating to case Crime No. 276/19, under sections 363, 366, 376 DA, 302, 201 of the Indian Penal
Code (45 of 1860) and sections 5(r) and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (32 of
2012) registered at Police Station Koh-e-fiza, Bhopal (M.P.) pertaining to an incident of rape and murder of a
minor girl occurred on 30-04-2019 at Manuabhan Tekri, Koh-e-fiza, Bhopal and any attempt, abetment and/or
conspiracy, in relation to or in connection with such offence(s) and/or for any other offence committed in the
course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts.
[F. No. 228/28/2020-AVD-II]
SANJAY KUMAR CHAURASIA, Under Secy.
वाजणज्य एवं उद्योग मंत्रालय
(वाजणज्य जवभाग)
नई दिल्ली, 10 दिसम् बर, 2020
का.आ. 1058.—केन्द्रीय सरकार, जनयाात (गुणवत्ता जनयंत्रण एंव जनरीक्षण) अजिजनयम, 1963 (1963 का
22) की िारा 7 की उृिारा (1) के सा ृर त जनयाात (गुणवत्ता जनयंत्रण एंव जनरीक्षण) जनयम, 1964 के जनयम
12, के उृजनयम (2) द्वारा प्रित्त िजियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मेससा एसिीएस इंजडया प्राइवेट जलजमटेड, प्लॉट
नंबर 64, िीआईडीसी मेन रोड, िरमृुर, ृोरबंिर, गुिरात-360577 (जिसे एतद्ृिात उि अजभकरण माना
िाएगा) को इस अजिसूचना के िासकीय रािृत्र में प्रकािन की तारी से तीन वषा की अवजि के जलए, वाजणज्य
मंत्रालय की िासकीय रािृत्र में प्रकाजित भारत सरकार की अजिसूचना के सा अनुसूची में जनर्िा् ट दिनांक 20
दिसम्बर, 1965 की अजिसूचना की सं्या का.आ. 3975 त ा दिनांक 20 दिसम्बर, 1965 की अजिसूचना सं.
का.आ. 3972 के तित प्रकाजित अजिसूचना में उृाबद्ध अनुसूची में जवजनर्िाष्ट जनि और अयस्ट् क – समूि-I अ ाात,
लौि अयस्ट्क, बॉक्साइट और समूि-II अ ाात, हज़ंक कॉन्सरेट, के जनयाात से ृूवा जनम्नजलज त ितों के अिीन ृोरबंिर
ृत्तन, जृृावाव ृत्तन, बेिी ृत्तन, ओ ा ृत्तन, कांडला ृत्तन और मुंिरा ृत्तन में उक् त जनि एवं अयस्ट् क के
जनरीक्षण करने के जलए एक अजभकरण के प ृ में मान्यता िेती िज, अ ाात् :
(i)
यि अजभकरण, जनि और अयस्ट्क समूि-। के जनयाात (जनरीक्षण) जनयम, 1965 जनि और अयस्ट्क
समूि-II के जनयाात (जनरीक्षण) जनयम, 1965 के जनयम 4 के अिीन जनरीक्षण की ृद्धजत की िााँच
3060 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
करने के जलये जनयाात जनरीक्षण ृररषि् द्वारा जनजमत्त नामजनर्िाष्ट अजिकाररयों को ृयााप्त सुजविाएं
िेगी; और
(ii) यि अजभकरण, इस अजिसूचना में य ा जवजनर्िा् ट अृने कायो का जन् ृािन करने के जलए, जनिेिक
(जनरीक्षण और गुणवत्ता जनयंत्रण) जनयाात जनरीक्षण ृररषि द्वारा समय-समय ृर, जलज त प ृ में,
दिए गए जनिेिों से आबद्ध िोंगी ।
[फा. सं. के-16014/14/2020-जनयाात जनरीक्षण]
दिवाकर ना जमसरा, संयुि सजचव
MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY
(DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE)
New Delhi, the 10th December, 2020
S.O. 1058.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 7 of the Export (Quality Control and
Inspection) Act, 1963 (22 of 1963) read with sub-rule (2) of rule 12 of the Export (Quality Control and Inspection) Rules,
1964, the Central Government hereby recognises M/s SGS India Private Limited, Plot No. 64, GIDC Main Road,
Dharampur, Porbandar, Gujarat-360577 as an agency for a period of three years with effect from the date of publication of
this notification in the Official Gazette , for the inspection of Minerals & Ores, Group-I, namely, Iron Ore, Bauxite and
Group-II namely, Zinc Cocentrates as specified in the Schedule annexed to the notification of the Government of India in the
Ministry of Commerce, published in the official Gazette vide number S.O. 3975, dated the 20th December, 1965, and
S.O. 3978 dated the 20th December, 1965 respectively, prior to export of the said Minerals and Ores at Porbandar Port,
Pipavav Port, Bedi Port, Okha Port, Kandla Port and Mundra Port subject to the following conditions, namely: -
(i)
the said agency shall give adequate facilities to the officers nominated by the Export Inspection Council in this
behalf to examine the method of inspection followed by them in carrying out the inspection specified under rule
4 of the Export of Minerals and Ores - Group I (Inspection) Rules, 1965 and the Export of Minerals and Ores -
Group II (Inspection) Rules, 1965; and
(ii)
the said agency, in performance of their function as specified in this notification shall be bound by such
directions, as the Director (Inspection and Quality Control), Export Inspection Council may give in writing
from time to time.
[F. No. K-16014/14/2020-Export Inspection]
DIWAKAR NATH MISRA, Jt. Secy.
ubZ fnYyh] 7 fnlEcj] 2020
-—isVªksfy;e vkSj [kfut ikbiykbuas ¼Hkwfe esa ç;ksDrk ds vf/kdkj dk vtZu½ vf/kfu;e]
1962 ¼1962 dk 50½] ¼blds ckn bls mDr vf/kfu;e dgk x;k gS½ dh /kkjk 2 dh mi&/kkjk ¼v½ ds vuqlj.k esa
dsUæh; ljdkj uhps nh x;h lkj.kh ds LrEHk ¼1½ esa mYysf[kr O;fDr dks Jh oh.vkbZ. xksfgy, lsokfuo`Ùk ¼xq ç ls½ ds
LFkku ij eSllZ ikbiykbu bUÝkLVªDpj fyfeVsM ¼ihvkbZ,y½ हेतु mDr lkj.kh ds LrEHk ¼3½ esa mYysf[kr izkÑfrd
xSl ikbiykbuksa ds fy, LrEHk ¼2½ esa mYysf[kr {ks=ksa ds laca/k esa mDr vf?kfu;e ds rgr l{ke izkf?kdkjh ds कार्यों
dk fuoZgu djus ds fy, ,rn}kjk izkf?kd`r djrh gS :-
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3061
O;fDr dk uke vkSj irk
{ks=kf/kdkj
izkÑfrd xSl ikbiykbu
¼ikbiykbuksa½ ds uke
¼1½
¼2½
¼3½
Jh ch- ,l- nos] vij lekgrkZ ¼lsokfuo`Ùk½]
l{ke izkf?kdkjh] ikbiykbu bUÝkLVªDpj fyfeVsM]
izFke ry] vkuan egy Vkoj – I]
Jhth vkjdsM ds lkeus] vkuan egy jksM]
vMktu]
lqjr - 395009]
xqtjkr
xqtjkr jkT;
ds lHkh ftys
ihvkbZ,y ikbiykbu
vkadksV Lij ikbiykbu
gthjk Lij ikbiykbu
fjyk;Ul Lij ikbiykbu
vVdikjMh Lij ikbiykbu
2- ;g vf/klwpuk tkjh gksus dh fnukad ls ykxw gksxh A
[Qk- la- ,y-14014@41@2016&th-ih- II]
jkt fd”kksj] voj lfpo
MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS
New Delhi, the 7th December, 2020
S.O. 1059.—In pursuance of sub-section (a) of Section 2 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines
(Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), (hereinafter called the said Act), the Central
Government hereby authorizes the person mentioned in column (1) of the table given below to perform the
functions of the Competent Authority vice Shri V. I. Gohil, Retired (GAS) under the said Act for M/s. Pipeline
Infrastructure Limited (PIL) in respect of areas mentioned in column (2) for the natural gas pipelines
mentioned in Colum (3) of the said Table:-
TABLE
Name and Address of the Person
Area of
Jurisdiction
Name of Natural Gas
Pipeline(s)
(1)
(2)
(3)
Shri B. S. Dave, Additional Collector (Retired),
Competent Authority, Pipeline Infrastructure Limited,
1st Floor, Anand Mahal Tower – I,
Opp. Shreeji Arcade, Anand Mahal Road, Adajan,
Surat – 395009,
Gujarat
All districts of
Gujarat State
PIL Pipeline
Ankot Spur Line
Hazira Spur Line
Reliance Spur Line
Atakpardi Spur Line
2. This notification will be effective from the date of its issue.
[F. No. L-14014/41/2016-GP-II]
RAJ KISHORE, Under Secy.
नई दिल् ली, 9 दिसम् बर, 2020
का.आ. 1060.—केंद्रीय सरकार, तेल उद्योग (जवकास) अजिजनयम, 1974 (1974 का 47) की िारा 3 की
उृिारा (3)( ) द्वारा प्रित् त िजियों का प्रयोग करते हुए एतद्द्वारा श्री रािीव रंिन, अृर सजचव, व्यय जवभाग को
20.11.2020 से 20.11.2022 तक या अगले आिेि िोने तक, िो भी ृिले िो, तेल उद्योग जवकास बोडा का सिस्ट्य
जनयुक् त करती िज।
[फा. सं. िी-32011/41/2016-जवत्त-I]
ृेररन िेवी, जनिेिक
3062 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 9th December, 2020
S.O. 1060.—In exercise of the Powers conferred by Sub-Section (3)(b) of Section 3 of the Oil Industry
(Development) Act, 1974 (47 of 1974), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Rajeev Ranjan,
Additional Secretary, Department of Expenditure as a member of the Oil Industry Development Board
w.e.f. 20.11.2020 to 20.11.2022 or until further orders, whichever is earlier.
[F. No. G-38011/41/2016-Fin.I]
PERIN DEVI, Director
जवद्युत मंत्रालय
नई दि ल् ली, 3 दिसम् बर, 2020
का.आ. 1061.—केंद्रीय सरकार, रािभाषा (संघ के िासकीय प्रयोिनों के जलए प्रयोग) जनयम, 1976 के
जनयम 10 के उृ जनयम (4) के अनुसरण में जवद्युत मंत्रालय के प्रिासजनक जनयंत्रणािीन ृावर जग्रड कारृोरेिन ऑफ
इंजडया जलजमटेड के जनम् नजलज त कायाालयों जिनके 80 प्रजतित कमाचारीवषंि ने हिंिी का कायासािक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर
जलया िज, को एतिद्वारा अजिसूजचत करती िज:-
1. ृावर जग्रड कारृोरेिन ऑफ इंजडया जलजमटेड,
िजक्षणी क्षेत्र ृारेषण प्रणाली-1,
765/400 के.वी. मिेश् वरम िी.आई.एस. उृकेंद्र,
मीर ानृेट (गॉंव), कन् िुकुर (मंडल),
रंगारेड्डी (जिला) – 501509 (तेलंगाना)
2. ृावर जग्रड कारृोरेिन ऑफ इंजडया जलजमटेड,
िजक्षणी क्षेत्र ृारेषण प्रणाली-1,
जचलकालूररृेट 765/400 के.वी. उृकेंद्र,
अन् नवरम ग्राम, रोम् ृीचेरला,
जिला – गुंटूर (आंध्र प्रिेि) – 522617
3. ृावर जग्रड कारृोरेिन ऑफ इंजडया जलजमटेड,
िजक्षणी क्षेत्र ृारेषण प्रणाली-1,
वरंगल 400/220 के.वी. उृकेंद्र,
ओगलाृुर गॉंव, िामेरा (डाक. एवं मंडल)
वरंगल ग्रामीण जिला – 506006 (तेलंगाना)
[सं. 11011/9/2017-ह िंदी]
राि ृाल, वररष्ठ सलािकार
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3063
MINISTRY OF POWER
New Delhi, the 3rd December, 2020
S. O. 1061.— In pursuance of Sub Rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Languages (Use for Official
Purpose of the Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notify the following offices of the Power
Grid Corporation of India Limited under the administrative control of Ministry of Power, where 80% of the staff
have acquired working knowledge of Hindi:
1. Power Grid Corporation of India Limited,
South Region Transmission System-1,
765/400 K.V. Maheshwaram G.I.S. Substation,
Meerkhanpet (Village), Kandukur (Mandal),
Rangareddy (District) – 501509 (Telangana)
2. Power Grid Corporation of India Limited,
South Region Transmission System-1,
Chilakaluripeta 765/400 K.V. Substation,
Annavaram Village, Rompicherla (Mandal),
District – Guntur (Andhra Pradesh) – 522617
3. Power Grid Corporation of India Limited,
South Region Transmission System-1,
Warangal 400/220 K.V. Substation,
Oglapur Village, Damera (P.O. & Mandal),
Warangal Rural District – 506006 (Telangana)
[No. 11011/9/2017-Hindi]
RAJ PAL, Sr. Adviser
नई दिल्ली, 3 दिसम् बर, 2020
का.आ. 1062.— केंद्रीय सरकार, रािभाषा (संघ के िासकीय प्रयोिनों के जलए प्रयोग) जनयम, 1976 के
जनयम 10 के उृ जनयम (4) के अनुसरण में जवद्युत मंत्रालय के प्रिासजनक जनयंत्रणािीन एनएचृीसी जलजमटेड के
जनम् नजलज त कायाालयों जिनके 80 प्रजतित कमाचारीवषंि ने हिंिी का कायासािक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर जलया िज, को
एतिद्वारा अजिसूजचत करती िज:-
1. एनएचृीसी जलजमटेड,
क्षेत्रीय कायाालय-जसलीगुड़ी,
जवद्युत नगर, ृोस्ट्ट-सजटेलाइट टाउनजिृ,
जसलीगुड़ी, जिला-िलृाईगुड़ी
(ृजिम बंगाल)-734015
2. एनएचृीसी जलजमटेड,
चूटक ृावर स्ट्टेिन,
हमंिी, कारजगल,
लद्दा -194103
[सं. 11011/9/2017-हिंिी]
राि ृाल, वररष्ठ सलािकार
3064 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 3rd December, 2020
S.O. 1062.— In pursuance of Sub Rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Languages (Use for Official
Purpose of the Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notify the following offices of the NHPC
Limited under the administrative control of Ministry of Power, where 80% of the staff have acquired working
knowledge of Hindi:
1. NHPC Limited,
Regional Office-Siligudi,
Vidyutnagar, P.O.-Satellite Township,
Siligudi, Distt.-Jalpaiguri
(West Bengal-734015
2. NHPC Limited,
Chutak Power Station,
Minji, Kargil,
Ladakh-194103
[No.11011/9/2017-Hindi]
RAJ PAL, Sr. Adviser
.
श्रम एवं रोिगार मंत्रालय
नई दिल्ली, 11 नवम् बर, 2020
का.आ. 1063.—औद्योजगक जववाि अजिजनयम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की िारा 17 के अनुसरण में
केन्द्रीय सरकार मेससा मु्य मिाप्रबंिक, िूरसंचार, बीएसएनएल, िजिराबाि और अन्य एवं उनके कमाचारी के
प्रबंितंत्र के संबद्ध जनयोिकों और उनके कमाकारों के बीच अनुबंि में जनर्िाष्ट औद्योजगक जववाि में केन्द्रीय सरकार
औद्योजगक अजिकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय, िजिराबाि -1 के ृंचाट (संिभा सं्या 02/2012) प्रकाजित करती िज िो
केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30.02.2020 को प्राप्त हुए े ।
[सं. एल- 42025/07/2020-आईआर (डीयू)]
डी. के. जिमांिु, अवर सजचव
MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT
New Delhi, the 11th November, 2020
S.O. 1063.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 08/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-
cum-Labour Court Hyderabad, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in
relation to The Chief General Manager, Telecommunications ,BSNL, Hyderabad, & Others, and their workmen
which were received by the Central Government on 30.08.2020.
[No. L- 42025/07/2020 IR (DU)]
D. K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT AT
HYDERABAD
Present: -Sri Muralidhar Pradhan , Presiding Officer
Dated the 29th day of July, 2020
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C.No. 8/2012
Between:
Sri Chinta Venkateswara Rao
S/o Veerabhadraiah,
R/o H.No.3-5-303/1/B, Pilli Chinnakrishna
Thota, Khammam.
..….Petitioner
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3065
AND
1.
The Chief General Manager,
Telecommunications,
BSNL, Abids, Hyderabad.
2.
The Asst. General Manager (Admn.)
O/o CGMT A.P. Circle,
Hyderabad -1.
… Respondents
Appearances:
For the Petitioner :
M/s. M.V. Hanumantha Rao, K. Seetharama Rao, N. Hari Charan, A. Venu & P. Nithya
Nageswari, Advocates
For the Respondent : Sri R.S. Murthy, Advocate
AWARD
Sri Ch. Venkateswara Rao who worked as Mazdoor (who will be referred to as workman) has filed this
petition under Sec. 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 against the Respondents Bharat Sanchar Nigam
Ltd., seeking for declaring the proceeding No.TA/STB/20-2/REP/06-10/21 dated 27.4.2010 issued by
Respondent No.2 as illegal, arbitrary and to set aside the same consequently directing the Respondents to
regularize or reengage the services of the workman by granting all consequential benefits.
2.
The averments made in the petition in brief are as follows:
The case of the Petitioner is that the Petitioner has worked as Mazdoor (Casual labourer) in Railway
Electrification Project (REP), Secunderabad to Nagpur from 1.1.1994 to 30.9.1996 for a period of 1004 days
along with others. Thereafter, the Petitioner along with others continued on voucher payment basis for sometime
and thereafter on contract basis. The Petitioner along with others have been requesting the Respondent either
for regularization or to provide regular work to them. Still, no action was taken by the Respondents, even
though the Petitioner has worked for a considerable period. It is stated that the Petitioner came to know that
by proceeding dated 21.11.2006 similarly situated persons i.e.,79 persons have been regularized giving
temporary status to them by the Respondents. In fact those persons are juniors to the Petitioner and other
similarly situated persons. It is further stated that the Petitioner has come from a very poor family and have
been pursuing the authorities since long time with a hope that the Department would consider his claim in a
positive manner. But inspite of the request of the Petitioner no action was taken by the Respondents.
Thereafter, the Petitioner along with others approached the Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Bench at
Hyderabad by filing OA Nos.100/10 and 101/10 and after hearing both the parties the Hon’ble Central
Administrative Tribunal disposed of both the OAs on 10.2.2010 giving the following direction to the
Respondent “since the applicants in the OA also have similar claims as the applicants in the AP No.12872/08, I
consider it appropriate to dispose of this Original Application by giving a direction to the applicants to file
individual representation to the Respondents giving full details namely, their addresses, places at which they
were engaged, the period for which they were engaged etc., within a period of 4 weeks and on receipt of such
representations, the Respondents, shall examine their applications with reference to the records and the scheme
that was in force and pass orders within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of such representation.”
It is further submitted that as per the orders of the Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal, the Petitioner and
others submitted elaborate representations to Respondent No.1 along with the copy of the orders passed by the
Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal and also the attendance book etc., on 3.3.2010. But the Respondents
instead of appreciating the circumstances and without proper verification of records and without providing
opportunity of being heard, have issued the impugned letter dated 27.4.2010, directing the Petitioner and others
not to do any further correspondence with the Respondents. It is stated that the proceeding dated 27.4.2010 are
ex facie illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and contrary to the record and violative of the principles of natural
justice and violative of Art.14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It is further stated that similarly situated
persons were regularized, therefore, the Respondents ought to have extended the same benefit to the Petitioner
also. It is also stated that the Respondents have extracted work from the Petitioners during subsequent period
and denial of the said benefit amounts to clear act of discrimination. It is stated that the Petitioner along with
similarly situated persons sought either for temporary status or for reengagement. But the Respondents did not
pay any heed to it either to give temporary status or to give reengagement to the Petitioner. It is further
submitted that the matter pertaining to the livelihood of the Petitioner who hails from the poor family and the
Respondents ought to have acted as a model employer by considering his case in a positive manner instead of
rejecting the claim without any cogent reasons. It is submitted that the Petitioner is having record and also the
Department had considered similarly situated persons and as such the Petitioner is entitled to get the appropriate
relief. It is also stated that the impugned order of Respondents No.2, is not only illegal, but also contrary to
3066 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
the earlier directions issued by the Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal. The Petitioner along with others
has filed their concerned books wherein the particulars of days worked by them and the number of days
worked in every month are duly certified by the officer of that time. They have also submitted the copies of
the IDs issued by the Respondents’ authorities. It is further stated that despite furnishing all the above
information, the Respondents’ authorities have not considered the request of the Petitioner and other similarly
situated persons for their regularization on par with similarly situated persons as done in other cases i.e., in the
proceedings dated 21.11.2000, and as such the inaction on the part of the Respondents is clearly discriminatory.
The Petitioner stated that the days book submitted by him clearly indicates about all the information of the
Petitioner with regard to his work i.e., MRPTS work, cable work or alignment store work etc.. It is also
submitted that the Petitioner was paid Rs.60/- per day. But inspite of the above information submitted by the
Petitioner his case has not been considered by the Respondents. Therefore, finding no other way the Petitioner
is compelled to take shelter in this Tribunal seeking the relief mentioned above.
3.
The Respondents filed counter with averments in brief as follows:
The Respondents’ management filed counter denying the facts averred in the claim statement. In the counter
the Respondents while admitting some of the facts made in the claim statement have also challenged the
maintainability of the petition. It is specifically stated that the Petitioner has filed this petition under Section
2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 seeking relief of reinstatement and regularization as a casual labour
in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., and to set aside communication No.TA/STB/20-2/REP/6-10/22 dated 27.4.2010,
which is not maintainable in view of the amendment made in the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Petitioner
has wrongly impleaded the Union of India as a party in this case. The Petitioner was not working under the
Respondents, and he was working under the contractor. There is no employer and employee relationship
between the Respondents and the Petitioner. It is submitted that there is no engagement of casual labour in
BSNL, after 1.10.2000 and the casual labour who have been engaged as such before imposition of the ban, order
vide letter No. 270/6/84-STN, New Delhi dated 30.3.1985 and letter No.270-6/84-STN dated 22.6.1988 for the
project circles and the line dismantling in the Electrification Project circles have been continued in BSNL, as a
matter of policy and the Petitioner having been engaged in Railway Electrification Project after imposition of
the ban in project circles vide letter dated 22.6.1988 is not covered by the policy thereof, and it is not open for
the Petitioner to assert for reengagement or regularization under the said policy. It is further submitted that
the Petitioner is confusing this Tribunal with regard to letter No.TA/STB/20-2/rep/06-10/22 dated 27.4.2010
pursuant to the direction of the Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal dated 10.2.2010 in OA No.100/2010
filed in continuation of WP No.12872/2008 in the Hon’ble High Court seeking for identical relief and the
communication dated 27.4.2010 was based on the directions dated 10.2.2010 in OA No.100/2010 to comply
with a judicial order notwithstanding the fact that the said OA No.100/2010 is misconceived and not
maintainable having regard to the definition of employee in Rule 3(8) of BSNL & CDA Rules 2006
implemented as such from 10.10.2006. It is clearly submitted that REP for line dismantling is distinct and
different and the said projects is outside the jurisdiction of the answering Respondents thereby leaving no
scope to reengage any casual labour engaged by the said projects organization after imposition of the ban order
and disengaging thereafter and entrustment of the work to a contractor thereby leaving no scope for
reengagement and regularization as per the settled law. It is submitted that the documents relied on by the
Petitioner do not form part of the records of the answering Respondents without any letters of engagement and
payment particulars while the maintenance of records is not the administrative concern of the answering
Respondents, and no records as such are maintained by the Respondents after the expiry of three years relating
to musterroll as per the retention schedule, and with the above averments, the Respondents submitted for
dismissal of the claim petition.
4.
During the course of hearing of this case, workman Sri Chinta Venkateswarlu is examined himself as
WW1 and also relied on 13 documents which are marked as Ex.W1 to W13, whereas the Respondents have
neither examined any witnesses nor even cross examined WW1, even after taking several opportunities.
5.
As per the averments made in the pleadings of the parties, the following points are to be
determined:
I.
Whether Lr. No.TA/STB/20-2/REP/06-10/22 dated 27.4.2010 is required to be set aside and the
Petitioner along with others is liable to be reinstated into service?
II.
Whether the Respondents are required to reengage the Petitioner along with others and whether the
Petitioner is entitled to be regularized by granting all consequential reliefs as prayed for?
6.
I have already heard the Learned Counsels for both the sides and perused the evidence adduced from
the side of the Petitioner.
7. Point No.I:
The Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner contended that the Respondents
engaged the Petitioner and others for REP for lying cable lines through out the railway track. In that process
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3067
the Petitioner along with others worked as a mazdoor (casual labourers) in the Railway Electrification Project
from Secunderabad to Nagpur from 1.1.1994 to 30.9.1996 for a period of 1004 days along with others
continuously. During that time Sri V.H.R.K.Vittal Rao, was the Divisional Engineer, Telecom (Railway
Electrification Project) Secunderabad, and was making payment to the Petitioner. He also used to sign on the
day book every month. The Assistant Engineer (Telecom) Railway Electrification Project, Secunderabad used
to provide work to the Petitioner and others and issued identity card to the Petitioner and others. He contended
that the nature of work and the number of working days clearly mentioned in the day book issued by the
authorities, which is the proof to show that the Petitioner and others were engaged and worked, for the
Respondents. He further contended that, the Petitioner along with others continuously worked under the
Respondents for which they were paid on voucher for some time and thereafter on contract basis. It is further
argued that the Petitioner along with others have been requesting the Respondents either for regularization of
their services or to provide regular work to them though, but even though they have given assurance, but no
action has been taken by the Department. Even though the Petitioner worked for a considerable period in the
Department, but his services were not regularized. He also contended that the Petitioner and others came to
know that by proceeding dated 21.11.2000 similarly situated persons of 79 persons have been regularized by
giving them temporary status by the Respondents, in fact, those persons are juniors to the Petitioner. He
contended that the Petitioner hails from a poor family and he has been pursuing the authorities since long time
with a hope that the Department would consider his claim in a positive manner. It is also contended that as no
action was taken by the Respondents, the Petitioner along with others filed WP No.12872/08 before the Hon’ble
High Court and thereafter, approached the Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal Bench at Hyderabad by
filing OA Nos.100/10 and 101/10, and after hearing both the parties the Hon’ble Central Administrative
Tribunal disposed of the OAs, on 10.2.2010 directing the Respondents to consider the grievances of the
Petitioner and others within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the representation. In obedience
to the order of the Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal, the Petitioner moved the Respondents by filing an
elaborate representation on 3.3.2010. But the Respondents vide their order dated 27.4.2010 rejected the
representations of the Petitioner and others which is illegal and violative of the principles of natural justice. It
is contended that the matter pertaining to the livelihood of the Petitioner as he hails from a poor family, the
Respondents ought to have acted as a model employer by considering the case of the Petitioner instead of
rejecting the representation of the Petitioner.
8.
On the other hand, the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents submitted that the case
is not maintainable as the Petitioner was not their worker. He was working under a contractor. There is no
employer and employee relationship between the Petitioner and the Respondents. There is no engagement of
casual labourers in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., after 1.10.2000 and the casual labour who have been engaged as
such before imposition of the ban order and completion of the projects are only the casual labourers and they
are being continued in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., as a matter of policy, and the Petitioner having been
engaged in the BSNL Railway Electrification Project after imposition of ban in project circles vide letter dated
22.6.1988 is not covered by the policy thereof and it is not open for the Petitioner to assert for reengagement or
regularization under the said policy. The Petitioner is confusing this Tribunal with regard to letter
No.TA/STB/20-2/rep/06-10/22 dated 27.4.2010 pursuant to the direction of the Hon’ble Central Administrative
Tribunal dated 10.2.2010 given in OA No.100/2010 filed in continuation of WP No.12872/2008 in the
Hon’ble High Court seeking for identical relief and the communication dated 27.4.2010 was based on the
directions dated 10.2.2010 given in OA No.100/2010 to comply with a judicial order notwithstanding the fact
that the said OA No.100/2010 is misconceived and not maintainable having regard to the definition of
employee contained in Rule 3(8) of BSNL & CDA Rules 2006 implemented as such from 10.10.2006. It is
further argued that REP for line dismantling is distinct and different and the said projects is outside the
jurisdiction of the answering Respondents thereby leaving no scope to reengage any casual labour engaged by
the said projects organization after imposition of the ban order and disengaging thereafter and entrustment of
the work to a contractor thereby leaving no scope for reengagement and regularization as per the settled law. It
is argued by the Learned Counsel for the Respondents that the documents relied on by the Petitioner do not form
part of the records of the answering Respondents without any letters of engagement and payment particulars
while the maintenance of records is not the administrative concern of the answering Respondents, and no
records as such are maintained by the Respondents after expiry of three years relating to muster roll as per the
retention schedule, and with these submissions, the Learned Counsel for the Respondents submitted for
dismissal of the claim petition.
9.
The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further contended that only to deprive the Petitioner workman
from his legitimate right the Respondents have taken a stand that they have not utilized the services of the
Petitioner directly and the Petitioner was working under a contractor with whom the Respondents have made
an agreement. He also contended that the Respondents have exploited the poor Petitioner. He also contended
that such type of labour exploitation should be prohibited. In support of this contention he relied on a decision
of the Apex Court reported in (2011)15 decided in the case of Bhilwara Dugdh Utpdak Sahakari Samiti Limited
Vs. Vinod Kumar Sharma, dead by LRs and others in Civil Appeal No.2585 of 2006 209 (S.C.) wherein their
3068 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Lordships held that “Labour statutes were meant to protect the employees/workmen because it was realised that
the employers and the employees are not on an equal bargaining position. Hence, protection of employees was
required so that they may not be exploited. However, this new technique of subterfuge has been adopted by
some employers in recent years in order to deny the rights of the workmen under various labour statutes by
showing that the workmen concerned are not their employees but are the employees/workmen of a contractor, or
that they are merely daily-wage or short-term or casual employees when in fact they are doing the work of
regular employees. This court cannot countenance such practices any more. Globalization/liberalization in the
name of growth cannot be at the human cost of exploitation of workers.” He also contended that in order to
avoid the legitimate right of the Petitioner the Respondents have stayed various commissions which is not at all
acceptable from a huge organization like the Respondents.
10.
On consideration of the rival contentions of both the sides it is seen that the Petitioner was working
under the Respondents for a period of more than three years. The Respondents have also engaged the services
of the Petitioner in different fields. But no letter of engagement had been given in favour of the Petitioner. The
Respondents have taken a plea that the Petitioner was working under a contractor to whom they have engaged
for their work. The Respondents have exploited the services of the Petitioner by engaging him through
contractors. The Petitioner after disengagement and denial of regularly engaging him in any work, he has
moved the Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal who had also directed the Respondents to consider the
representation of the Petitioner. But the Respondents in a very casual manner considered the representation of
the Petitioner and rejected his representation without any reasonable grounds. The Respondents have also taken
a plea that the documents relating to the work of the Petitioner is not available with them and it is not their
duty to keep in custody and it is the duty of the administrative Department of the Respondents’ organization.
Taking such type of plea the Respondents can not be escaped from the liability when the administrative
Department is under the control of their organization. The Respondents should have called for the documents of
the Petitioner and passed a reasonable order while rejecting the representation of the Petitioner. The Petitioner
is also relied on 13 documents showing that he had worked under the Respondents and the officers of the
Respondents’ organization have recognized him as a mazdoor which clearly shows that without any malafide
intention the Petitioner has moved for the courts to get the relief. He has not prayed for regularization of his
service, but only to reengage him as a casual labourer. The Respondents would have engaged the Petitioner as a
casual labourer when they have already regularized the services of some similarly situated employees.
Therefore, it can safely be stated that the prayer of the Petitioner is genuine and the order passed by the
Respondents rejecting the representation of the Petitioner dated 27.4.2010 in a casual manner is liable to be set
aside and the said impugned order dated 27.4.2010 is also hereby set aside.
Thus Point No.I is answered accordingly.
11.
Point No.II: In view of the findings given in Point No.I, it is seen that the Petitioner was working as a
mazdoor/casual labourer under the Respondents for a period of three years i.e., for 1004 days, he has not
produced any letter of engagement. Only he wants to be a casual labour under the Respondents. The Petitioner
is only entitled to be engaged as a mazdoor/casual labour under the Respondents and is not entitled to get any
other relief as prayed for.
Thus, Point No.II is answered accordingly.
ORDER
In view of the findings given in Point Nos.I and II, it is hereby ordered: The case of the Petitioner is
allowed in part. The Respondents are directed to engage the Petitioner as a casual labour at the time of their
need, if they fail to engage the Petitioner as a casual labourer, they are directed to pay a sum of Rs.50000/-
(Fifty thousand) to the Petitioner towards compensation. This order be complied within four months from the
date of receipt of notification, failing which the Petitioner is at liberty to take appropriate steps according to
Law.
Award is passed accordingly. Transmit.
Dictated to Smt. P. Phani Gowri, Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me on this the 29th
day of July, 2020.
MURALIDHAR PRADHAN, Presiding Officer
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3069
Appendix of evidence
Witnesses examined for the
Witnesses examined for the
Petitioner
Respondent
WW1: Sri Chinta Venkateswara Rao
NIL
Documents marked for the Petitioner
Ex.W1:
Photostat copy of order dt.27.4.2010 issued by the Respondent No.2
Ex.W2:
Photostat copy of representation dt.3.3.2010 by WW2
Ex.W3:
Photostat copy of order in OA No.1229/2011 by Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal
Ex.W4:
Photostat copy of order in OA No.100/2010 by Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal
Ex.W5:
Photostat copy of order in OA No.101/2010 by Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal
Ex.W6:
Photostat copy oflr.dt.9.5.2007 issued by Divisional Officer, BSNL, (RE)(TP) Secunderabad
Ex.W7:
Photostat copy of Lr. of Director, BSNL, REP, Secunderabad dt.12.9.2002
Ex.W8:
Photostat copy of list of candidates issued by Div. Engineer, Secunderabad dt.11.9.2002
Ex.W9:
Photostat copy of lr.dt.13.11.2007 providing information under RTI Act along with list issued by
Respondent No.2
Ex.W10:
Photostat copy of lr.dt.21.11.2000 with regard to temporary status
Ex.W11:
Photostat copy of days book signed by Authority; Divisional Engineer
Ex.W12:
Photostat copy of identity card of Petitioner issued by Asst. Engineer Telecom
Ex.W13:
Photostat copy of order passed in WP No.12872/2008
Documents marked for the Respondent
NIL
ubZ fnYyh] 4 fnlEcj] 2020
—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼a1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh;
ljdkj cSad vkWQ cMkSnk 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; la- 1] /kuckn ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la- 30@2016½ dks
izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 04-12-2020 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y-12012@69@2016-vkbZ vkj ¼ch-II]
lhek caly] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 4th December, 2020
S.O. 1064.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 30/2016) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court No 1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Bank of
Baroda and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 04.12.2020.
[No. L-12012/69/2016-IR(B-II)
SEEMA BANSAL, Section Officer
3070 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, DHANBAD
In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A) of I.D.Act. 1947
Reference: No. 30/2016
Employer in relation to the management of Bank of Baroda, Gamharia Branch
AND
Their workman
Present: Shri Dinesh Kumar Singh, Presiding Officer
Appearances:
For Employer
: Sri R.R. Prasad, Advocate.
For workman
: Sri R.R. Ram, Advocate.
State : Jharkhand.
Industry:- Banking
Dated 31.08./2020
AWARD
By Order No. L-12012/69/2016-IR(B-II)) dated 28.09.2016, the Central Government in the Ministry of
Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section
10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the management of Bank of Baroda, Gamharia Branch in alleged illegal
termination of Shri Dinesh Kumar Singh is legal, justified and proper? If not, What relief he is
entitled to?”
2. After receipt of the reference, both the parties were noticed. The concerned workman Dinesh Kumar Singh
has filed his written statement of claim on 02/01/2017 and the management Bank of Baroda, Gamharia Branch
through its Regional Manager Bank of Baroda, Jamshedpur has filed his written statement on 20/04/2017.
The workman Dinesh Kumar Singh has filed rejoinder to the written statement of the management on
02/06/2017.
3.
The claim of concerned workman namely Dinesh Kumar Singh as per his written statement is as
follows:-
That he had been working at Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda with effect from 05/02/2007 from
the very date of inception of this Branch of Bank of Baroda as a Cleaning Mazdoor cum peon. The Branch had
made local advertisement for employment of a person for the said job and he was holder of the employment
exchange card, so he was taken in employment after selecting him from a group of persons and said
employment card was taken by the Bank. Subsequently Dy. General Manager of the Bank of Baroda had
directed all the Branch Managers of the Bank of State of Jharkhand to issue advertisement to all such persons
who were working in their respective Branches as part time cleaning mazdoor/full time cleaning mazdoor cum
peon to apply for such post vide letter dated 22/25-10-2012. After that he had applied for the said post in a
prescribed pro-forma but he had not got any information about the action taken on his application. Thereafter
the management had stopped him from working in the branch with effect from 13/02/2015 without any charge-
sheet, notice, notice pay or compensation in utter violation of section 25 F of Industrial Dispute Act and
engaged a new man on this post in violation of section 25 H of I.D. Act. He was working continuously without
break in the said branch of the management since 05/02/2007 and he had been in continuous service for more
than 240 days in a year before termination of his service. The Branch Manager Sri Pankaj Srivastava informed
him that since he was not the employee of the Bank, so there was no question of his removing from service and
thereafter he had submitted several representation for his regularisation, payment of wages and reinstatement but
the same was not accepted. After that he raised an Industrial Dispute before the competent authority and
subsequently the matter was referred to the Industrial Tribunal.
A prayer has been made to hold the action of management in terminating his service as illegal,
unjustified and improper.
4.
The case of management of Bank of Baroda, Gamharia Branch through its Regional Manager Bank of
Baroda Bistupur Jamshedpur is as follows:-
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3071
That the present reference case is neither maintainable in law nor in fact. The concerned workman had
submitted the statement of claim after lapse of sixty days and he had to file the same within 15 days from the
date of receipt of notification, so this reference case is not maintainable. The Gamharia Branch of Bank of
Baroda had engaged concerned workman namely Dinesh Kumar Singh for sweeping and cleaning purpose
purely on casual/temporary basis intermittently on day to day basis and his engagement started in the morning
and ended with the completion of work for which he was engaged. The concerned workman had never been
appointed in the Bank by the competent authority as per the prescribed procedure and there is no relation of
employer and employee between the management and the concerned workman. The concerned workman is not
at all workman as per section 2(s) of Industrial Dispute Act and the appointment of Sub-Staff in Bank is
governed by statutory rules and guidelines. The Bank has laid down eligibility criteria for appointment in
Sub-Staff cadre which has specified minimum and maximum age limit, educational qualification etc. In terms of
the directions issued by the Central Government, employment of persons in Sub Staff cadre would be done
through employment exchange as also by advertisement for the post in the area where the vacancies are declared
but the concerned workman namely Dinesh Kumar Singh had never been sponsored by the employment
exchange and on this ground his claim is not maintainable. The concerned workman was engaged purely on
temporary basis as a stop gap arrangement without following the laid down procedure, so his case doesn’t fall in
the ambit of definition of Industrial Dispute Act. The concerned workman was never terminated from service as
he was never appointed by the Bank. The concerned workman was not at any point of time an employee of the
Bank and he was engaged for part of the day purely on casual/temporary basis for sweeping and cleaning
purposes. The concerned workman had neither been engaged nor worked continuously in Bank for 240 days in a
calendar year, so his claim is not maintainable.
A prayer has been made to hold the action of management as legal and justified and dismiss the claim
of workman.
5.
The concerned workman has submitted the rejoinder to the written statement of the management in
which he has denied the averments made in the written statement of the management.
6.
The concerned workman has examined only one witness. He is himself WW-1, Dinesh Kumar Singh.
7.
The WW-1, Dinesh Kumar Singh has deposed before the Tribunal that he had been appointed by
Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda on 05/02/2007 and he had been terminated from service by verbal order on
13/02/2015. He has also deposed that he had been working in the said Branch Office since 05/02/2007 as a
Cleaning Mazdoor- Cum- Peon and he had been paid wages as per Minimum Wages Act through vouchers on
weekly basis. He has also stated that he had worked continuously without any interruption and break with entire
satisfaction of management for 8 years from 05/02/2007 to 13/02/2015 and on 13/02/2015 he was terminated
from service without any notice/compensation. He has also deposed that the provision of section 25(F) of I.D.
Act had not been complied with as he had worked for 240 days in a year. He has also stated that he has applied
for regularization for his service in a specified pro-forma in the year 2012, but he didn’t get any information on
his application. He has also deposed that he had submitted his application for Conciliation before the Assistant
Labour Commissioner but the matter was not settled. He has also deposed that he is entitled to be reinstated and
to be regularised as a full time Cleaning Mazdoor with full back wages as per prevailing rate of pay in the Bank.
In the cross-examination he has deposed that the Branch Manager had issued appointment letter to him
and the same had been filed by him in this case. He has also deposed that his date of birth is 1967 and his case
was referred for regularization but the same was regretted. He has denied that in the year 2012 he was 45 years
old, so he was not eligible for appointment. He has also deposed that he don’t have any matriculation certificate
though he had passed it in the year 1984. He had denied the suggestion that he had not worked for 240 days in a
calendar year.
8.
The concerned workman has proved the following documents which are marked as:-
Exhibit W-1- Photo Copy of letter number Gamhar/06/70 dated 21.9.12 of Senior Branch Manager addressed to
Dy. General Manager Bank of Baroda, Jamshedpur.
Exhibit W-2- Photo copy of General circular letter dated 22/25-10-12 issued by Regional Office of Bank of
Baroda, Jamshedpur.
Exhibit W-3- Photo Copy of letter dated 17/08/2015 of Regional Office Bank of Baroda, Jamshedpur
addressed to concerned workman.
Exhibit W-4- Photo Copy of representation dated 24/02/2015 of concerned workman addressed to DGM Bank
of Baroda, Regional Office, Jamshedpur for regularisation of his service.
3072 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Exhibit W-5- Photo Copy of representation dated 17/07/2015 of concerned workman addressed to DGM,
Regional Office Bank of Baroda, Jamshedpur for his regularisation.
Exhibit W-6- Photo Copy of representation dated 12/02/2015 of concerned workman addressed to DGM,
Regional Office Bank of Baroda, Jamshedpur for his regularisation.
Exhibit W-7- Photo Copy of letter dated 25/08/2015 of Assistant Labour Commissioner, Chaibasa to the
concerned workman and Regional Manager Bank of Baroda, Jamshedpur.
Exhibit W-8- Photo Copy of reply of management of Bank of Baroda to Assistant Labour Commissioner,
Chaibasa.
Exhibit W-9- Photo Copy of reply of concerned workman to Assistant Labour Commissioner, Chaibasa.
Exhibit W-10- Photo Copy of representation of concerned workman to the Branch Manager regarding housing
loan.
Exhibit W-11 series- Photo Copy of Pass Book of concerned workman for the period from 01/07/2010 to
17/04/2017.
Exhibit W-12- Photo Copy of Voter Identity Card of concerned workman.
9.
The management has examined two witnessess. They are MW-1, Raj Kamal and MW-2, Kundan
Rajak.
10.
The MW-1, Raj Kamal has deposed that he was working as Senior Branch Manager at Gamharia
Branch in Bank of Baroda and the concerned workman Dinesh Kumar Singh was never appointed by any
competent authority in the Bank. He has produced the copy of guidelines issued by the Bank of Baroda which
has been marked as Exhibit M-1. He has also deposed that as per guidelines for appointment as a person of sub
staff, the eligibilities are maximum age 26 years on the date of appointment and class Xth pass educational
qualification. He has deposed that the concerned workman was engaged as casual labour on day to day basis and
he was never appointed in the Bank by any competent authority. He has produced the photo copy of Aadhar
Card and Election Identity Card of the concerned workman in which his date of birth has been mentioned as
1967. He has proved the Voter I-Card and Aadhaar card of the concerned workman and both the documents are
marked as Exhibit M-2 and Exhibit M-3 repectively. He has further deposed that the engagement of casual
labour is made on daily basis in contingency and is paid for that day only for number of days engaged in a
month.
In the cross-examination he has deposed that he was working at Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda
since 01/06/2017 and he has no knowledge when the concerned workman was discharged from service. He has
further stated that there is no record available in Bank regarding appointment of concerned workman. He has
also deposed that he has knowledge that on earlier occasion the concerned workman was engaged for cleaning
purposes and he was not paid wages on monthly basis whereas he was paid his wages on daily basis in cash. He
has also deposed that he has no knowledge whether the concerned workman was discharged from service on
13/02/2015 or not and he has no knowledge regarding serving of notice or holding enquiry in this matter. He has
further deposed that no record is available regarding continuous service of concerned workman since
05/02/2007 to 13/02/2015 as cleaning peon in the Bank.
11.
The MW-2, Kundan Rajak Spl. Assistant in Bank of Baroda, Kharsama, Jamshedpur has deposed that
he was posted at Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda since 2007 to 2019 and at that time the concerned
workman Dinesh Kumar Singh was working as clearing Mazdoor in the said Branch for work as per
requirement. He has also stated that the concerned workman was never appointed on casual basis by the
competent person and his remuneration was paid as per his work. He has also stated that the concerned
workman had never worked for more than 240 days in a year.
In the cross-examination he has deposed that he was not posted in Mango Branch on 05/02/2007. He
has further deposed that he has no knowledge that concerned workman was appointed on casual basis by the
Bank. He has further deposed that the concerned workman was paid for his work by voucher and he used to
prepare such vouchers for payment whereas attendance of the concerned workman was not marked on the
attendance register. He has denied the suggestion that the concerned workman was retrenched from service on
13/02/2015 without any information.
12.
The management has proved the following documents in support of this case which are marked as:-
Exhibit M-1- Photo Copy of letter of Zonal Regional Authorities dated 05 Oct. 2016 regarding guidelines of
recruitment of Substaff.
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3073
Exhibit M-2- Photo Copy of Aadhaar Card of concerned workman.
Exhibit M-3- Photo Copy of Voter ID Card of concerned workman.
13.
The learned lawyer of the concerned workman has submitted before Tribunal that the concerned
workman Dinesh Kumar Singh was appointed by the Branch Manager Bank of Baroda Gamharia on 05/02/2007
for working as cleaning mazdoor as well as peon and since that date the concerned workman had been working
in the Bank regularly. He has further argued that concerned workman had completed his attendance for more
than 240 days in each and every calendar year but the management had verbally terminated him from service
with effect from 13/02/2015 without any show-Cause notice/charge-sheet, so the management had violated the
provision of 25F and 25 H of the I.D. Act. He has also submitted that the concerned workman was paid his
wages through vouchers and this fact has been admitted by MW-1 and MW-2 in their evidence but the
management has not produced those vouchers before the Tribunal after calling for those documents by the
Tribunal, so adverse inference can be drawn. He has also submitted that concerned workman had applied for his
regularisation in the year 2012 but no decision was taken by the Bank management. He has also argued that the
concerned workman had taken loan of Rs. 3,00,000/- from the said Bank as a staff of the said Bank. He has
relied on the decision of Rajasthan High Court passed in Civil Writ Petition No. 5551 of 2016 and Civil Writ
Petition No. 125 of 2006.
14.
On the other hand the learned lawyer of management has submitted that the concerned workman is not
at all workman as per definition of 2(s) of the Industrial Dispute Act and there is no employer-employee
relationship between the concerned workman and the management. He has also submitted that the concerned
workman was appointed on daily basis for sweeping and clearing purposes on casual and temporary basis on
day to day basis. He has also argued that the concerned workman had not been terminated from the service as he
has never been an employee of the Bank. He has further submitted that the concerned workman has not
produced any appointment letter and termination letter showing that he had been an employee of the Bank, so
there is no question of his termination from Bank. He has also submitted that this reference case is not
maintainable. He has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court as reported in SCC 2006 (L& S) 753, and
SCC 2007 (6) 7, SCC 2014 (13) 232, 2016 (1) JLJR and decision of Hon’ble Jharkhand passed in case of Bipin
Kumar Verma Vs. UCO Bank, Dhanbad -LPA No-268/2012.
FINDINGS
15.
It is the claim of the concerned workman namely Dinesh Kumar Singh that he had been working at
Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda w.e.f. 05/02/2007 as a Cleaning Mazdoor -cum –Peon but his services was
terminated on 13/02/2015 without giving any so cause or compensation to him. It is the further claim of the
concerned workman that he had worked for more than 240 days in twelve calendar months before his
termination of service.
16.
On the other hand this is the case of the management of Bank of Baroda that the concerned workman
had never been appointed as sub staff in Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda but he had been engaged for
sweeping work as daily wager. It is further case of the management that the concerned workman had never
worked continuously in Bank for 240 days in twelve calendar months, so his claim is not maintainable.
17.
Now, in the light of the pleading of both the parties the Tribunal will examine oral and documentary
evidence available on the record.
18.
The most competent witness in this case is WW-1, Dinesh Kumar Singh. He has deposed before the
Tribunal that he had been appointed by Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda on 05/02/2007 and his service had
been terminated by verbal order on 13/02/2015. He had also deposed that he had been working in the Branch
since 05/02/2007 as Cleaning Mazdoo-cum-Peon and he had been paid wages as per Minimum Wages Act
through vouchers on weekly basis. He has also deposed that he had worked for more than 240 days in a calendar
year but his service was terminated without complying the provision of Section 25F of the I.D. Act, so he is
entitled for reinstatement and regularisation of his service. In the cross-examination he has deposed that the
management had given appointment letter to him and the same had been filed. He has also stated that his date of
birth is 1967 and his case was referred for regularisation but the same was regretted. He has denied the
suggestion that in the year 2012 he was 45 years old, so he had not been eligible for appointment.
The MW-1, Raj kamal who was Senior Branch Manager of Gamharia Branch in Bank of Baroda as
deposed that the concerned workman namely Dinesh Kumar Singh was never appointed by any competent
authority in the Bank. He has also deposed that the maximum age for appointment of any person as sub staff is
26 years and the educational qualification is matriculation. He has also stated that as per Aadhaar Card and
Election Identity Card the date of birth of concerned workman was 1967. He has also stated that the concerned
workman was engaged as casual labour on day to day basis and he was never appointed as peon. In the cross-
3074 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
examination he has stated that he has no knowledge of the discharge of the concerned workman and no record is
available in the Bank regarding his appointment.
The MW-2, Kundan Rajak, who is Special Assistant in Bank of Baroda, Jamshedpur, has stated that he
was posted at Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda from 2007 to 2019 and at that time concerned workman was
working as a Clearing Mazdoor in the Branch but he was never appointed by the competent authority and he had
been paid his remuneration as per his work. He has also deposed that the concerned workman had never worked
for 240 days in a year. In the cross-examination he has stated that he has no knowledge that the concerned
workman was appointed on casual basis by the Bank. He has further deposed that the concerned workman was
paid for his work by voucher and he used to prepare such vouchers for payment whereas attendance of the
concerned workman was not marked on the attendance register. He has further deposed that the attendance of
concerned workman was not marked on evidence register.
19.
Now, coming to the documentary evidence of workman it appears that Exhibit W-1 is a photo copy of
letter dated 21/09/2012 issued by Branch Manager to the Dy. General Manager, Bank of Baroda , Jamshedpur in
which it is mentioned that one person namely Dinesh Kumar Singh is engaged for purpose on casual basis since
inception of Gamharia branch and payment to Dinesh Kumar Singh is made on weekly basis. Further Exhibit
W-2 is a general circular letter issued by Dy. General Manager, Bank of Baroda on 22/25-10-12 regarding
guidelines for appointment of ex-employee-cum-sweeper. Further Exhibit W-3 is a letter issued by Assistant
General Manager, Bank of Baroda to the concerned workman Dinesh Kumar Singh informing him that he was
not an employee of Bank, so there is no question of his termination from service. Exhibit W-4, Exhibit W-5 and
Exhibit W-6 are the representation of concerned workman to the Dy. General Manager, Bank of Baroda,
Jamshedpur for regularisation of his service in Bank. Moreover Exhibit W-7 is a notice of Assistant Labour
Commissioner to the management of Bank and concerned workman. Exhibit W-8 and Exhibit W-9 are the reply
of management and the concerned workman respectively to the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Government of
India, Chaibasa. Further Exhibit W-10 is the information given by concerned workman regarding settlement of
his loan. Exhibit W-11 is the copy of pass book of concerned workman and Exhibit W-12 is the identity card of
workman issued by Election Commission of India in which his date of birth has been mentioned as 39 years on
01/01/2006.
20.
The documentary evidence of management shows that the Exhibit M-1 is the detail guidelines for
appointment of staff of Bank of Baroda. Exhibit M-2 is the photo copy of Aadhaar Card of concerned workman
in which his date of birth has been mentioned as 1967 and Exhibit M-3 is the Identity Card of Election
Commission of India of the concerned workman in which his date of birth is mentioned as 39 years on
01/01/2006.
21.
Now, after analysing the oral evidence of WW-1 Dinesh Kumar Singh available on the record it
appears that the concerned workman had been engaged in the Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda on
casual/daily basis for cleaning purposes since 05/02/2007. Further this fact has been corroborated by Exhibit W-
1 a letter issued by Senior Branch Manager on 21/09/2012 in which it is mentioned that Dinesh Kumar Singh
was engaged for the purpose on casual basis since inception of Gamharia Branch and payment was being made
to him on weekly basis. Moreover the MW-1 and MW-2 in their cross-examination have admitted that the
concerned workman had been engaged for cleaning purpose in the Bank and was paid his remuneration. The
Exhibit W-4, Exhibit W-5 and Exhibit W-6 show that the concerned workman had been removed from the
service on 13/02/2015.
20.
It is relevant to mention here that on the prayer of concerned workman the payment vouchers and the
attendance register of the Bank for the period 2007 to 2015 had been called for but the same were not produced
on the ground that payment vouchers are not available and the name of concerned workman had not been
mentioned in the attendance register for the period 2007 to 2015,
21.
It is required to mention here that the MW-2 in its cross-examination has categorically admitted that
the concerned workman was paid for his work by vouchers and he used to prepare such vouchers for payment.
Since it is an admission by the management that payment was made to the concerned workman by vouchers but
the same were not produced before the Tribunal so adverse inference is drawn.
22.
In view of the above discussion the Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the concerned workman
namely Dinesh Kumar Singh had been working in Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda since 05/02/2007 till he
was terminated from service on 13/02/2015.
23.
It is important to mention here that the workman has been defined u/s 2(s) of Industrial Dispute Act.
The Section 2(s) of I.D. Act reads as follows:-
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3075
“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 administrative 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
24.
At this stage it is relevant to mention here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a case as reported in 2011
LAB. I. C. 2799 (S.C) has been pleased to observe as follows:-
“14. It is apposite to observe that 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 a 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.
15. Whenever an employer challenges the maintainability ground that the employee is not a workman
within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Act, what the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal is required to
consider is whether the person is employed in an industry for hire or reward for doing manual,
unskilled, skilled, operational, technical or clerical work in an industry. Once the test of employment
for hire or reward for doing the specified type of work is satisfied, the employee would fall within the
definition of ‘workman”.
25.
It is required to mentioned here that the concerned workman namely Dinesh Kumar Singh had worked
in the Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda on casual basis as Cleaning Mazdoor cum peon since 05/02/2007
and he was paid his remuneration on weekly basis as per Minimum Wages Act, so he was employed in the
Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda on hire and consequently he was a workman of the Gamharia Branch of
Bank of Baroda so, there was a relationship between him and the management as employer and employee.
Hence there is an Industrial Dispute.
26.
It is also relevant to mention here that the word retrenchment has been defined u/s 2(oo) of the I .D
.Act, definition of continuous service has been mentioned u/s 25-B of I . D .Act and the condition precedent to
retrenchment have been mentioned u/S 25 F of I.D Act.
Section 2(oo) of the I.D.Act reads as follows:-
Section 2(oo) -“retrenchment” means the termination by the employer of the service of a workman for any
reason whatsoever, otherwise than as a punishment inflicted by way of disciplinary action but does not include-
(a)
Voluntary retirement of the workman; or
(b) Retirement of the workman on reaching the age of superannuation if the contract of employment
between the employer and the workman concerned contains a stipulation in that behalf; or
(bb) Termination of the service of the workman as a result of the non-renewal of contract of employment
between the employer and the workman concerned on its expiry or of such contract being
terminated under a stipulation in that behalf contained therein; or
(c ) Termination of the service of a workman on the ground of continued ill-health.
The Section 25-F of the Industrial Dispute Act reads as follows:-
25-F Conditions precedent to retrenchment of workmen- No workman employed in any industry who has been
in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer until-
3076 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(a)
The workman has been given one month’s notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment
and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been paid in lieu of such notice, wages for
the period of the notice:
(b)
The workman has been paid, at the time of retrenchment, compensation which shall be equivalent to
fifteen days’ average pay (for Every completed year of continuous service) or any part thereof in
excess of six months; and
(c)
Notice in the prescribed manner is served on the appropriate Government (or such authority as may
be specified by the appropriate Government by notification in the Official Gazette.)
At this stage it is required to mentioned here that the word continuous service has been define under
Section 25-B of the I.D. Act. The Section 25-B of I.D. Act reads as follows:-
25-B. Definition of continuous service – For the purpose of this Chapter,-
(1) a workman shall be said to be in continuous service for a period if he is, for that period, in
uninterrupted service, including service which may be interrupted on account of sickness or
authorized leave or an accident or a strike which is not illegal, or a lock-out or a cessation of work
which is not due to any fault on the part of the workman;
(2) Where a workman is not in continuous service within the meaning of clause (1) for a period of one
year or six months, he shall be deemed to be in continuous service under an employer-
(a) for a period one year, if the workman, during a period of twelve calendar months preceding
the date with reference to which calculation is to be made, has actually worked under the
employer for not less than –
(i)
one hundred and ninety days in the case of a workman employed below ground in a
mine; and
(ii) two hundred and forty days, in any other case;
(b)
…………………………………..
27. Now in this case there is categorical evidence that the concerned workman namely Dinesh Kumar Singh had
worked in Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda since 05/02/2007 to 13/02/2015 on casual basis as cleaning
mazdoor cum peon and in this regard a letter had been issued by Senior Branch Manager on 21/09/2012
(Exhibit W-1), so it appears that he had worked in the Bank for 240 days in a calendar year.
28.
In view of such fact the concerned workman was in continuous service in the Gamharia Branch of
Bank of Baroda as per definition mentioned u/s 25-B of I.D’ Act. Moreover there is also evidence that the
concerned workman was removed from his service w.e.f. 13/02/2015. Further there is no evidence before the
Tribunal that the concerned workman had been given one month notice in writing indicating the reasons for his
retrenchment/ removal or had been paid compensation equivalent to 15 days of average pay as per provision of
25-F of the I.D. Act.
29.
Hence, in view of above the discussion the Tribunal holds that the concerned workman namely Dinesh
Kumar Singh had worked in Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda since 05/02/2007 as a Cleaning Mazdoor
Cum Peon and he had been removed from service w.e.f. 13/02/2015 without complying the provisions of section
25F of the I.D. Act.. Further the action of the management in terminating the service of the concerned w.e.f.
13/02/2015 is not justified. Hence the concerned workman is entitled for relief.
30.
At this stage it is relevant to mention here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in catena of decision has
been pleased to observe that the completion of 240 days work doesn’t under the law import the right to
regularisation and it merely imposed certain obligation on the employer at the time of termination of service.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a case of Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd Vs. Dan Bahadur Singh, as
reported in (2007) 6 SCC 207, has been pleased to observe:-
“14. The next question which requires consideration is whether completion of 240 days in a year
confers any right on an employee or workman to claim regularisation in service. In Madhyamik
Shiksha Parishad vs. Anil Kumar Mishra it was held that the completion of 240 days’ work does not
confer the right to regularisation under the Industrial Disputes Act. It merely imposes certain
obligations on the employer at the time of termination of the services. In M.P. Housing Board vs.
Manoj Shrivastava (para 17) after referring to several earlier decisions it has been reiterated that it is
well settled that only because a person had been working for more than 240 days, he does not derive
any legal right to be regularised in serivee. This view has been reiterated in Gangadhar Pillai vs.
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3077
Siemens Ltd. The same question has been examined in considerable detail with reference to an
employee working in a government company in Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs. Workmen
and paras 34 and 35 of the report are being reproduced below: (SCC p.426)
“34. Thus, it is well settled that there is no right vested in any daily wager to seek regularisation.
Regularisation can only be done in accordance with the rules and not dehors the rules. In the case of
E. Ramakrishnan v. State of Kerala this Court held that there can be no regularisation dehors the
rules. The same view was taken in Kishore (Dr.) v. State of Maharashtra and Union of India v.
Bishamber Dutt. The direction issued by the services Tribunal for regularising the services of persons
who had not been appointed on regular basis in accordance with the rules was set aside although the
petitioner had been working regularly for a long time.
35. In Surinder Singh Jamwal (Dr.) v. State of J&K it was held that ad hoc appointment does not give
any right for regularization as regularization is governed by the statutory rules.””
The Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court has been pleased to observe in L.P.A No. 268/2012 which is as
under:-
“(xiv) Be that as it may, even assuming without admitting that this appellant has worked more than 240
days in couple of years, then also, his services cannot be regularized. 240 days’ working is not a magic
bond which converts illegal appointment into the legal appointment. In fact, 240 days working has
nothing to do with the regularization at all. 240 days working has got reference under Section 25-B of
the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for calculation of continuous years of service and nothing beyond
that. Unnecessarily several times the Labour Court or the Industrial Courts are committing an error
that if any worker has completed 240 days, their services should be regularized. In fact, there is no
casual connection at all between the working of 240 days and right of regularization. Illegality in the
appointment cannot be diluted by the working of 240 days. Illegality in the appointment continues, even
if, the worker has worked for 240 days.”
The Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court has been further pleased to hold as follows:-
“Whenever any employment is given unauthorizedly, in the respondent-UCO Bank, Hirapur, Dhanbad,
such type of employment cannot be converted into a regular employment unless there are rules for
regularization or scheme for regularization. In the facts of the present case, there are no rules of
regularization nor there is any scheme of regularization floated by the UCO Bank. In absence of such
type of law, the charity shown by the Court will be cruelty to others. If such type regularization is
allowed by the Courts, it will provide encouragement to those who are adorning high-ranking
administrative position to give illegal appointment and later on, to get them regularized by the orders
of the Courts. A thing which cannot be done directly, can never be done indirectly. If no employment
can be given without there being any advertisement and without there being any recruitment process,
the Court cannot be a party to illegal regularization of such employee.”
31. In view of such fact and in view of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court
it is settled that the concerned workman is not entitled for regularization of his job for working 240 days in a
calendar year in Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda.
32. It is relevant to mention here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a case of BSNL Vs. Bhurumal as
reported in (2014) 7 SCC 177, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been pleased to observe as under:-
34. 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. Since such a workman was working on daily wage basis
and even after he is reinstated, he has no right to seek regularization (See: State of Karnataka vs. Uma
Devi (2006) 4 SCC 1). Thus when he cannot claim regularization and he has no right to continue even
as a daily wage worker, no useful purpose is going to be served in reinstating such a workman and he
can be given monetary compensation by the Court itself inasmuch as if he is terminated again after
reinstatement, he would receive monetary compensation only in the form of retrenchment
compensation and notice pay. In such a situation, giving the relief of reinstatement, that too after a
long gap, would not serve any purpose.
33.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a case of District Development Officer Vs. Satish Kantilal
Amrelia as reported in (2018) 12 SCC 29 B has been pleased to hold as follows:-
3078 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
“16) In view of forgoing discussion, we are of the considered view that it would be just, proper and
reasonable to award lump sum monetary compensation to the respondent in full and final
satisfaction of his claim of re-instatement and other consequential benefits by taking recourse to the
powers under Section 11-A of the Act and the law laid down by this Court in Bharat Sanchar Nigam
Limited case (supra)”.
34. The Hon’ble Supreme Court is an another case Deputy Executive Engineer Vs Kuberbhai Kanjhibhai as
reported in 2019 (160) FLR 651 has reiterated the same principle.
35.
Now, in this case the concerned workman had been working in Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda
for about eight years as on casual basis as cleaning mazdoor cum peon and his service was terminated by the
Gamharia Branch of Bank of India in the year 2015 without complying the provisions of section 25F of the I.D.
Act. Moreover about five years have elapsed after his termination in the year 2015, so giving relief of
reinstatement after long gap would not serve any purpose.
36.
It is relevant to mention here that the facts and circumstances of this case is different from the facts and
circumstances of the case relied by the learned lawyer of the workman, so the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan
High Court passed in Civil Writ Petition No. 5551 of 2016 and Civil Writ Petition No. 125 of 2006 is not
applicable in this case.
37.
In view of such fact the Tribunal comes to the conclusion that it would be just, proper and reasonable
to Award lump-sum monetary compensation to the concerned workman in full and final satisfaction of his claim
of reinstatement and other benefits.
38.
Hence, the following Award is rendered:-
“The action of the management of Bank of Baroda, Gamharia Branch in terminating service of Shri Dinesh
Kumar Singh is not legal, justified and proper, so he is entitled for relief.
Hence, the Gamharia Branch of Bank of Baroda is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- (Rupees two
lakhs fifty thousand) to the concerned workman namely Dinesh Kumar Singh after proper verification as
compensation within one month after publication of the award.
This is the Award of this Tribunal.
DINESH KUMAR SINGH, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 4 fnlEcj] 2020
.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh;
ljdkj cSad vkQ cMkSnk 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;] caxyksj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la- 06@2017½ dks izdkf'kr
djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 04-12-2020 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y-12011@24@2016-vkbZ vkj ¼ch-II½]
lhek caly] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 4th December, 2020
S.O. 1065.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 06/2017) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court, Bangalore as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Bank of
Baroda, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 04.12.2020.
[No. L-12011/24/2016-IR(B-II)]
SEEMA BANSAL, Section Officer
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3079
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIUBNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
BANGALORE
DATED : 13th NOVEMBER 2020
PRESENT : JUSTICE SMT. RATNAKALA, Presiding Officer
C R No. 06/2017
I Party
II Party
The General Secretary,
Bank of Baroda Employees Union,
Regd Office, C/o Bank of Baroda,
Kempgowda Road,
BANGALORE – 560 009.
The Dy. General Manager,
Bank of Baroda,
Regional Office, Lexington Avenue,
Brigade Road,
BANGALORE – 560 025
Appearances:
I Party :
Sh. Muralidhara, Advocate
II Party :
Sh. T. P. Muthanna, Advocate
1.
The Government of India, Ministry of Labourvide order No. L-12011/24/2016-IR(B-II) dated
26.04.2017in exercise of the power conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10
of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred as “The Act”) (14 of 1947) referred the following
Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the management of Bank of Baroda, Bangalore, in not regularizing 44
workmen mentioned in the Annexure (A-VIII) enclosed, for the post of Sweeper-cum-Peon, is
legal and justified? If not, what relief the respective 44 workmen are entitled to?”
2.
On receipt of the reference order, notice was issued to both parties. Sh. MD, Advocate filed
represented the 1st Party and filed Claim Statement. 2nd Party appeared through their Learned Counsel Sh. TPM.
Though sufficient opportunity was provided they failed to file Counter Statement.The matter was posted for
Evidence of 1st Party. On 10.11.2020 Sh. MD filed a Memo which reads thus:
“I Party / Union has raised the above dispute seeking regularization of 44 workmen in the
services of the II Party / Bank. However, the I party has filed another petition seeking
regularization of around 500 workers in the II Party / Bank, which includes 44 workmen named
in the above case.
In view of the above, I Party does not want to press the above case for adjudication.
WHEREFORE, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to dispose of the case (order of reference) as
“NOT PRESSED” in the interest of justice and equity.“
3.
In view of the above memonow it is not required to record any finding on the referred issue.
AWARD
Reference is Rejected.
(Dictated to U D C, transcribed by him, corrected and signed by me on 13th November 2020)
JUSTICE SMT. RATNAKALA, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 4 fnlEcj] 2020
.—vkS|kSfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh;
ljdkj lSUVªy 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; la- 1] /kuckn ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la- 22@2014½
dks izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 04-12-2020 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y-12011@63@2005-vkbZ vkj ¼ch-II½]
lhek caly] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
3080 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 4th December, 2020
S.O. 1066.— In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No.22/2014) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court No 1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Central
Bank of India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 04.12.2020.
[No. L-12011/63/2005-IR(B-II)]
SEEMA BANSAL, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, DHANBAD
In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A) of I.D. Act. 1947
Reference: No. 22/2014
Employer in relation to the management of Central Bank of India, Muzaffarpur
AND
Their workman
Present: Shri Dinesh Kumar Singh, Presiding Officer.
Appearances:
For Employer
: Sri R. Ranjan, Advocate
For workman
: Sri B. Prasad, Rep.
State : Jharkhand.
Industry:- Banking
Dated : 31.07 .2020
AWARD
By Order No.L-12011/63/2005-IR(B-II)) dated 12.02.2014, the Central Government in the Ministry of
Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub -section (2A) of Section
10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the management of Central Bank of India, Muzaffarpur in terminating
the services of Shri Ramesh Kumar, Sub-staff, Devapur Branch, P.O.- Motihari, Distt. East
Champaran (Bihar) is legal and or justified? If not, what relief Shri Ramesh Kumar is entitled
to?”
2.
The Tribunal in this matter has passed an award on 06/04/2015 holding that the action of the
management of Central Bank of India, Muzaffarpur in terminating the service of Shri Ramesh Kumar, Sub-
Staff, Devapur Branch, P.O-Motihari, Distt- East Champaran (Bihar) is not justified, so the workman be
engaged at once, without giving any back wages. The management being aggrieved by the said award filed a
writ petition bearing W.P. (C) No. 993/2016 before the Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi. The Hon’ble
Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi has been pleased to set aside the said award and remitted the case back to the
Tribunal for hearing the parties afresh on the basis of materials already on record.
After production of the order of Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court passed in W.P. (C) No. 993/2016 both
the parties were heard again.
3.
The claim of the sponsoring union, Bihar, Provincial Central Bank of India Employees Association
representing the concerned workman namely Sri Ramesh Kumar, as per written statement, is as follows:-
That the concerned workman had been orally appointed by the management of Central Bank of India to
discharge the duties of a peon at Devapur Branch , P.O. Motihari, Distt. East Champaran (Bihar) w.e.f.
26/07/1999 and after appointment he used to work in the Bank from 10 A.M. to 6 P.M. The workman used to
discharge the duties in Bank including taking out ledgers/registers from the almirah, carrying token book/scroll
book from accounts department to cash department, taking out cash box from the strong Room, stitching of
currency notes, cleaning tables, chairs, posting of mails to Post Office, distribution of letter of Bank through
peon book, serving water, tea to the members of staff and customers and he had been paid his wages through
debit vouchers of the Bank. The concerned workman had been discharging all the duties of a peon from
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3081
26/07/1999 to 13/05/2000 uninterruptedly, so he had worked for more than 240 days in a calendar year but in
the evening of 13/05/2000 i.e. at the close of working hours, he was told by the Branch Manager that his
services were no longer required and on next day when he had gone to the Bank he was stopped from
discharging his duties without been given any prior notice or payment of compensation of retrenchment.
Thereafter the concerned workman had represented to the management for his reinstatement and regularization
of his services as a peon but no positive step was taken and on finding no redressal of this grievances, he had
raised an Industrial Dispute through the sponsoring union before the appropriate authority.
The sponsoring union has made a prayer for reinstatement of service of the concerned workman as a
peon under Bank’s Subordinate Cadre, regularization of his service and payment of his back wages from the
date of termination.
4.
The case of the management, Central Bank of India as per its written statement is as follows:-
That the concerned workman namely Ramesh Kumar was not workman so the instant dispute is outside
the scope of Industrial Disputes Act. The concerned workman was never appointed by the competent authority
on any permanent post after following and complying with prescribed proceedings under the rules for
employment in the service of Bank, so there was no employer-employee relationship between the concerned
workman and the Bank, as a result the instant dispute is outside the scope of the I.D. Act. The concerned
workman was engaged on day to day basis on a purely casual nature of jobs which came to an end at the end
each and every day and he was engaged for casual work from 26/07/1999 to 13/05/2000. The concerned
workman had never rendered continuous service in the Bank, so the scope and purview of section 25 F of
Industrial Dispute Act is not applicable. The concerned workman has raised the dispute after five years without
any reasonable and valid explanation for this long delay, so it is a stale case. It is an established principle of law
that a person who had been engaged in violation of rules and procedure of recruitment in a permanent post
cannot claim permanent employment under the employers, so the concerned workman is not entitled for any
relief.
5.
The concerned sponsoring union has filed rejoinder to the written statement of the management.
6.
The sponsoring union has examined two witnesses in support of its case. They are WW-1, Ramesh
Kumar the concerned workman and WW-2, Madan Prasad.
7.
The WW-1 Ramesh Kumar has deposed before the Tribunal that he had worked as peon in the Central
Bank of India, Devapur Branch, East Champaran and he used to discharge his work including putting ledgers on
the table, arranging/setting vouchers, cleaning of table, bringing tea for staff, putting cash box, distributing
letters etc from 10 A.M. to 6 P.M. all along since 26/07/1999 to 13/05/2000 continuously for 293 days on the
direction of the Branch Manager. He has also deposed that he used to discharge the work of a permanent
employee as there was no permanent employee at that time in Branch but he was retrenched from the service
from 15th May 2000 without any notice or any payment of compensation. He has also stated that he has
submitted several representation before the Management. He has proved the photocopies of those representation
which are marked as Exhibit W-1 series. He has also proved the photocopy of circulars of Bank dated
16/11/2000 to 13/09/2001 which are marked as Exhibit W-2 series. He has also proved a forwarding letter of
Bank dated 22/11/2000 and 20/09/2001 with enclosure which are marked as Exhibit W-3 series. He has also
stated that his claim is for reinstatement and regularisation as a peon is justified.
In the cross-examination he has deposed that he was not a member of any union and no union had told
me to be its member. He has also deposed that he used to get payment of wages through vouchers. He has also
stated that all the circulars and my representations which I had submitted before the Tribunal were taken by me
on the instruction of Branch Manager. He has denied the suggestions that he had worked as casual worker and
he was not regular worker in the Bank.
8.
The WW-2 Madan Prasad has deposed that he was posted as Branch Manager at Devapur, East
Champaran from 09/07/1999 to 13/05/2002 and at time Ramesh Kumar was working in the Branch from
26/07/1999 to 13/05/2000 as a peon like a permanent one. He has also stated that there was no permanent peon
at that time in Branch and the Branch Manager had made several request for regularisation of temporary worker
as permanent. He has proved the photo copy of letter dated 22/11/2000 and the proforma for temporary worker
dated 20/09/2001 which had already been marked as Exhibit W-2/1 and Exhibit W-2/4. He has also proved the
copy of letter dated 20/09/2001 which had already been marked as Exhibit W-2/3 as enclosure to the aforesaid
Exhibit W-2/4. He has also deposed that the concerned workman was covered under the scheme of the Bank, so
he had forwarded his name for absorption in permanent cadre.
In the cross-examination he has deposed that no written appointment letter was given to the concerned
workman and he was temporarily kept by him in the Bank. He has also admitted that there is no provision for
temporary workers to mark their attendance in the Muster Roll. He has also deposed that payment to the
concerned workman was made through vouchers subject to the approval of Higher Authority. He has further
3082 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
stated that the concerned workman had worked for 293 days. He has denied the suggestion that workman had
never done continuous work for 293 days.
9.
The sponsoring union has proved the following documents which are marked as:-
Exhibit W-1- Xerox copy of letter dated 17/05/2000 of the workman addressed to the Branch Manager, Central
Bank of India, Devapur Branch for reinstatement and regularization of his service as peon.
Exhibit W-1/1- Xerox Copy of letter dated 16/08/2001 of the workman requesting for reinstatement and
regularization.
Exhibit W-1/2- Xerox Copy of letter dated 06/01/2003 of the workman addressed to the Management for
reinstatement and regularization of his service.
Exhibit W-1/3- Xerox Copy of letter dated 28/12/2004 of the workman requesting for his reinstatement and
regularization of this service.
Exhibit W-2- Xerox Copy of Circular No: 16 dated 16.11.2000 of Central Bank of India, Regional Office,
Motihari.
Exhibit W-2/1- Xerox Copy of Letter dated 22/11/2000 of Branch Manager of Devapur Branch, CBI informing
the engagement of concerned workman and others on casual/temporary basis.
Exhibit W-2/2- is the Xerox Copy of Circular No: 1-02/14 dated 13/09/2001 of Central Bank of India,
Motihari.
Exhibit W-2/3- Xerox Copy of letter dated 20/09/2001 of the Branch Manager addressed to Regional Office
Motihari informing the Management regarding working of Ramesh Kumar from 26/07/1999 to 13/05/2000
continuously for 293 days as a Sub Staff(Peon).
Exhibit W-2/4- Xerox Copy of Proforma sent by the Branch Manager, Devapur certifying that the workman-
Ramesh Kumar worked at Devapur Branch.
Exhibit W-3- Xerox Copy of Circular dated 16/11/2011 issued by the Management of Central Bank of India
regarding absorption of the services of daily rated/casual workmen performing the duties of a peon.
10.
On the other hand the management has examined only one witness. He is MW-1,Vijay Kumar Mishra .
11.
The MW-1 Vijay Kumar Mishra has deposed that he had been working as Branch Manager, Central
Bank of India, Devapur Branch, East Champaran since 21/09/2011. He has also deposed that he came to know
through vouchers payment dated 31/07/1999 to 31/12/1999 that Ramesh Kumar had worked as a peon. He has
proved the photo copy of the vouchers in 17 sheets which are marked as Exhibit M-1 to Exhibit M-16. He has
also proved the vouchers dated 03/01/2000 to 13/05/2000 which are marked as Exhibit M-1/17 to Exhibit 1/26.
He has further deposed that the concerned workman was not issued any appointment letter for the job.
In the cross-examination he has deposed that he had joined Central Bank of India, Devapur Branch,
East Champaran on 22/04/2002 and he couldn’t say whether any permanent peon was posted in the said Bank at
that time or not. He has also deposed that Sri Madan Prasad was posted as a Branch Manager during that period.
He has further deposed that he had not seen any circular of the Bank for regularisation of temporary workman.
He has expressed his ignorance with regard to attention drawn on Exhibit W-2/2 as he was not in service at that
time. He has also deposed that the Exhibit W-2/4 shows 293 days with no permanent posting of a peon during
that period. He has admitted the circular dated 16/11/2011 regarding regularisation of temporary workman and
the same marked as Exhibit W-3. He has also deposed that he had no knowledge about the workman.
12.
The management has proved the following documents which are marked as follows:-
Exhibit M-1- PL Voucher date 31/07/1999 for Rs. 150 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 26/07/1999 to 31/07/1999
(6 days).
Exhibit M-1/1- PL Voucher date 10/08/1999 for Rs. 150 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 02/08/1999 to
07/08/1999 ( 6 days).
Exhibit M-1/2- PL Voucher date 14/08/1999 for Rs. 150 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 09/08/1999 to
14/08/1999 ( 6 days).
Exhibit M-1/3- PL Voucher date 21/08/1999 for Rs. 150 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 16/08/1999 to
21/08/1999 ( 6 days).
Exhibit M-1/4- PL Voucher date 30/08/1999 for Rs. 150 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 23/08/1999 to
28/08/1999 ( 6 days).
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3083
Exhibit M-1/5- PL Voucher date 04/09/1999 for Rs. 125 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 30/08/1999 to
04/09/1999 ( 5 days).
Exhibit M-1/6- PL Voucher date 11/09/1999 for Rs. 150 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 06/09/1999 to
11/09/1999 ( 6 days).
Exhibit M-1/7- PL Voucher date 24/09/1999 for Rs. 275 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 13/09/1999 to
24/09/1999 ( 11 days).
Exhibit M-1/8- PL Voucher date 15/10/1999 for Rs. 275 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 04/10/1999 to
15/10/1999 ( 11 days).
Exhibit M-1/9- PL Voucher date 30/10/1999 for Rs. 250 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 21/10/1999 to
30/10/1999 ( 10 days).
Exhibit M-1/10- PL Voucher date 30/10/1999 for Rs. 250 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 21/10/1999 to
30/10/1999 ( 10 days).
Exhibit M-1/11- PL Voucher date 12/11/1999 for Rs. 275 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 01/11/1999 to
12/11/1999 ( 11 days).
Exhibit M-1/12- PL Voucher date 20/11/1999 for Rs. 150 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 15/11/1999 to
20/11/1999 ( 6 days).
Exhibit M-1/13- PL Voucher date 04/12/1999 for Rs. 275 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 22/11/1999 to
04/12/1999 ( 11 days).
Exhibit M-1/14- PL Voucher date 11/12/1999 for Rs. 150 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 06/12/1999 to
11/12/1999 ( 6 days).
Exhibit M-1/15- PL Voucher date 18/12/1999 for Rs. 150 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 13/12/1999 to
18/12/1999 ( 6 days).
Exhibit M-1/16- PL Voucher date 24/12/1999 for Rs. 125 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 20/12/1999 to
24/12/1999 ( 5 days).
Exhibit M-1/17- PL Voucher date 31/12/1999 for Rs. 125 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 27/12/1999 to
31/12/1999 ( 5 days).
Exhibit M-1/18- PL Voucher date 07/01/2000 for Rs. 125 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 03/01/2000 to
07/01/2000 ( 5 days).
Exhibit M-1/19- PL Voucher date 15/10/2000 for Rs. 125 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 10/01/2000 to
15/01/2000 ( 5 days).
Exhibit M-1/20- PL Voucher date 29/01/2000 for Rs. 250 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 17/01/2000 to
29/01/2000 ( 10 days).
Exhibit M-1/21- PL Voucher date 05/02/2000 for Rs. 150 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 31/01/2000 to
05/02/2000 ( 6 days).
Exhibit M-1/22- PL Voucher date 15/03/2000 for Rs. 325 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 07/02/2000 to
12/02/2000 and 14/02/2000 to 19/02/2000 and 21/02/2000 ( 13 days).
Exhibit M-1/23- PL Voucher date 25/03/2000 for Rs. 225 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 13/03/2000 to
18/03/2000 and 23/03/2000 to 25/03/2000 and 21/02/2000 ( 9 days).
Exhibit M-1/24- PL Voucher date 10/04/2000 for Rs. 300 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 27/03/2000 to
08/04/2000 ( 12 days).
Exhibit M-1/25- PL Voucher date 29/04/2000 for Rs. 275 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 10/04/2000 to
29/04/2000 ( 11 days).
Exhibit M-1/26- PL Voucher date 17/05/2000 for Rs. 250 paid to Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 02/05/2000 to
06/05/2000 and 08/05/2000 to 13/05/2000 ( 10 days).
13.
The learned lawyer of the Sponsoring Union has submitted before the Tribunal that the concerned
workman namely Ramesh Kumar had been appointed by Central Bank of India, Devapur Branch, East
Champaran on temporary basis in permanent nature and he had worked from 26/07/1999 to 13/05/2000, so he
had worked in the said Bank continuously for 293 days. He has also submitted that the management had
illegally and arbitrarily terminated his service without following the provision of 25 F of the Industrial Dispute
Act, so his service may be reinstated as a peon under subordinate cadre of Bank after regularising his service
and making payment of full back wages from the date of his termination. He has relied on the decisions of
3084 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in the case of Devandar Singh Vs. Municipal Corporation, Umrala Gram
Panchayat Vs The Sec. Municipal Employee Union, T.Nadu Termd. Full Time Tem. Lic… Vs Life Insurance
Corp. Of India & Ors and Vinay Prakash Vs. Bank of India. He has also relied on the decision of Patna High
Court passed in the case of Mithilesh Kumar Singh Vs State of Bihar and Ors and The Management of Punjab
National Bank Vs Mintu Kumar & Anr.
14.
On the other hand the learned lawyer of the management has submitted that the concerned workman
namely Ramesh Kumar had been engaged on daily wages and he was not a workman of the bank, so there is no
employer-employee relationship between the concerned workman and the Bank. He has also submitted that the
concerned workman had never rendered his continuous service in the Bank and had never worked for twelve
months in a calendar year. He has also argued that the claim of the sponsoring union is not legal and justified
and the concerned workman is not entitled for any relief
15.
Now the only point of determination in this case is whether the action of the management of Central
bank of India, Muzaffarpur in terminating the service of Sri Ramesh Kumar the concerned workman is legal and
justified and whether he has entitled for any relief.
FINDINGS
16.
It is pleading of the Sponsoring Union that the concerned workman had been appointed as a peon in
permanent nature in the Central Bank of India, Devapur Branch as a peon and he had rendered his service from
26/07/1999 to 13/05/2000 uninterrupted, so he had worked for more than 240 days in a calendar year but he had
been terminated without complying the provision of section 25F of the I.D. Act.
It is further case of the Sponsoring Union that the service of the concerned workman would be regularised in
subordinate cadre with the payment of all back wages.
17.
On the other hand it is the case of the management that the concerned workman was never appointed as
a peon and he was engaged as a daily wager in the Bank to meet the needs of the Bank, so there is question of
his termination from the service of Bank.
It is further case of the management that the concerned workman had never rendered continuous service of more
than 240 days in a calendar year in the Bank and he was not an employee of the Bank, so this reference case is
not maintainable.
18.
Now in the light of the pleadings of both the parties the Tribunal will analyze the oral and
documentary evidence of both the parties.
19.
In this case the most competent witness is WW-1 Ramesh Kumar. He has deposed that he worked in
the Central Bank of India, Devapur Branch as a peon since 26/07/1999 to 13/05/2000 continuously on the
direction of the Branch Manager and during that period there was no permanent peon in the Bank. He has also
stated that he had worked for about 293 days in the Bank continuously but his service was terminated from 15
May 2000 without following the provision of 25 F of the I.D. Act. In the cross-examination he has admitted that
the Branch Manager had not given any appointment letter to him.
The WW-2 Madan Prasad who was the Branch Manager during the said period has supported the case
of the workman and has deposed that the concerned workman had worked in the Branch from 26/07/1999 to
13/05/2000 and at that time there was no permanent peon in the Bank. In the cross-examination he has admitted
that no written appointment letter was given to him and he was temporarily kept by him. He has also admitted
that there is no provision for temporary workers to mark their attendance in Muster Roll.
20.
The MW-1 has deposed that he came to know through vouchers payment dated 31/07/1999 to
13/05/2000 that the concerned workman had worked as peon. In the cross-examination he has admitted the
circular dated 16/11/2011 of Central Bank of India regarding regularization of temporary workman.
21.
Now coming to the documentary evidence of the workman it appears that the Exhibit W-1, Exhibit W-
1/1, Exhibit W-1/2, Exhibit W-1/3 are representation of concerned workman submitted to the Branch Manager
for regularisation of his service against the permanent post on different dates. Further the Exhibit W-2 is a
general letter issued by Regional Manager, Central Bank of India regarding information of subordinate staff
engaged on casual/temporary basis and Exhibit W-2/1 is a letter issued by Branch Manager of Devapur Branch,
Central Bank of India to the Regional Office mentioning in details the information of subordinate staff engaged
on casual/temporary basis in which the name of concerned workman has been mentioned as working from
26/07/1999 to 13/05/2000 for a period of 240 days in one year. Further the Exhibit W-2/2 is a general letter
issued by the Regional Manager on 13/09/2001 regarding information of temporary workers. Moreover the
Exhibit W-2/3, is a letter of Branch Manager, Devapur to Regional Office, Motihari mentioning the name of
concerned workman namely Ramesh Kumar working as sub-staff since 26/07/1999 to 13/05/2000 and Exhibit
2/4 is pro-forma of information of temporary workers in which the name of workman namely Ramesh Kumar
has been mentioned as working from 25/07/1999 to 13/05/2000 total 293 days as sub staff and no permanent full
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3085
time staff posted during this period. Further the Exhibit W-3 is a general letter issued by AGM, Central Bank of
India regarding information temporary/casual workers.
22.
The documentary evidences of the management are the payment vouchers by which payment of wages
are made to the concerned workman. After perusal, it appears that Exhibit M-1 to Exhibit M-1/26 are vouchers
of payment made to the concerned workman as a labour charge of different period starting from 26/07/1999 to
13/05/2000. It further appears that payment was not continuous but he was paid for five days, six days or for a
longer period by different vouchers.
23.
Now, after analyzing the oral and documentary evidence available on the record the Tribunal finds that
the concerned workman namely Ramesh Kumar had been orally engaged as sub staff in Devapur Branch of
Central Bank of India without issuance of any appointment letter and the concerned workman had worked in
Devapur Branch of Central Bank of India since 26/07/1999 to 13/05/2000 continuously for 293 days. Further
the Tribunal also finds that the concerned workman had been paid his remuneration for the period he had
worked in the Bank on different dates and he had not been paid his salary on the monthly basis. The Tribunal
also finds that finds that the concerned workman had been removed from his service on 15/05/2000.
24.
It is important to mention here that the workman has been defined u/s 2(s) of Industrial Dispute Act.
The Section 2(s) of I.D. Act reads as follows:-
“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 administrative 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
25.
At this stage it is relevant to mention here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a case as reported in 2011
LAB. I. C. 2799 (S.C) has been pleased to observe as follows:-
“14. It is apposite to observe that 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 a 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.
15. Whenever an employer challenges the maintainability ground that the employee is not a workman
within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Act, what the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal is required to consider
is whether the person is employed in an industry for hire or reward for doing manual, unskilled, skilled,
operational, technical or clerical work in an industry. Once the test of employment for hire or reward for doing
the specified type of work is satisfied, the employee would fall within the definition of ‘workman”.
26.
It is required to mentioned here that the concerned workman namely Ramesh Kumar had worked in
Devapur Branch of Central Bank of India as sub staff and he was paid his remuneration by PL Vouchers of
Bank on different dates, so he was employed in the Devapur Branch of Central Bank of India on hire and
consequently he was a workman of the Devapur Branch of Central Bank of India and there was a relationship
between him and the management as employee and employer, so there is an Industrial Dispute.
27.
It is also relevant to mention here that the word retrenchment has been defined u/S 2(oo) of the I .D
.Act, definition of continuous service has been mentioned u/s 25-B of I . D .Act and the condition precedent to
retrenchment have been mentioned u/S 25 F of I.D Act.
Section 2(oo) of the I.D.Act reads as follows:-
Section 2(oo) -“retrenchment” means the termination by the employer of the service of a workman for any
reason whatsoever, otherwise than as a punishment inflicted by way of disciplinary action but does not include-
(a)
Voluntary retirement of the workman; or
3086 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(b) Retirement of the workman on reaching the age of superannuation if the contract of employment
between the employer and the workman concerned contains a stipulation in that behalf; or
(bb) Termination of the service of the workman as a result of the non-renewal of contract of employment
between the employer and the workman concerned on its expiry or of such contract being
terminated under a stipulation in that behalf contained therein; or
(c) Termination of the service of a workman on the ground of continued ill-health.
The Section 25-F of the Industrial Dispute Act reads as follows:-
25-F Conditions precedent to retrenchment of workmen- No workman employed in any industry
who has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched
by that employer until-
(a) The workman has been given one month’s notice in writing indicating the reasons for
retrenchment and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been paid in lieu of
such notice, wages for the period of the notice:
(b)
The workman has been paid, at the time of retrenchment, compensation which shall be
equivalent to fifteen days’ average pay (for Every completed year of continuous service) or
any part thereof in excess of six months; and
(c)
Notice in the prescribed manner is served on the appropriate Government (or such
authority as may be specified by the appropriate Government by notification in the Official
Gazette.)
At this stage it is required to mentioned here that the word continuous service has
been define under Section 25-B of the I.D. Act. The Section 25-B of I.D. Act reads as follows:-
25-B. Definition of continuous service – For the purpose of this Chapter,-
(1) a workman shall be said to be in continuous service for a period if he is, for that period, in
uninterrupted service, including service which may be interrupted on account of sickness or
authorized leave or an accident or a strike which is not illegal, or a lock-out or a cessation of work
which is not due to any fault on the part of the workman;
(2) Where a workman is not in continuous service within the meaning of clause (1) for a period of one
year or six months, he shall be deemed to be in continuous service under an employer-
(a) for a period one year, if the workman, during a period of twelve calendar months preceding the
date with reference to which calculation is to be made, has actually worked under the employer for
not less than –
(i) one hundred and ninety days in the case of a workman employed below ground in a mine; and
(ii) two hundred and forty days, in any other case;
(b)…………………………………..
28. Now in this case there is categorical evidence that the concerned workman namely Ramesh Kumar had
worked in Devapur Branch of Central Bank of India for more than 240 days in twelve calendar months as per
Exhibit W-2/1, Exhibit W-2/3 and Exhibit W-2/4, which are documents of the Bank, so the concerned workman
was in continuous service in the Bank as per definition mentioned u/s 25-B of I.D’ Act. Moreover there is also
evidence that the concerned workman was removed from his service on 15/05/2000. Further there is no
evidence before the Tribunal that the concerned workman had been given one month notice in writing indicating
the reasons for his retrenchment/ removal or had been paid compensation equivalent to 15 days of average pay
as per provision of 25-F of the I.D. Act.
29.
Hence, in view of above the discussion the Tribunal holds that the concerned workman namely
Ramesh Kumar had been working in Devapur Branch of Central Bank of India, since 26/07/1999 to 13.05.2000
as peon/sub staff and he had been removed from service w.e.f. 15/05/2000. Further the action of the
management in terminating the service of the concerned w.e.f. 15/05/2000 is not justified. Hence the concerned
workman is entitled for relief.
30. At this stage it is relevant to mention here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in catena of decision has been
pleased to observed that the completion of 240 days work doesn’t under the law import the right to
regularisation and it merely imposed certain obligation on the employer at the time of termination of service.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a case of Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd Vs. Dan Bahadur Singh, as
reported in (2007) 6 SCC 207, especially in Paragraph No. 18 as under:-
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3087
“18. The next question which requires consideration is whether completion of 240 days in a year
confers any right on an employee or workman to claim regularisation in service. In Madhyamik
Shiksha Parishad vs. Anil Kumar Mishra it was held that the completion of 240 days’ work does not
confer the right to regularisation under the Industrial Disputes Act. It merely imposes certain
obligations on the employer at the time of termination of the services. In M.P. Housing Board vs.
Manoj Shrivastava (para 17) after referring to several earlier decisions it has been reiterated that it is
well settled that only because a person had been working for more than 240 days, he does not derive
any legal right to be regularised in serivee. This view has been reiterated in Gangadhar Pillai vs.
Siemens Ltd. The same question has been examined in considerable detail with reference to an
employee working in a government company in Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs. Workmen
and paras 34 and 35 of the report are being reproduced below: (SCC p.426)
“34. Thus, it is well settled that there is no right vested in any daily wager to seek regularisation.
Regularisation can only be done in accordance with the rules and not dehors the rules. In the case of
E. Ramakrishnan v. State of Kerala this Court held that there can be no regularisation dehors the
rules. The same view was taken in Kishore (Dr.) v. State of Maharashtra and Union of India v.
Bishamber Dutt. The direction issued by the services Tribunal for regularising the services of persons
who had not been appointed on regular basis in accordance with the rules was set aside although the
petitioner had been working regularly for a long time.
35. In Surinder Singh Jamwal (Dr.) v. State of J&K it was held that ad hoc appointment does not give
any right for regularization as regularization is governed by the statutory rules.””
The Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court has been pleased to observe in L.P.A No. 268/2012 which is as
under:-
“(xiv) Be that as it may, even assuming without admitting that this appellant has worked more than 240
days in couple of years, then also, his services cannot be regularized. 240 days’ working is not a magic
bond which converts illegal appointment into the legal appointment. In fact, 240 days working has
nothing to do with the regularization at all. 240 days working has got reference under Section 25-B of
the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for calculation of continuous years of service and nothing beyond
that. Unnecessarily mes the Labour Court or the Industrial Courts are committing an error that if any
worker has completed 240 days, their services should be regularized. In fact, there is no casual
connection at all between the working of 240 days and right of regularization. Illegality in the
appointment cannot be diluted by the working of 240 days. Illegality in the appointment continues, even
if, the worker has worked for 240 days.”
The Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court has been further pleased to hold as follows:-
“Whenever any employment is given unauthorizedly, in the respondent-UCO Bank, Hirapur, Dhanbad,
such type of employment cannot be converted into a regular employment unless there are rules for
regularization or scheme for regularization. In the facts of the present case, there are no rules of
regularization nor there is any scheme of regularization floated by the UCO Bank. In absence of such
type of law, the charity shown by the Court will be cruelty to others. If such type regularization is
allowed by the Courts, it will provide encouragement to those who are adorning high-ranking
administrative position to give illegal appointment and later on, to get them regularized by the orders
of the Courts. A thing which cannot be done directly, can never be done indirectly. If no employment
can be given without there being any advertisement and without there being any recruitment process,
the Court cannot be a party to illegal regularization of such employee.”
31. In view of such fact and in view of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble Jharkhand High
Court it is settled that the concerned workman namely Ramesh Kumar is not entitled for regularization of his job
for working 240 days in a twelve calendar months in Devapur Branch of Central Bank of India.
32. It is relevant to mention here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a case of BSNL Vs. Bhurumal as
reported in (2014) 7 SCC 177, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been pleased to observe as under:-
34. 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. Since such a workman was working on daily wage basis
and even after he is reinstated, he has no right to seek regularization (See: State of Karnataka vs. Uma
Devi (2006) 4 SCC 1). Thus when he cannot claim regularization and he has no right to continue even
as a daily wage worker, no useful purpose is going to be served in reinstating such a workman and he
can be given monetary compensation by the Court itself inasmuch as if he is terminated again after
3088 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
reinstatement, he would receive monetary compensation only in the form of retrenchment
compensation and notice pay. In such a situation, giving the relief of reinstatement, that too after a
long gap, would not serve any purpose.
33.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a case of District Development Officer Vs. Satish Kantilal Amrelia
as reported in (2018) 12 SCC 29 B has been pleased to hold as follows:-
“16) In view of forgoing discussion, we are of the considered view that it would be just, proper and
reasonable to award lump sum monetary compensation to the respondent in full and final
satisfaction of his claim of re-instatement and other consequential benefits by taking recourse to the
powers under Section 11-A of the Act and the law laid down by this Court in Bharat Sanchar Nigam
Limited case (supra)”.
34. The Hon’ble Supreme Court is an another case Deputy Executive Engineer Vs Kuberbhai Kanjhibhai as
reported in 2019 (160) FLR 651 has reiterated the same principle.
35.
Now, in this case the concerned workman had been working in Devapur Branch of Central Bank of
India since 26/07/1999 to 13/05/2000 and his service was terminated by the Devapur Branch of Central Bank of
India on 15/05/2000 without complying the provisions of section 25F of the I.D. Act.. Moreover after his
termination in the year 2000 about twenty years have elapsed, so giving relief of reinstatement after long gap
would not serve any purpose.
36.
It is relevant to mention here that the facts and circumstances of this case is different from the facts and
circumstances of the case relied by the learned representative of the workman, so the decision of Hon’ble
Supreme Court as passed in Umrala Gram Panchayat Vs The Sec. Municipal Employee Union, T. Nadu Termd.
Full Time Tem. Lic… Vs Life Insurance Corp. of India & Ors and Vinay Prakash Vs Bank of India & Ors. as
well as the decision of Hon’ble Patna High Court as passed in Mithilesh Kumar Singh Vs State of Bihar And
Ors, The Management of Punjab National Bank Vs Mintu Kumar & Anr. are not applicable in this case.
37.
In view of such fact the Tribunal comes to the conclusion that it would be just proper and reasonable to
Award lump-sum monetary compensation to the concerned workman in full and final satisfaction of his claim of
reinstatement and other benefits.
38.
Hence, the Devapur Branch of Central Bank of India is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-
(Two Lakhs) to the concerned workman namely Ramesh Kumar after proper verification as compensation
within one month after publication of the award in Official Gazette.
This is the Award of this Tribunal.
DINESH KUMAR SINGH, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 4 fnlEcj] 2020
.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh;
ljdkj dsujk cSad 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;] y[kuÅ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la- 55@2003½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS
tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 04-12-2020 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y-12011@2@2003-vkbZ vkj ¼ch-II½]
lhek caly] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 4th December, 2020
S.O. 1067.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 55/2003) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court, Lucknow as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Canara
Bank and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 04.12.2020.
[No. L-12011/2/2003-IR(B-II)]
SEEMA BANSAL, Section Officer
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3089
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL–CUM-LABOUR COURT LUCKNOW
PRESENT: P. K. SRIVASTAVA, HJS (Retd.)
I.D. No. 55/2003
Ref. No. L-12011/2/2003-IR(B-II) dated: 29.04.2003
BETWEEN:
The Assistant Secretary
Canara Bank Employees’ Union
C/o Canara Bank, 426 – W-2, Basant Vihar
Kanpur – 21.
(Espousing case of Sri K. N. Khatri)
AND
The Dy. General Manager
Canara Bank
Circle Office, Vipin Khand
Gomti Nagar, Lucknow (UP) – 226010
AWARD
1.
By order No. L-12011/2/2003-IR(B-II) dated: 29.04.2003 the Central Government in the Ministry of
Labour, New Delhi in exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub section (1) and sub section (2A) of
Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) referred this industrial dispute for adjudication.
2.
The reference under adjudication is:
“WHETHER HE ACTION OF THE MANAGEMENT OF CANARA BANK, LUCKNOW IN
IMPOSING
THE
PUNISHMENT
OF
STOPPAGE
OF
TWO
INCREMENTS
WITH
CUMULATIVE EFFECT ON SHRI K.N. KHATRI VIDE ORDER DATED 31.3.2001 IS LEGAL
AND JUSTIFIED? IF NOT, WHAT RELIEF IS THE CONCERNED WORKMAN ENTITLED
TO?”
3.
It is admitted case of the parties that the workman, K. N. Khatri was working as Armed Guard in Sald
Mahadev Branch of Canara Bank, when he placed under suspension vide order dated 07.051992; and
subsequently, was issued a major penalty charge sheet dated 31.07.1992 for gross misconduct i.e. misbehaving
and assaulting the Manager/staff and disorderly behavior in the bank premises. The Disciplinary Authority, on
the basis of findings of the Enquiry Officer, issued show cause; whereby the workman was proposed of the
punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect upon the workman. The Disciplinary
Authority passed punishment order dated 31.03.2001; which was subsequently confirmed by the Appellate
Authority vide order dated 27.02.2002.
4.
It has been alleged by the workman that the Departmental proceedings which were conducted in
violation to the principles of natural justice is liable to be set aside. Moreover, he has also come up with a case
that the management of the bank had also lodged an FIR for the alleged misconduct; wherein charge sheet was
filed and later on he had been acquitted by the Trial Court on 27.11.1999 and on his acquittal, the workman
requested the management to drop the charges, but the management, denying his request proceeded with the
inquiry and after conducting the same in arbitrary manner, imposed the punishment of stoppage of two
increments with cumulative effect. The workman has also alleged that the Appellate Authority also rejected his
appeal dated 18.05.2001 vide order dated 27.02.2002 in utter violation of paragraph 19.14 of the Bipartite
Settlement an illegal manner and has prayed that the action of the management in imposing the punishment of
stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect be declared illegal and unjustified and the same may be set
aside with consequential benefits.
5.
The management of the Bank in its written statement has denied the allegations of the workman and
has submitted that the workman had been involved in willfully causing damage to the property of the Bank and
for misbehaving and assaulting the Manager/staff and disorderly behavior in the bank premises; resultantly, he
had been placed under suspension vide dated 07.05.1992 and subsequently was issued a charge sheet dated
31.07.1992 for gross misconduct. The management has also submitted that the was afforded all reasonable
opportunity to defend himself, inasmuch as the departmental proceedings were conducted in accordance with
the principles of natural justice and after thorough appreciation of the findings of the inquiry officer, the
workman was imposed with the punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect, which was
3090 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
subsequently confirmed by the Appellate Authority under Rules. As regards acquittal of eh workman in
criminal case, the management has submitted that the same was not clean acquittal but after giving him benefit
of doubt, therefore, it had no effect on the ongoing domestic inquiry. The management has submitted that the
punishment order is well reasoned and speaking; therefore, the same is liable to be up held, without any relief to
the workman concerned.
6.
The workman’s union has filed its rejoinder, reiterating the averments already made in the statement of
claim.
7.
The parties have filed documents in support of its case. The workman’s union examined the workman;
whereas the management has examined Shri Arun Srivastava, Inquiry Officer in support of their respective
case. The parties did not turn up to argue their case; however, their written submission were already on record,
therefore, keeping in view long pendency of the case, the file was reserved for award.
8.
Since the alleged action of the management for reduction of basis pay was based on the domestic
inquiry, therefore, following preliminary issues were framed vide order dated 26.02.2020:
(i) Whether the domestic inquiry conducted by the management is fair and proper; and
(ii) Whether the findings of inquiry officer are perverse?
(iii) Whether the punishment imposed is proportionate to the charges or not?
The parties have led their respective evidence on the schedule of reference as a whole; therefore, the
same is taken into account for adjudicating the preliminary issues framed hereinabove.
9.
It had been alleged by the workman that the Departmental proceedings which were conducted in
violation to the principles of natural justice is liable to be set aside. Moreover, he has also come up with a case
that the management of the bank had also lodged an FIR for the alleged misconduct; wherein charge sheet was
filed and later on he had been acquitted by the Trial Court on 27.11.1999 and on his acquittal, the workman
requested the management to drop the charges, but the management, denying his request proceeded with the
inquiry and after conducting the same in arbitrary manner, imposed the punishment of stoppage of two
increments with cumulative effect. The workman has also alleged that the Appellate Authority also rejected his
appeal dated 18.05.2001 vide order dated 27.02.2002 in utter violation of paragraph 19.14 of the Bipartite
Settlement an illegal manner and has prayed that the action of the management in imposing the punishment of
stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect be declared illegal and unjustified and the same may be set
aside with consequential benefits.
10.
However, in rebuttal the management has come up with a case, that the workman who was indulged in
disruptive activities at work place and not only used abusive language but also hurled his seniors causing utter
indiscipline, was placed under suspension and subsequently was issued a charge sheet to the workman and after
conducting a detailed inquiry, wherein the principles of natural justice was observed, the workman was found
partially guilty for the alleged charges and rsutantlly, the workman was punished with stoppage of two
increments with cumulative effect. It is also the case of the management that the FIR was also lodged against
the workman for similar deed; wherein he was acquitted, giving him benefit of doubt; hence the acquittal was
not clean. The management had argued that the management had right to proceed with the departmental inquiry
even after acquittal of the workman in criminal proceedings as departmental proceedings and criminal
proceedings stand in a different footing. The management has relied upon:
(i)
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Divisional Controller, KSRTC vs MG Vittal Rao
(Manu/SC/1368/2011).
(ii)
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Hon’ble High Cout of Judicature Bombay through its Registrar vs
Shri Uday Singh JT 1997 (5) SC 298.
(iii)
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lalit Popli vs Canara Bank & others (2003) 3 SCC 583.
Issue No. 01:-
11.
As regards first issue regarding fairness of the domestic inquiry, the workman’s union has taken a stand
that the workman’s request for dropping the charges was not adhered to by the management of the Bank on the
basis of his acquittal in the criminal case with same charges and secondly that the principles of natural justice
was duly followed during the departmental proceedings. The workman stated on oath that he sought time to file
reply to the findings of the inquiry officer which was not granted; likewise, he was also not given opportunity
for personal hearing. However, the workman during his cross-examination, stated that he participated in the
inquiry proceedings, he was represented by one Sri Sudhir Sonkar in the said inquiry. He also stated that he was
granted adjournment on absence of his defence representative; moreover, he also filed with written submission
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3091
before the inquiry, he was given copy of report of inquiry officer along with show cause and was given time for
representation and when he did not represent in time, the punishment was imposed upon him. Though the
workman has pleaded that there was violation of principles of natural justice; but failed to substantiate the same
through cogent evidence i.e. documentary or oral. On the contrary, from perusal of the admission made by him
during the cross-examination before this Tribunal this goes to establish that the domestic inquiry was fairly
conducted by the management and the workman had been given all reasonable opportunity to defend himself
during the course of the inquiry and the workman’s union has pleaded wrong facts before this Tribunal and it
has not come with clean hands.
Also, Hon’ble Supreme Court in Karnataka Power Transmission Corpn. Ltd. vs Sri C. Nagaraju &
Anr. 2019 LLR 1181 has observed as under:
“9.
Acquittal by a criminal court would not debar an employer from exercising the power to
conduct departmental proceedings in accordance with the rules and regulations. The two
proceedings, criminal and departmental, are entirely different. They operate in different fields and
have different objectives. Ajit Kumar Nag (Supra). In the disciplinary proceedings, the question in
whether the Respondent is guilty of such conduct as would merit his removal from service or a lesser
punishment, as the case may be, whereas in the criminal proceedings, the question is whether the
offences registered against him under the PC Act are established, and if established, what sentence
should be imposed upon him. The standard of proof, the mode of inquiry and the rules governing
inquiry and trial in both the cases are significantly distinct and different. State of Rajasthan v.
B. K. Meena, (1996) 6 SCC 417.”
Hence, from perusal of the above quoted law, it is crystal clear that the submissions of the workman’s
union that the management should not have proceeded with the departmental inquiry on his acquittal in the
criminal proceedings is not acceptable. Accordingly, the issue No. 01 is decided in favour of the management.
Issue No. 02:-
12.
As regards, issue No. 2, it is apparent on the face of record that the workman participated in the
departmental proceedings and had been afforded all reasonable opportunity to defend himself; moreover,
acquittal of the workman in the criminal case has no effect on the ongoing departmental action. Also, the
workman’s union has not suggested at any juncture that the findings of the inquiry officer was perverse or
inconsistent with the evidence collected by him during the course of inquiry, I am of the considered view that
the findings of the inquiry officer were not perverse.
Issue No. 03:-
13.
Now taking up the third issue, It is well settled that the Labour Court has ample power under section
11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to substitute a lesser punishment, taking into consideration the facts
and circumstances of the case. Moreover, the principle of proportionality calls for interference of this Court into
the punishment imposed by the management i.e. of removal in view of law in Joseph Solomon vs. Presiding
Officer, Labour Court, U.P., Dehradun & another 2012 (134) FLR 424.
14.
In the instant case the workman was charge sheeted for his alleged involvement in willfully causing
damage to the property of the Bank and for misbehaving and assaulting the Manager/staff and disorderly
behavior in the bank premises; which has been found partially proved by the inquiry officer and accordingly, the
workman had been issued a show cause notice regarding stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect.
15.
Hon’ble Apex Court in B.C. Chayurvedi v. Union of India, (1995) 6 SCC 749 while discussing about
the scope of judicial review, in disciplinary matters, has observed as under:
“The High Court/Tribunal, while exercising the power of judicial review, cannot normally substitute
its own conclusion on penalty and impose some other penalty. If the punishment imposed by the
disciplinary authority or the appellate authority shocks the conscience of the High Court/Tribunal, it
would appropriately mould the relief, either directing the disciplinary/appellate authority to
reconsider the penalty imposed, or to shorten the litigation, it may itself, in exceptional and rare
cases, imposed appropriate punishment with cogent reasons in support thereof.”
In DG, RPF vs. Sai Babu (2003) 4 SCC 331, Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that:
“6…………. Normally, the punishment imposed by a disciplinary authority should not be disturbed
by the High Court or a tribunal except in appropriate cases that too only after reaching a conclusion
that the punishment imposed is grossly or shockingly disproportionate, after examining all the
relevant factors including the nature of charges proved against, the past conduct, penalty imposed
earlier, the nature of duties assigned having due regard to their sensitiveness, exactness expected of
3092 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
an discipline required to be maintained, and the department/establishment which the delinquent
person concerned works.”
In United Commercial Bank vs. P.C. Kakkar (2003) 4 SCC 364 Hon’ble Apex Court on review of a
long line of cases and the principles of judicial review of administrative action under English law summarized
the legal position in the following words:
“11.
The common thread running through in all these decisions is that the court should not
interfere with the administrators’ decision unless it was illogical or suffers from procedural
imp0ropriety or was shocking to the conscience of the court, in the sense that it was in defiance of
logic or moral standards. In view of what has been stated in Wednesbury case the court would not
go into the correctness of the choice made by the administrator open to him and the court should not
substitute its decision to that of the administrator. The scope of judicial review is judicial review is
limited to the deficiency in decision-making process and not the decision.
12.
To put it differently, unless the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority or the
appellate authority shocks the conscience of the court/tribunal, there is no scope for interference.
Further, to shorten litigation it may, in exceptional and rare cases, impose appropriate punishment
by recording cogent reasons in support thereof.”
In Union of India vs. S.S. Ahluwalia (2007) 7 SCC 257 Hon’ble Supreme Court reiterated the legal
position as follows:
“8.
……… The scope of judicial review in the matter of imposition of penalty as a result of
disciplinary proceedings is very limited. The court can interfere with the punishment only if it finds
the same to be shockingly disproportionate to the charges found to be proved.”
In State of Meghalaya v. Mecken Singh N. Marak (2008) 7 SCC 580 Hon’ble Supreme Court stated
that:
“The punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority or the appellate authority unless shocking to
the conscience of the court, cannot be subjected to judicial review.
16.
Hon’ble Apex Court in Administrator, Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli vs. Gulbhia M. Lad
(2010) 2 SCC (L&S) 101 has observed that
“The legal position is fairly well settled that while exercising the power of judicial review, the High
Court or a Tribunal cannot interfere with the discretion exercised by the disciplinary authority,
and/or on appeal the appellate authority with regard to the imposition of punishment unless such
discretion suffers from illegality or material procedural irregularity or that would shock the
conscience of the court/tribunal. The exercise of discretion in imposition of punishment by the
disciplinary authority or appellate authority is dependent on host of factors such as gravity of
misconduct, past conduct, the nature of duties assigned to the delinquent, responsibility of the
position that the delinquent holds, previous penalty, if any, and the discipline required to be
maintained in the department or establishment he works. Ordinarily the court or the tribunal would
not substitute its opinion on reappraisal of facts.
17.
Moreover, the Banks being financial institution; where the hard earned money of the public at large is
kept, and any disorderly atmosphere in the Bank premises may lead to loss to trust of the depositors on the
Banking institution; which may ultimately lead to collapse of financial system of the country and the same is not
permissible at all. Hon’ble Apex Court in (2011) 1 Supreme Court Cases (L&S) 721 has observed that:
“7.
It is now well settled that the courts will not act as an appellate court and reassess the
evidence led in the domestic enquiry, nor interfere on the ground that another view is possible on the
material on record. If the inquiry has been fairly and properly held and the findings are based on
evidence, the question of adequacy of the evidence or the reliable nature of the evidence will not be
grounds for interfering with the findings in departmental enquiries. Therefore the courts will not
interfere with findings of fact recorded in departmental inquiries, except where such findings are
based on no evidence or where they are clearly perverse. The test to find out perversity is to see
whether a tribunal acting reasonably could have arrived at such conclusion or findings, on the
material on record. The courts will however interfere with the findings in disciplinary matters, if
principles of natural justice or statutory regulations have been violated or if the order is found to be
arbitrary, capricious, mala fide or based on extraneous considerations.”
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3093
18.
In the instant case, the workman was punished with the punishment of stoppage of two increments with
cumulative effect. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Western Coalfield Ltd. vs Santosh Kumar and others 2018
LLR 764 has observed that hurling of filthy abusive language at a senior officer justifies dismissal; whereas in
the present case, the workman had been punished with stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect,
probably the charges being partially proved. Therefore, under the facts and the circumstances of the case in
hand and considering the laws pronounced by Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble High Courts, there is no
justification in interfering with the punishment imposed upon the workman. Accordingly, the workman is not
entitled for any relief.
19.
Award as above.
Let two copies of this award be sent to the Ministry for publication.
LUCKNOW.
20th November, 2020
P. K. SRIVASTAVA, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 4 fnlEcj] 2020
.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼a1947 dk 14 ½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh;
ljdkj ;wukbVsM bafM;k ba'kksjsal dEiuh fyfeVsM ds izca/kra=] 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; la- 1] /kuckn ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la-
13@2007½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 04-12-2020 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y-17012@18@2006-vkbZ vkj ¼,e½]
uohu oS|] mi funs'kd
New Delhi, the 4th December, 2020
S.O. 1068.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 13/2007) of the Cent. Govt. Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court No 1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of United
India Insurance Co. Ltd., and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 04.12.2020.
[No. L-17012/18/2006-IR(M)]
NAVIN VAIDYA, Dy. Director
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, DHANBAD
In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A) of I.D.Act. 1947
Reference: No. 13/2007
Employer in relation to the management of United India Insurance Company Ltd, Muzaffarpur
AND
Their workman
Present: Shri Dinesh Kumar Singh, Presiding Officer
Appearances:
For Employer
: Sri A.K. Sarkar, Advocate.
For workman
: Sri D.K. Verma, Advocate.
State : Jharkhand.
Industry:- Insurance
Dated : 27.08.2020
AWARD
By Order No.L-17012/18/2006 (IR(M)) dated 13.02.2007, the Central Government in the Ministry of
Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section
10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:
3094 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the management of United India Insurance Company, Divisional Office,
Muzaffarpur in terminating and not reinstating and regularizing the services of Sh. Ashok
Kumar Jha, S/o Late Lakshmeswar Jha, Vill Nawelpur Mshihraulia, PO Siho, PS-Sakra, Distt.
Muzaffarpur without complying Section 25 F of the ID Act, 1947 is legal and or justified and
expedient? If not, what relief Sh. Ashok Kumar Jha is entitled to?”
2.
The Tribunal in this matter has passed an award on 21/07/2014 holding that the action of the
management of United India Insurance Company in terminating and not regularizing the service of Shri Ashok
Kumar Jha S/o Late Lakshmeswar Jha is not legal and justified and therefore, the workman be regularized under
the management in the lowest grade soon after the publication of the award in the official Gazette.
The management being aggrieved by the said award filed a writ petition bearing C.W.J.C.
No. 6159/2015 before the Hon’ble Patna High Court Patna.
The Hon’ble Patna High Court, has been pleased to set aside the said award and remitted the matter to
the Tribunal to dispose of the same afresh expeditiously.
3.
After production of the order of Hon’ble Patna High Court passed in C.W.J.C. No. 6159/2015 both the
parties were heard again.
4.
The claim of the concerned workman Ashok Kumar Jha as per his written statement is as follows:-
That he had been appointed as sub-staff against permanent vacancy in September 1998 in United India
Insurance Company, Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur and he had been working since 1998 with unblemished
record of service with full satisfaction of the management but his service was terminated with effect from
28/07/2001 without following mandatory provision of law and principle of natural justice. He had discharged
his duties for more than 240 days in attendance in every year which ipso facto shows that he was engaged
against permanent vacancy and he acquired the status of permanent staff. He had represented before the
management on several occasion for his proper designation and status as well as wages but unfortunately
neither his representation was disposed of nor the same was rejected at any time. He had raised the dispute
before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Patna against his termination of service by the management but the
matter was not settled. The management had exploited him and made discrimination against him by not
maintaining statutory documents.
He has made a prayer to pass an Award with the direction to the management to reinstate and
regularize his service from the date of his appointment with full back wages and other consequential benefits.
5.
On the other hand the case of the management as per its written statement is as follows:-
That the concerned workman had never been appointed and included in the panel of staff of the
Company at Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur. The management of United India Insurance Company is an
undertaking of Govt. of India and has codified rules and established procedure for recruitment of sub-staff or
anyone under the permanent establishment of the Company and the Divisional Manager, In-charge of the
Division doesn’t have any power or authority to induct any one even in the capacity of sub-staff. The concerned
workman was not working as sub-staff against the permanent vacancy and he had never been inducted in the
Company’s pay-roll by issuing any valid appointment or authority, so the question of his termination does not
arise. The concerned workman had never been employed or had been entrusted with any work, so question of
assigning any reason or complying any mandatory provision of law does not arise. In absence of any valid
employment, the retrenchment of concerned workman by the management does not arise. The concerned
workman had never imparted his service even for a continued period of seven days, so the question of
continuation of service for 240 days does not arise and subsequently non-compliance of section 25F and 25N of
Industrial Dispute Act is also irrelevant. The concerned workman had neither been employee nor been
terminated by the management, so the question of reinstatement and regularization of his service does not arise.
A prayer has been made to pass an Award in favour of the management.
6.
The concerned workman has filed rejoinder to the written statement filed by the management in which
he has almost denied all the averments.
7.
The concerned workman has examined only one witness. He is himself Ashok Kumar Jha. The WW-1
Ashok Kumar Jha has deposed before the Tribunal that the management had terminated him from his service
with effect from 28/07/2001 and since then he was out of employment. He has also deposed that he had been
appointed as sub-staff against permanent vacancy in September 1998 as per the provision of law and since then
he had been working as sub-staff against permanent vacancy continuously. He has also stated that he had
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3095
worked for more than 240 days in every year and he acquired the status of permanent staff but the management
was paying less wages than the wages prescribed for sub-staff. He has also stated that he had demanded proper
wages from the management but the management became annoyed and terminated his service illegally without
following mandatory provision of law and principle of natural justice. He has also stated that the management
had not issued any notice to him and had not paid any retrenchment compensation to him.
In the cross-examination he has stated that the documents filed by him had been signed and endorsed
by Sri S.N. Rub, Kishori Choudhary, Anil Raj Singh and Dr. Joher. He has also deposed that all the Officers
were working in the Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur from 1998 to 2001. He has further deposed that he had
applied for the job after an advertisement found on the notice board of the Divisional Office and only on verbal
interview he was appointed. He has further deposed that no appointment letter was given to him and he was
terminated from his job in July 2001. He has further deposed that he has produced photo copy of salary slip
voucher which are marked as W-1 series. He has further deposed that he had personally approached the
Regional Office at Patna but he had not received any reply in writing.
8.
The concerned workman has proved Photo Copy of receipts of payment made to him by United India
Insurance Company ltd, Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur which are marked as Exhibit W-1 series (80 sheets)-
9.
On the other hand the management has examined two witnesses. They are MW-1 Abhay Shankar and
MW-2 Vijay Das.
10.
The MW-1 Abhay Shankar has deposed that the concerned workman was never under any
establishment of the Company, so he does not come under the ambit of the Industrial Dispute Act. He has also
stated that the workman has not produced any iota of evidence substantiating his recruit in the capacity of class-
IV employee and in absence of employer-employee relationship there is no existence of Industrial Dispute. He
has also deposed that there is no material that the concerned workman was in continuous employment for a
period of not less than one year and the concerned workman has not produced any appointment letter or
document showing existence of any vacancy against which he was employed. He has further stated that the
concerned workman has produced only the receipts of payment received for serving water to the employees of
Muzaffarpur Division on payment of Rs. 25/- and there is no authentic document in support of the claim of the
concerned workman. He has further stated that the Company is a public undertaking and it is bound by various
rules and regulations in the matter of recruitment. He has also deposed that there are specific guidelines issued
by the Company to all the Officers from refraining engagement of any person other than employee of the
Company for performing of duties. He has further deposed that the payment receipts do not show the continuity
of service for even a week, meaning thereby his services had been hired for five working days only, so in this
way the continuity service of 240 days in a year is not established.
In the cross-examination he has deposed that he had seen all the payment receipts and payment had
been made not for the service but for goods and articles. He has also stated that petty articles could be
purchased without tender and he had not taken any receipt of the articles of petty nature articles purchased by
the Company. He has also stated that expenditures are generally maintained in General Expenditure Register
and he has not produced the General Expenditure Register of the Company before the Tribunal. He has also
deposed that he has not produced attendance register of employees for the period 1998 to 2001 and the original
receipts of the period 1988 to 2001 before the Tribunal. He has denied the suggestion that Ashok Kumar Jha
had worked in Divisional Office of United India Insurance Company, Muzaffarpur from 1998 to 2001 and he
had attended his office for 240 days in every year.
11.
The MW-2 Vijay Das has deposed before the Tribunal that he was posted as Class-III employee at
Muzaffarpur Divisional Office of the Company during the period of 1988 till his continuation of his tenure. He
has also deposed that he had put his signature on the attendance register maintained for the attendance for Class-
III and Class-IV employee of Division from the year 1988 to 2006 and he has proved attendance register for the
period of January 1999 to December 2002 which has been marked as Exhibit M-1 series. He has also deposed
that in the attendance register there is neither signature nor marking of attendance of the concerned workman.
He has further stated that the concerned workman had neither been inducted nor his services were utilized by
the Company. He has also deposed that the payment receipts had never been brought to his knowledge. He has
also deposed that there was no vacancy of Class-IV staff in Divisional Office as per sanctioned strength.
In the cross-examination he has deposed that permanent employee of the Company used to mark their
attendance on the attendance register. He has also stated that there was no certificate of any Officer of the
Company on this register. He has also stated that on some pages there is signature of Competent Officer and on
some pages there is no signature of Competent Authority. He has further deposed that this register has been
prepared from original register. He has further deposed that the all the expenditure of the Company are
3096 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
maintained in the ledger which is called SS2 register. He has also deposed that the attendance of daily wager are
not marked on the attendance register, i.e. Exhibit M-1. He has also deposed that he has no knowledge whether
the employees of daily wager were paid as per Minimum Wages Act or not. He has further deposed that Ashok
Kumar Jha was seen in office time to time as a water supplier.
12.
The management has proved photo copy of attendance register of class III and class IV employees of
the period 04/01/1999 to 01/01/2003 of United India Insurance Company ltd, Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur
which are marked as Exhibit M-1 series.
13.
The learned lawyer of the workman has submitted before the Tribunal that the workman namely Ashok
Kumar Jha was working in United India Insurance Company, Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur since September
1998 against a permanent vacancy but his service was terminated with effect from 28/07/2001without
complying the provision of Section 25 F of I.D. Act. He has also argued that the concerned workman had
submitted several representation before the management for his regularisation but no decision was taken on his
representation, so he had been illegally and arbitrarily terminated from the service without complying principle
of natural justice. He has made prayer for reinstatement of the concerned workman and payment of full back
wages with consequential benefits.
14.
On the other hand the learned lawyer of the management has submitted that the concerned workman
had never been employed as a subordinate staff and there was no employer-employee relationship between the
management and the concerned workman. He has also argued that the concerned workman was employed as a
daily wager and he was paid accordingly. He has further submitted that there was no permanent vacancy of
class-IV employees in the Company. He has also argued that there are rules and guidelines for recruitment of
staff in the Company. He has lastly argued that there is no merit in this reference case and the case may be
dismissed. He has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court as reported in 2019 LLR
969.
15.
Now, the only point of consideration in this case is whether the action of the management of United
India Insurance Company, Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur in terminating and not reinstating and regularizing
the services of Sh. Ashok Kumar Jha without complying of section 25 F of I.D. Act is legal or justified and to
what relief he is entitled.
FINDINGS
16.
It is the claim of concerned workman namely Ashok Kumar Jha that he had been appointed as a sub-
staff against permanent vacancy in United India Insurance Company, Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur in
September 1998 but he was terminated from the service w.e.f. 28/07/2001 without following the provision of
25F of the I.D. Act.
It is further claim of concerned workman that a direction be issued to management for her reinstatement and
regularization of his service will full back wages and consequential benefits.
17.
On the other hand it is the case of the management that the concerned workman had never been
appointed by the United India Insurance Company Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur as sub-staff and he had not
served the Company continuously for 240 days in twelve calendar months, so there is question of his
termination by the Company.
18.
Now in the light of pleading of both the parties the Tribunal will examine the oral and documentary
evidence available in the record.
19.
The most competent witness in this is WW-1, Ashok Kumar Jha who has supported its case by stating
therein that he had been appointed as sub-staff against the permanent vacancy in September,1998 as per
provision of law and since then he had been working against permanent vacancy continuously but his service
was terminated w.e.f. 28/07/2001 without following the mandatory provisions of law. He has also deposed that
he had continuously worked in the Company for more than 240 days in every year. In the cross-examination he
has admitted that no appointment letter was issued to him and he was paid his remuneration through receipts
which are Exhibit –W-1 series.
The MW-1, Abhay Shankar in his evidence has deposed that the concerned workman has not produced
any documents showing his appointment, and there is no material to show that the concerned workman was in
continuous employment for a period of not less than one year. He has also deposed that the concerned workman
has produced only receipt of payments and there is no authentic documents in support of his claim. He has also
stated that the payment receipts only show the continuity of service for even a week meaning thereby that his
service had been hired for five working days only. In the cross-examination he has deposed that the payment
receipt was not only for the service but for the goods and articles.
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3097
The MW-2, Vijay Das has proved the photo copy register of attendance for class III and class IV
employee of for the period of January, 1999 to 2002 and he has deposed that in the said attendance register
there is neither signature nor signature mark of attendance of the concerned workman. He has also stated that
the concerned workman had neither been inducted into service nor his services were utilized by the Company.
In the Cross-examination he has deposed that the permanent employee of the Company used to mark their
attendance on the register.
20.
After analyzing documentary evidence it appears that the Exhibit W-1 series are the photo copy of
receipts of payment of labour charge made to the concerned workman which are altogether eighty sheets in
number. It further appears that all the receipts of payment are of labour charges of different years. It appears
that the five payment receipts are of year 1998, forty payment receipts are of year 1999, thirty one payment
receipts are of year 2000 and four payment receipts are of year 2001. It further appears that in most of the
payment receipts it has been mentioned that payment had been made for serving water for four days or five
days only at the rate of Rs. 25/- per day. Further after calculating the working of concerned workman it comes
to about 24 days in 1998, 196 days in 1999, 143 days in 2000, and 18 days in 2001 Moreover the Exhibit W-1
series does not show that the concerned workman had worked in United India Insurance Company, Muzaffarpur
for 240 days in twelve calendar months.
The M-1 series which is photocopy of attendance register of class III and class IV employee of
Muzaffarpur Division of United India Insurance Company of period 04/01/1999 to 20/12/2002 and it does not
show the name of concerned workman namely Ashok Kumar Jha as employee of the company and there is no
mark of his attendance in the register.
21.
Now in this case the concerned workman has not produced any appointment letter and in the cross-
examination he has admitted that no appointment letter was issued to him by the United India Insurance
Company. Further the concerned workman has not produced any documents showing advertisement issued by
the United India Insurance Company for appointment on the post of sub-staff in the Company. Further the
Exhibit W-1 series does not show that the concerned workman had continuously worked for 240 days in twelve
calendar months. Additionally the concerned workman has not produced any document to show that there was
any vacancy of sub staff and he had been appointed against the said permanent vacancy of the Company.
22.
At this stage it is required to mention here that u/s 25B of I.D. Act there is definition of continuous
service and u/s 25F of the I.D. Act conditions precedent to retrenchment of workman has been mentioned.
Section 25B of I.D. Act reads as follows:-
25-B. Definition of continuous service – For the purpose of this Chapter,-
(1) a workman shall be said to be in continuous service for a period if he is, for that period, in uninterrupted
service, including service which may be interrupted on account of sickness or authorized leave or an accident or
a strike which is not illegal, or a lock-out or a cessation of work which is not due to any fault on the part of the
workman;
(2) Where a workman is not in continuous service within the meaning of clause (1) for a period of one year or
six months, he shall be deemed to be in continuous service under an employer-
(a) for a period one year, if the workman, during a period of twelve calendar months preceding the date
with reference to which calculation is to be made, has actually worked under the employer for not
less than –
(i) one hundred and ninety days in the case of a workman employed below ground in a mine; and
(ii) two hundred and forty days, in any other case;
(b)…………………………………..
Further, Section 25F of the I.D. Act reads as follows:-
25-F Conditions precedent to retrenchment of workmen- No workman employed in any industry
who has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that
employer until-
(a)
The workman has been given one month’s notice in writing indicating the reasons for
retrenchment and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been paid in lieu of such
notice, wages for the period of the notice:
3098 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 12, 2020/AGRAHAYANA 21, 1942 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(b)
The workman has been paid, at the time of retrenchment, compensation which shall be
equivalent to fifteen days’ average pay (for Every completed year of continuous service) or any
part thereof in excess of six months; and
(c)
Notice in the prescribed manner is served on the appropriate Government (or such authority as
may be specified by the appropriate Government by notification in the Official Gazette.)
23.
Now in this case there is no documentary evidence that the concerned workman had worked for 240
days in twelve calendar months in United India Insurance Company Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur , so there
is no continuous service of the concerned workman as per definition of continuous service mentioned in u/s
25B of the I.D. Act.
24.
In view of above discussions the Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the concerned workman had
not worked continuously for 240 days in a twelve calendar months in a year, so he had not served the United
India Insurance Company Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur continuously for not less than one year, so the
provisions of section 25F of the Industrial Dispute Act is not applicable in this case.
25.
Hence, the action of the management of United India Insurance Company Divisional Office,
Muzaffarpur in terminating the service of concerned workman namely Ashok Kumar Jha is legal, justified and
expedient.
26.
Now, the next point of consideration in this case is whether the concerned workman is entitled for
reinstatement and regularisation of service in United India Insurance Company, Divisional Office,
Muzaffarpur?
27.
In this regard the concerned workman WW-1, Ashok Kumar Jha has deposed that he had worked in
the United India Insurance Company, Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur on his appointment as sub staff against
permanent vacancy in September , 1998 and had worked continuously and regularly till his termination on
28/07/2001.
On the other hand MW-1, Abhay Shankar has deposed that concerned workman had never been appointed as
sub staff in the office of the United India Insurance Company, Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur and he had been
hired for five working days in a week only.
Further the MW-2, Vijay Das who has proved the attendance register of class-III and class-IV
employees of Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur for the period of January 1999 to December 2002 has deposed
that there is no mark of attendance of concerned employee on the aforesaid register.
28.
Moreover the Exhibit W-1 series are the payment receipt for the year 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001 for
serving water for four or five days at the rate Rs. 25/- per day. Further the M-1 series does not show the name of
the concerned workman on the attendance register the period January 1999 to December 2002.
29.
It is required to mention here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Aeronautics
Ltd. Vs. Dan Bahadur Singh, reported in (2007) 6 SCC 207, has been pleased to hold as under:-
“14. The next question which requires consideration is whether completion of 240 days in a year confers
any right on an employee or workman to claim regularisation in service. In Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad
vs. Anil Kumar Mishra it was held that the completion of 240 days’ work does not confer the right to
regularisation under the Industrial Disputes Act. It merely imposes certain obligations on the employer at
the time of termination of the services. In M.P. Housing Board vs. Manoj Shrivastava (para 17) after
referring to several earlier decisions it has been reiterated that it is well settled that only because a
person had been working for more than 240 days, he does not derive any legal right to be regularised in
serivee. This view has been reiterated in Gangadhar Pillai vs. Siemens Ltd. The same question has been
examined in considerable detail with reference to an employee working in a government company in
Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs. Workmen and paras 34 and 35 of the report are being
reproduced below:( 2007 (1) SCC p.408)
“34. Thus, it is well settled that there is no right vested in any daily wager to seek regularisation.
Regularisation can only be done in accordance with the rules and not dehors the rules. In the case of E.
Ramakrishnan v. State of Kerala this Court held that there can be no regularisation dehors the rules. The
same view was taken in Kishore (Dr.) v. State of Maharashtra and Union of India v. Bishamber Dutt. The
direction issued by the services Tribunal for regularising the services of persons who had not been
appointed on regular basis in accordance with the rules was set aside although the petitioner had been
working regularly for a long time.
[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]
भारत का रािृत्र : दिसम् बर 12, 2020/अग्रिायण 21, 1942
3099
35. In Surinder Singh Jamwal (Dr.) v. State of J&K it was held that ad hoc appointment does not give any
right for regularization as regularization is governed by the statutory rules.””
30.
The Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court has been pleased to observe in L.P.A No. 268/2012 which is as
under:-
“(xiv) Be that as it may, even assuming without admitting that this appellant has worked more than 240
days in couple of years, then also, his services cannot be regularized. 240 days’ working is not a magic
bond which converts illegal appointment into the legal appointment. In fact, 240 days working has
nothing to do with the regularization at all. 240 days working has got reference under Section 25-B of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for calculation of continuous years of service and nothing beyond that.
Unnecessarily several times the Labour Court or the Industrial Courts are committing an error that if any
worker has completed 240 days, their services should be regularized. In fact, there is no casual
connection at all between the working of 240 days and right of regularization. Illegality in the
appointment cannot be diluted by the working of 240 days. Illegality in the appointment continues, even if,
the worker has worked for 240 days.”
The Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court has been further pleased to hold as follows:-
“Whenever any employment is given unauthorizedly, in the respondent-UCO Bank, Hirapur, Dhanbad,
such type of employment cannot be converted into a regular employment unless there are rules for
regularization or scheme for regularization. In the facts of the present case, there are no rules of
regularization nor there is any scheme of regularization floated by the UCO Bank. In absence of such
type of law, the charity shown by the Court will be cruelty to others. If such type regularization is allowed
by the Courts, it will provide encouragement to those who are adorning high-ranking administrative
position to give illegal appointment and later on, to get them regularized by the orders of the Courts. A
thing which cannot be done directly, can never be done indirectly. If no employment can be given without
there being any advertisement and without there being any recruitment process, the Court cannot be a
party to illegal regularization of such employee.”
31.
It is relevant to mention here that it has already been held by this Tribunal that the concerned
workman had not worked for 240 days in twelve calendar months in the United India Insurance Company,
Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur.
32.
In view of such fact and in view of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble Jharkhand High
Court it is settled that the concerned workman namely Ashok Kumar Jha even, if he would had worked for 240
days in twelve calendar months, is not entitled for reinstatement and regularization of his service in United
India Insurance Company, Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur.
33.
Hence, the following Award is rendered:-
“The action of the management of United India Insurance Company, Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur
was justified in terminating and not reinstating and regularizing the services of the concerned
workman namely Sri Ashok Kumar Jha as mentioned in the schedule of reference without complying
section 25 of the I.D. Act 1947 is legal, justified and expedient . Consequently the concerned workman
is not entitled for any relief.”
This is the Award of this Tribunal.
DINESH KUMAR SINGH, 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.
SURENDER
MAHADASAM
Digitally signed by SURENDER
MAHADASAM
Date: 2020.12.19 12:21:30
+05'30'