4644 GI/2022

(1397)

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. 29]

नई दिल् ली, िुलाई 17— िुलाई 23, 2022, िजनवार/ आषाढ़ 26— श्रावण 1, 1944

No. 29]

NEW DELHI, JULY 17—JULY 23, 2022, SATURDAY/ASADHA 26–SRAVANA 1, 1944

इस भाग में जभन् न ृष्‍ सं्‍ ा िी िाती िज जिससे दक ि ृ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 मंत्राल ों (रक्षा मंत्राल 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 मत्रांल

(रािस्ट्व जवभाग)

(केन्री अप्रत् क्ष कर एवं सीमा िुल्क बोडड)

नई दिल्ली, 28 िून, 2022

का.आ. 678.—केन्री सरकार, रािभाषा (संघ के िासकी प्र ोिनों के जलए प्र ोग) जन म, 1976 के जन म

10 के उृजन म (4) के अनुसरण में रािस्ट्व जवभाग के अिीन, प्रिान आ ुक्त का का ाडल , केंरी माल और सेवाकर,

िम्मू, ओ.बी.-32-रेल िजड कॉम्प्लेक्स, िम्मू, जिसके 80 प्रजतित से अजिक कमडचारर ों ने हिंिी का का ड सािक ज्ञान प्राप्त

कर जल ा िज, को अजिसूजचत करती िज।

[फा. सं. ई-11017/3/2017- जिन्िी-2 डीओआर]

नीिाररका हसंि, जनिेिक (रािभाषा)

सी.जी.-डी.एल.-सा.-26072022-237566

CG-DL-W-26072022-237566

1398

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 23, 2022/SRAVANA 1, 1944

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department of Revenue)

(CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS)

New Delhi, the 28th June, 2022

S.O. 678.—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 notifies, Office of the Principal Commissioner, Central Goods

and Services Tax, Jammu, O.B.-32, Rail Head Complex, Jammu, where more than 80% staff have acquired the

working knowledge of Hindi.

[F. No. E-11017/3/2017-Hindi-II DOR]

NIHARIKA SINGH, Director (OL)

नई दिल्ली, 19 िुलाई, 2022

का.आ. 679.—केन्री सरकार, रािभाषा (संघ के िासकी प्र ोिनों के जलए प्र ोग) जन म, 1976 के जन म

10 के उृजन म (4) के अनुसरण में रािस्ट्व जवभाग के अिीन, जनम्नजलज त का ाडल जिसके 80 प्रजतित से अजिक

कमडचारर ों ने जिन्िी का का ड सािक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर जल ा िज, को अजिसूजचत करती िज।

क्रम सं.

का ाडल का नाम

का ाडल का ृता

केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर

आ ुक्ताल , उि ृुर

का ाडल आ ुक् त, केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर आ ुक्ताल , उि ृुर 142-बी, जिरण मगरी,

सेक्टर-11, उि ृुर

केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर

संभाग-ए उि ृुर

का ाडल उृ/सिा क आ ुक् त, केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर संभाग-ए उि ृुर, चतु ड तल,

एल.आई.सी.भवन, रेती स्ट्टेंड, उि ृुर

केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर

संभाग-बी उि ृुर

का ाडल उृ/सिा क आ ुक् त, केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर संभाग-बी उि ृुर, चतु ड तल,

एल.आई.सी.भवन, रेती स्ट्टेंड, उि ृुर

केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर

संभाग-सी उि ृुर

का ाडल उृ/सिा क आ ुक् त, केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर संभाग-सी उि ृुर 142-बी, जिरण

मगरी, सेक्टर-11, उि ृुर

केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर

संभाग-डी कांकरोली

का ाडल उृ/सिा क आ ुक् त, केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर संभाग-डी कांकरोली आर.के.

अस्ट्ृताल के सामने, भीलवाड़ा बाईृास, कांकरोली, जिला-रािसमन्ि

केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर

संभाग-ई भीलवाड़ा

का ाडल उृ/सिा क आ ुक् त, केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर संभाग-ई भीलवाड़ा, 11 आिाि

नगर, ृन्नािा सर्कडल के समीृ, भीलवाड़ा

केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर

संभाग-एफ भीलवाड़ा

का ाडल उृ/सिा क आ ुक् त, केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर संभाग-एफ भीलवाड़ा, 11 आिाि

नगर, ृन्नािा सर्कडल के समीृ, भीलवाड़ा

केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर

संभाग-िी जचत्तोड़गढ़

का ाडल उृ/सिा क आ ुक् त, केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर संभाग-िी जचत्तोड़गढ़, सेक्टर 4,

जनि भवन के ृास, गांिीनगर, जचत्तोड़गढ़

केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर

संभाग-एच कोटा

का ाडल उृ/सिा क आ ुक् त, केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर संभाग-एच, सी.ए.डी. सर्कडल,

रािस्ट्व भवन, कोटा

केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर

संभाग-आई कोटा

का ाडल उृ/सिा क आ ुक् त, केंरी वस्ट्तु एवं सेवा कर संभाग-आई, सी.ए.डी. सर्कडल,

रािस्ट्व भवन, कोटा

[फा. सं. ई-11017/3/2017- जिन्िी-2 डीओआर]

नीिाररका हसंि, जनिेिक (रािभाषा)

[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का रािृत्र : िुलाई 23, 2022/श्रावण 1, 1944

1399

New Delhi, the 19th July, 2022

S.O. 679.—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 notifies, the following offices under Department of revenue

where more than 80% staff have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi.

S.No.

Office Name

Office Address

Central Goods and Services Tax

Commissionerate, Udaipur

Office of the Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax

Commissionerate, Udaipur 142-B, Hiran Magri, Sector-11 , Udaipur

Central Goods and Services Tax

Division-A Udaipur

Office of the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and

Services Tax Division-A Udaipur, 4th Floor, LIC Bhawan, Reti Stand,

Udaipur

Central Goods and Services Tax

Division-B Udaipur

Office of the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and

Services Tax Division- B Udaipur, 4th Floor, LIC Bhawan, Reti Stand,

Udaipur

Central Goods and Services Tax

Division-C Udaipur

Office of the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner , Central Goods and

Services Tax Division - C Udaipur 142-B, Hiran Magr, Sector-11,

Udaipur

Central Goods and Services Tax

Division-D Kankroli

Office of the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner , Central Goods and

Services Tax Division-D Kankroli R.K. Opposite Hospital , Bhilwara

Bypass, Kankroli, District- Rajsamand

Central Goods and Services Tax

Division-E Bhilwara

Office of the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner , Central Goods and

Services Tax Division-E Bhilwara, 11 Azad Nagar, Near Pannadhay

Circle , Bhilwara

Central Goods and Services Tax

Division-F Bhilwara

Office of the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner , Central Goods and

Services Tax Division -F Bhilwara, 11 Azad Nagar, Near Pannadhay

Circle , Bhilwara

Central Goods and Services Tax

Division-G Chittorgarh

Office of the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and

Services Tax Division-G Chittorgarh, Sector 4, Near Mineral Bhawan,

Gandhinagar, Chittorgarh

Central Goods and Services Tax

Division-H Quota

Office of the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and

Services Tax Division-H, CAD. Circle, Revenue Bhawan , Kota

Central Goods and Services Tax

Division-I Quota

Office of the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and

Services Tax Division -I, CAD. Circle, Revenue Bhawan, Kota

[F. No. E-11017/3/2017-Hindi-II DOR]

NIHARIKA SINGH, Director (OL)

को ला मंत्राल

नई दिल्ली, 20 िुलाई, 2022

का.आ. 680.—केन्री सरकार, को ला िारक क्षेत्र (अिडन और जवकास) अजिजन म, 1957 (1957 का 20)

(जिसे इसमें इसके ृश्चात उक्त अजिजन म किा ग ा िज) की िारा 4 की उृ-िारा (1) के अिीन भारत सरकार के, को ला

मंत्राल के द्वारा िारी की गई अजिसूचना सं्‍ ांक 426, तारी 5 िुलाई, 2021, िो भारत के रािृत्र, भाग II, ण्ड 3

उृ- ण्ड (ii), तारी 10 िुलाई, 2021 में प्रकाजित की गई ी, उस अजिसूचना से उृाबद्ध अनुसूची में जवजनर्िडष्ट ृररक्षेत्र

की भूजम में जिसका माृ 105.97 एकड़ (लगभग) अ वा 42.88 िेक्टे र (लगभग) िज, को ले का ृूवेक्षण करने के अृने

आि की सूचना िी ी;

1400

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 23, 2022/SRAVANA 1, 1944

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

और केन्री सरकार का ि समािान िो ग ा िज दक इस अजिसूचना में उृाबद्ध अनुसूची में जवजनर्िडष्ट की गई उक्त

भूजम के भाग में को ला अजभप्राप् िज;

अतः अब केन्री सरकार, उक्त अजिजन म की िारा 7 की उृ-िारा (1) द्वारा प्रित्त िजक्त ों का प्र ोग करते हुए

इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णडत 105.97 एकड़ (लगभग) अ वा 42.88 िेक्टे र (लगभग) माृ की उक्त भूजम के सभी

अजिकार के अिडन करने के अृने आि की सूचना िेती िज ;

रटप्ृण 1 : इस अजिसूचना के अिीन आने वाले क्षेत्र के रे ांक सं्‍ ा आरईवी/08/2021, तारी 15 दिसंबर,

2021 का जनरीक्षण उृा ुक्त, जिला – ििारीबाग, झार ण्ड के का ाडल ा को ला जन ंत्रक, 1, काउंजसल िाउस स्ट्रीट,

कोलकाता – 700001 के का ाडल ा मिाप्रबंिक, अरगड़ा क्षेत्र, जिला – ििारीबाग, झार ंड के का ाडल ा

मिाप्रबंिक (भूजम और रािस्ट्व), सेंरल कोलफील््स जलजमटेड, िरभंगा िाउस, रााँची – 834001, झार ंड ा मु्‍

मिाप्रबंिक (गवेषण जवभाग), सेंरल माइन प्लाहनंग एंड जडिाइन इंस्ट्टीच् ूट जलजमटेड, गोंडवाना ृजलेस, कांके रोड, रााँची –

834008, झार ंड में दक ा िा सकता िज।

रटप्ृण 2 : उक्त अजिजन म की िारा 8 के उृबंिों की ओर ध् ान आकषष्ट दक ा िाता िज, जिसमें जनम्नजलज त

उृबंि िैं :-

‘‘8. अिडन की बाबत् आृजत्त ां.- (1) कोई व्यजक्त, िो दकसी भूजम में जिसकी बाबत् िारा 7 के अिीन

अजिसूचना जनकाली गई िज, जितबद्ध िज, अजिसूचना के जनकाले िाने के तीस दिनों के भीतर सम्ृूणड भूजम ा

उसके दकसी भाग ा ऐसी भूजम में ा उस ृर के दकन्िीं अजिकारों का अिडन दकए िाने के बारे में आृजत्त

कर सकेगा।

स्ट्ृष्टीकरण.- इस िारा के अ ाडन्तगडत ि आृजत्त निीं मानी िाएगी दक कोई व्यजक्त दकसी भूजम में को ला

उत्ृािन के जलए स्ट्व ं नन संदक्र ाएाँ करना चािता िज और ऐसी संदक्र ाएाँ केन्री सरकार ा दकसी अन् व्यजक्त

को निीं करनी चाजिए।

(2) उृिारा (1) के अिीन प्रत् ेक आृजत्त सक्षम प्राजिकारी को जलज त प ृ में की िाएगी और सक्षम

प्राजिकारी आृजत्तकताड को स्ट्व ं सुने िाने का ा जवजि व्यवसा ी द्वारा सुनवाई का अवसर िेगा और ऐसी

सभी अृजत्त ों को सुनने के ृश्चात और ऐसी अजतररक्त िााँच, दि कोई िो, करने के ृश्चात िो वि

आवश् क समझता िज, वि ा तो िारा 7 की उृ-िारा (1) के अिीन अजिसूजचत भूजम के ा ऐसी भूजम में

ा उस ृर के अजिकारों के संबंि में एक ररृोटड ा ऐसी भूजम के जवजभन्न टुकड़ों ा ऐसी भूजम में ा उस

ृर के अजिकारों के संबंि में आृजत्त ों ृर अृनी जसफ़ाररिों और उसके द्वारा की गई कारडवाई के अजभले

सजित जवजभन्न ररृोटड केन्री सरकार को उसके जवजनश्च के जलए िेगा।

(3) इस िारा के प्र ोिनों के जलए वि व्यजक्त दकसी भूजम में जितबद्ध समझा िाएगा, िो प्रजतकर में जित का

िावा करने को िकिार िोता, दि भूजम ा दकसी ऐसी भूजम में ा उस ृर के अजिकार इस अजिजन म के

अिीन अर्िडत कर जलए िाते।’’

रटप्ृण 3: केन्री सरकार ने को ला जन ंत्रक, 1, काउंजसल िाउस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता -700001 को उक्त

अजिजन म की िारा (3) के अिीन अजिसूचना सं्‍ ा का.आ. 2518, तारी 27 मई 1983, िो भारत के रािृत्र, भाग

I,I ंड 3, उृ- ंड (ii), तारी 11 िून 1983 में प्रकाजित की गई ी, सक्षम प्राजिकारी जन ुक्त दक ा िज।

[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का रािृत्र : िुलाई 23, 2022/श्रावण 1, 1944

1401

अनुसूची

जगद्दी ‘सी’ ओृनकास्ट्ट ृरर ोिना

जिला ििारीबाग (झार ण्ड)

( रे ांक सं्‍ ांक आरईवी/ 08/ 2021, तारी 15 दिसम्बर, 2021)

सभी अजिकार:

क्रम सं. ंड

ग्राम

ाना

सं्‍ ा

अंचल

जिला

अिडन के अिीन क्षेत्र

रटप्ृजण ां

एकड़ में

िेक्टे र में

क

डाड़ी

ििारीबाग

87.51

35.41

भाग

डाड़ी

ििारीबाग

0.32

0.13

भाग

ग

डाड़ी

ििारीबाग

18.14

7.34

भाग

कुल क्षेत्र (क + + ग):

105.97 एकड़

(लगभग)

42.88

िेक्टे र

(लगभग)

भू – अजभले के अनुसार अजिग्रजित दकए िाने वाले प्लॉट की जववरणी:

ब्लॉक

ग्राम

ाना

सं.

ाता

सं.

प्लॉट सं. अजिग्रिण

की भूजम

(एकड में)

भूजम का प्रकार

अजभजलज त

भूस्ट्वामी का नाम

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

क

डाडी

803

4.24 गजर मिरुवा (िंगल झाड़ी)

सरकारी भूजम

803

8.50 अजिसूजचत वन भूजम

सरकारी भूजम

890

4.50 गजर मिरुवा (िंगल झाड़ी)

सरकारी भूजम

901

0.28 गजर मिरुवा (ृरती)

सरकारी भूजम

904

14.99 गजर मिरुवा (िंगल झाड़ी)

सरकारी भूजम

904

7.16 अजिसूजचत वन भूजम

सरकारी भूजम

909

1.29 गजर मिरुवा (ृरती)

सरकारी भूजम

914

0.79 गजर मिरुवा (ृत् र)

सरकारी भूजम

917

0.04 गजर मिरुवा (ृत् र)

सरकारी भूजम

924

0.46 गजर मिरुवा (ृत् र)

सरकारी भूजम

936

2.50 गजर मिरुवा (झाड़ी)

सरकारी भूजम

936

7.61 अजिसूजचत वन भूजम

सरकारी भूजम

944

5.85 गजर मिरुवा (िंगल झाड़ी)

सरकारी भूजम

944

13.57 अजिसूजचत वन भूजम

सरकारी भूजम

1402

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 23, 2022/SRAVANA 1, 1944

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

954

0.07 गजर मिरुवा (िंगल झाड़ी)

सरकारी भूजम

1486

4.27 गजर मिरुवा (िंगल झाड़ी)

सरकारी भूजम

1486

10.90 अजिसूजचत वन भूजम

सरकारी भूजम

1494

0.49 गजर मिरुवा (िंगल झाड़ी)

सरकारी भूजम

कुल (ब्लॉक क)

87.51

डाडी

841

0.29 गजर मिरुवा (ृरती)

सरकारी भूजम

833

0.03 गजर मिरुवा (ृत् र)

सरकारी भूजम

कुल (ब्लॉक )

0.32

ग

डाडी

825

18.14 गजर मिरुवा (िंगल झाड़ी)

सरकारी भूजम

कुल (ब्लॉक ग)

18.14

कुल क्षेत्र (क+ +ग):

105.97

सीमा - वणडन:

क्रम सं.

सीमा रे ा

सीमा वणडन

ए1-ए2-ए3-ए4-ए5-ए6-ए7-ए1.

रे ा जबन्िु ‘ए1’ से आरंभ िोकर जबन्िु ए2, ए3, ए4, ए5

ए6

से गुिरते हुए आरंजभक जबन्िु ‘ए1’ ृर जमलती िज ।

बी1-बी2-बी3-बी4-बी5-बी6-बी7-बी1.

रे ा हवंिु ‘बी1’ से आरंभ िोकर जबन्िु बी2, बी3, बी4,

बी5, बी6, एवं बी7

से गुिरते हुए आरंजभक जबन्िु ‘बी1’

ृर जमलती िज।

सी1-सी2-सी3-सी4-सी5-सी6-सी7-सी8-

सी9-सी10-सी11-सी12-सी13-सी14-

सी15-सी16-सी17-सी18-सी19-सी20-

सी21-सी22-सी23-सी24-सी25-सी26-

सी27-सी28-सी29-सी30-सी31-सी32-

सी33-सी34-सी35-सी36-सी37-सी38-

सी39-सी40-सी41-सी42-सी43-सी1.

रे ा जबन्िु ‘सी1’ से आरंभ िोकर जबन्िु सी2, सी3, सी4,

सी5, सी6, सी7, सी8, सी9, सी10, सी11, सी12, सी13,

सी14, सी15, सी16, सी17, सी18, सी19, सी20, सी21,

सी22, सी23, सी24, सी25, सी26, सी27, सी28, सी29,

सी30, सी31, सी32, सी33, सी34, सी35, सी36, सी37,

सी38, सी39, सी40, सी41, सी42, त ा सी43 से गुिरते

हुए आरंजभक जबन्िु ‘सी1’ ृर जमलती िज।

[ फा. सं. 43015/04/2021-एलए एण्ड आईआर]

राम जिरोमजण सरोि, जनिेिक

MINISTRY OF COAL

New Delhi, the 20th July, 2022

S.O. 680.—Whereas by the notification of Government of India in the Ministry of Coal, number S.O. 426,

dated the 5^th July 2021, issued under sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and

Development) Act, 1957(20 of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), published in the Gazette of India, Part

II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii), dated the 10^th July, 2021, the Central Government gave notice of its intention to

prospect for coal in 105.97 acres (approximately) or 42.88 hectares (approximately) of the land in the locality

specified in the Schedule annexed to that notification;

[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का रािृत्र : िुलाई 23, 2022/श्रावण 1, 1944

1403

And, whereas, the Central Government is satisfied that coal is obtainable in a part of the said lands specified

in the Schedule appended to this notification;

Now, therefore, in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 7 of the said Act, the Central

Government hereby gives notice of its intention to acquire the lands measuring 105.97 acres (approximately) or 42.88

hectares (approximately) and all rights in or over the said lands as specified in the Schedule appended hereto;

Note 1: The plan bearing number Rev/08/2021, dated the 15th December, 2021, the area covered by this

notification may be inspected at the office of the Deputy Commissioner, District Hazaribagh, Jharkhand or at the

office of the Coal Controller, 1, Council House Street, Kolkata-700 001 or at the office of the General Manager,

Argada Area, District Hazaribagh, Jharkhand or General Manager (Land and Revenue), Central Coalfields Limited,

Darbhanga House, Ranchi-834001, Jharkhand or General Manager (Exploration Division), Central Mine Planning

and Design Institute Limited, Gondwana Palace, Kanke Road, Ranchi-834008.

Note 2: Attention is hereby invited to the provisions of section 8 of the said Act which provides as follows:-

" 8. Objections to acquisition.- (1) Any person interested in any land in respect of which a

notification under section 7 has been issued may, within thirty days of the issue of the notification,

object to the acquisition of the whole or any part of the land or any rights in or over such land.

Explanation.- It shall not be an objection within the meaning of this section for any person to say that he

himself desires to undertake mining operations in the land for the production of coal and that such operations should

not be undertaken by the Central Government or by any other person.

(2) Every objection under sub-section (1) shall be made to the competent authority in writing, and the

competent authority shall give the objector an opportunity of being heard either in person or by a legal

practitioner and shall, after hearing all such objections and after making such further inquiry, if any, as

he thinks necessary, either makes a report in respect of the land which has been notified under sub-

section (1) of section 7 or of rights in or over such land, or make different reports in respect of different

parcels of such land or of rights in or over such land, to the Central Government, containing his

recommendations on the objections, together with the record of the proceeding held by him, for the

decision of that Government.

(3) For the purposes of this section, a person shall be deemed to be interested in land who would be

entitled to claim an interest in compensation if the land or any rights in or over such land were acquired

under this Act.”

Note 3: The Coal Controller, 1, Council House Street, Kolkata-700 001 has been appointed by the Central

Government as the competent authority under section 3 of the said Act, vide notification number S.O. 2518, dated the

27^th May,1983, published in the Gazette of India, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii), dated the 11^th June, 1983.

SCHEDULE

Gidi ‘C’ Opencast Project

District- Hazaribagh (Jharkhand)

( Plan bearing number Rev/08/2021, dated the 15th December, 2021 )

All Rights :

Serial

number

Block

Village

Thana

number

Circle

District

Area under acquisition

Remarks

in acres

in hectares

Dari

Hazaribagh

87.51

35.41

Part

Dari

Hazaribagh

0.32

0.13

Part

Dari

Hazaribagh

18.14

7.34

Part

Total area : (A+B+C) :

105.97

acres

(approxi-mately)

42.88

hectares

(approxi-mately)

Details of plots to be acquired as per land record:

Block

Village

Thana

number

Khata

number

Plot

number

Area under

acquisition

Type of land

Name of

recorded tenant

(in acres)

Dari

803

4.24

Gair Majurwa

(Jungle Jhari)

Government land

803

8.50

Notified forest

Government land

1404

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 23, 2022/SRAVANA 1, 1944

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

890

4.50

Gair Majurwa

(Jungle Jhari)

Government land

901

0.28

Gair Majurwa

(Parti)

Government land

904

14.99

Gair Majurwa

(Jungle Jhari)

Government land

904

7.16

Notified forest

Government land

909

1.29

Gair Majurwa

(Parti)

Government land

914

0.79

Gair Majurwa

(Pathar)

Government land

917

0.04

Gair Majurwa

(Pathar)

Government land

924

0.46

Gair Majurwa

(Pathar)

Government land

936

2.50

Gair Majurwa

(Jhari)

Government land

936

7.61

Notified forest

Government land

944

5.85

Gair Majurwa

(Jungle Jhari)

Government land

944

13.57

Notified forest

Government land

954

0.07

Gair Majurwa

(Jungle Jhari)

Government land

1486

4.27

Gair Majurwa

(Jungle Jhari)

Government land

1486

10.90

Notified forest

Government land

1494

0.49

Gair Majurwa

(Jungle Jhari)

Government land

Total of block A:

87.51

Dari

841

0.29

Gair Majurwa

(Parti)

Government land

833

0.03

Gair Majurwa

(Pathar)

Government land

Total of block

0.32

Dari

825

18.14

Gair Majurwa

(Jungle Jhari)

Government land

Total of block

C :

18.14

Grand total area

(A+B+C)

105.97

Boundary description:

Serial

number ^{Boundary Line}

Boundary description

A1-A2-A3-A4-A5-A6-A1.

Line starts from point ‘A1’and passes through points A2,

A3, A4 and A5 and meets at starting point ‘A1’.

B1-B2-B3-B4-B5-B6-B7-B1.

Line starts from point ‘B1’ and passes through points

B2, B3, B4, B5, B6 and B7 and meets at starting point

‘B1’.

C1-C2-C3-C4-C5-C6-C7-C8-C9-C10-C11-

C12-C13-C14-C15-C16-C17-C18-C19-C20-

C21-C22-C23-C24-C25-C26-C27-C28-C29-

C30-C31-C32-C33-C34-C35-C36-C37-38-C39-

C40-C41-C42-C43-C1.

Line starts from point ‘C1’ and passes through points

C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, C7, C8, C9, C10, C11, C12, C13,

C14, C15, C16, C17, C18, C19, C20, C21, C22, C23,

C24, C25, C26, C27, C28, C29, C30, C31, C32, C33,

C34, C35, C36, C37, C38, C39, C40, C41, C42 and C43

and meets at starting point ‘C1’.

[F. No. 43015/04/2021-LA&IR]

RAM SHIROMANI SAROJ, Director

[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का रािृत्र : िुलाई 23, 2022/श्रावण 1, 1944

1405

ृेरोजल म और प्राकषजतक गजस मंत्राल

नई दिल् ली, 5 िुलाई, 2022

का.आ. 681.—केन् री सरकार, रािभाषा (संघ के िासकी प्र ोिनों के जलए प्र ोग) जन म, 1976 के जन म

10 के उृजन म (4) के अनुसरण में ृेरोजल म और प्राकषजतक गजस मंत्राल के प्रिासजनक जन ंत्रणािीन सावडिजनक क्षेत्र के

उृक्रम के जनम् नजलज त का ाडल को, जिनके 80 ा अजिक प्रजतित कमडचारी वषन् ि ने जिन् िी का का डसािक ज्ञान प्राप् त कर

जल ा िज, अजिसूजचत करती िज:-

मिाराष्ट्र राज् का ाडल ,

इंजड न ऑ ल कॉृोरेिन जलजमटेड,

(जवृणन प्रभाग), इंजड न ऑ ल भवन

प्लॉट सी 33, िी ब्लॉक, बांरा कुलाड कॉम्ृलेक्स,

बांरा (ृूवड), मुम्बई - 400051

[फा. सं. 11012/3/2021-ओएल]

िोभना श्रीवास्ट् तव, उृ जनिेिक (रािभाषा)

MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS

New Delhi, the 5th July, 2022

S.O. 681.—In pursuance of Sub Rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Language (Use for official purpose of the

Union) Rules, 1976, the central Government hereby notifies the following office of the Public Sector undertaking

under the administrative control of the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, in which 80 or more percent of the staff

have acquired working Knowledge of Hindi:-

Maharastra State Office,

Indian Oil Corporation Limited,

(Marketing Division), Indian Oil Bhawan

Plot C 33, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex,

Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400051

[F. No. 11012/3/2021-OL]

SHOBHANA SRIVASTAVA, Dy. Director (OL)

श्रम और रोिगार मंत्राल

ubZ fnYyh] 15 tqykbZ] 2022

—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj cSad

vkWQ bf.M;k ds izca/kr=] lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjkas ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ’V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;

ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k&lg&Je U;k;ky;] ua- 1 /kuckn ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la- 246@2001½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gSA

[la ,y-12012@148@2001-vkbZvkj ¼ch-II½]

jktsUnz flag] voj lfpo

1406

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 23, 2022/SRAVANA 1, 1944

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

New Delhi, the 15th July, 2022

S.O. 682.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 246/2001) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,

No.1 Dhanbad shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Bank of India and their

workmen.

[No. L-12012/148/2001-IR(B-II)]

RAJENDER SINGH, Under Secy.

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. 246/2001

Employer in relation to the management of Bank of India, Jamshedpur

AND

Their workman

Present: Shri Dinesh Kumar Singh, Presiding Officer

Appearances:

For the Employers :- Sri D.K. Verma, Advocate

For the workman. :- None

State : Jharkhand.

Industry:- Banking

Dated : 31.05.2022

AWARD

By Order No. L-12012/148/2001- (IR(B-II)) dated 13.11.2001 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 management of Bank of India, Sini Branch in not regularising the services of

Shri Shyamal Ch. Roy is justified? If not, what relief the concerned workman is entitled to?

2. The reference is received on 27/11/2001 by this Tribunal in which the Sh. S.C. Roy the concerned workman had

been advised to submit statement of claim along with relevant document within fifteen days but the workman did not

appear before the Tribunal. However, after receipt of the reference, both parties were noticed and both parties

appeared for certain dates, but subsequently workman left appearing before this Tribunal. Thereafter, again regd.

notices were issued to both the parties but the notice issued to workman returned unserved. Now this case is pending

since 27/11/2001 and workman is not appearing before Tribunal, so it is felt that workman/union has lost its interest in

this matter. Hence “No Claim” Award is passed. Communicate.

D. K. SINGH, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 18 tqykbZ] 2022

—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

QsMjy cSad fyfeVsM izca/k rarz ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ’V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksxd vf/kdj.k ,ukZdqye ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 50@2015½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gSA

[la- ,y-12025@01@2022-vkbZvkj ¼ch-1½-07]

Mh- xqgk] voj lfpo

[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का रािृत्र : िुलाई 23, 2022/श्रावण 1, 1944

1407

New Delhi, the 18th July, 2022

S.O. 683.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref.50/2015) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court

Ernakulam as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Federal Bank Ltd. and

their workmen.

[No. L-12025/01/2022–IR(B-1) -07]

D. GUHA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

ERNAKULAM

Present: Shri. V. Vijaya Kumar, B. Sc, LLM, Presiding Officer

(Friday the 01^st day of April 2022, 11 Caitra1944)

ID No. 50/2015

Workman

Sri. Nizar T.M

Peringattu Parambil House

Nettoor P.O., Maradu(Via)

Ernakulam- 682040.

By Adv.C.Anil Kumar

Management

The Chairman & CEO,

Federal Bank Limited,

Head Office, Federal Towers

Aluva

Ernakulam – 683101

By Adv. B. S .Krishnan Associates

This case coming up for final hearing on 26.11.2020 and 01.07.2021and this Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour

Court 01.04.2022 passed the following:

AWARD

This is a claim petition filed under Section 2A(2) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

According to workman, he joined the service of Federal Bank on 08.04.1985 as a Bankman. Since then he

had an unblemished service record to his credit. When he was working in Poonithura Branch of the Management

Bank, he was served with a charge sheet cum enquiry order dated 18.06.2013. It was alleged that one Sri. Antony M.J,

a customer of the Branch alerted the cashier Sri. Gopakumar C.S that he had seen the workman pocketing a bundle of

cash from the cash drawer. On verification, it is found that there is a shortage of Rs.50,000/-. The workman left the

Branch at 5.15 PM without permission from the Chief Manager and he was summoned to the Branch and was

instructed to return the money taken away by him. The workman refused having taken any money as alleged. It was

also alleged that Smt. Dinu Joy, Assistant Manager informed the Chief Manager that she found the workman dropping

something in the cash cabin. On verification, it was found that there was a bundle of 500 rupee notes of 90 pieces. On

the basis of the above allegations, the workman was charge sheeted for doing acts prejudicial to the interest of the

Management or gross negligence involving or likely to involve the Bank in serious loss. He submitted a reply to

charge sheet on 28.06.2013 denying the allegations in the charge sheet. Without considering the explanation, the

Enquiry Officer conducted an enquiry in complete violation of the principles of natural justice. The workman’s

objection regarding the procedure adopted by the Enquiry Officer was not considered positively. Even though the

workman requested the Enquiry Officer to issue letters to two customers of the Bank for examining in the enquiry,

the request was denied by Enquiry Officer thereby denying an opportunity to the workman to defend the charges in

fair and proper manner. The non-examination of these two witnesses has caused serious prejudice to the workman.

The Enquiry Officer submitted his report dated 02.02.2014 finding the workman guilty of charges alleged against him.

The finding of the Enquiry Officer was not supported by any evidence and his findings are perverse. There is material

contradictions in the deposition of MW1 to MW5 brought out through cross examination. The same was not

considered by the Enquiry Officer. The workman had tendered evidence before the Enquiry Officer but the same was

also not properly evaluated by the Enquiry Officer. The enquiry was conducted in flagrant violation of principles of

natural justice and fairness.

The management filed Written Statement denying the above allegations. A charge sheet dated 18.06.2013

was issued to the workman alleging that on 07.03.2013, he had stolen an amount of Rs.50,000/- from the cash cabin of

1408

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 23, 2022/SRAVANA 1, 1944

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Poonithura Branch of the Management Bank and returned Rs.45,000/- when the theft was revealed. On 07.03.2013,

Sri. Antony M.J, a customer of Poonithura Branch informed Sri. Gopakumar C.S, cashier of the Branch that he had

seen the workman pocketing a bundle of cash from the cash drawer. The workman was inside the cash cabin at around

11.40 AM in connection with a P/L voucher payment. Sri. Gopakumar C.S questioned the workman regarding the

cash but he denied the same. Sri. Gopakumar informed the matter to Smt. Dinu Joy, Cash Officer who appraised the

matter to the Chief Manager. The Cash Officer advised Sri. Gopakumar C.S to close the cash and tally the balance.

On verifying the cash balance, a shortage of Rs.50,000/- was confirmed. The workman left the Branch at 5.15 PM

without obtaining the permission of the Chief Manager. Hence the workman was called back to the Branch and was

directed to return the money taken by him. The workman refused having taken the money. Smt. Dinu Joy also

reported that she had seen the workman putting something in the cash cabin while entering the Bank when he was

called back by the Chief Manager. The matter was reported to the Chief Manager and on verification, he found a 500

rupee note bundle with 90 pieces lying in the counter table of cash counter. When the Chief Manager questioned the

workman regarding the balance of Rs.5000/-, the workman admitted that he had taken the bundle of cash and it

contained only Rs.45,000/-. Considering the seriousness of the matter, the workman was kept on suspension and a

domestic enquiry was ordered to look into the charges levelled against him. The Enquiry Officer conducted the

enquiry strictly in accordance with the principles of natural justice. The Enquiry Officer/ Disciplinary Authority

allowed the workman to engage an Advocate to represent his case in the enquiry. 5 witnesses were examined from the

Management side and 12 documents were marked in the enquiry as Management exhibits. The defence side perused

the documents and also cross examined the Management witness in detail. On conclusion of the evidence of the

Management, the workman examined himself as a witness in the enquiry. After a careful analysis of the evidence

produced in the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer concluded that the charges against the workman are proved. The finding

of the Enquiry Officer was forwarded to the workman for his comments. He submitted his comments on 22.02.2014.

After analyzing the entire records of the enquiry, the Disciplinary Authority agreed with the findings of the Enquiry

Officer and held that the workman was guilty of committing acts of gross misconduct of “doing any act prejudicial to

the interest of the Bank or gross negligence or negligence involving or likely to involve the Bank in serious loss”.

Considering the gravity of the charges proved, the Disciplinary Authority proposed a punishment of dismissal without

notice on the workman. The Disciplinary Authority afforded an opportunity of personal hearing regarding the nature

of proposed punishment. After considering all the facts and pleadings of the workman, the Disciplinary Authority

imposed a punishment of dismissal without notice on the workman. The appeal filed by the workman was also

rejected by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 01.08.2014. The evidence adduced in the enquiry sufficiently

proves the fraud and theft committed by the workman. An employee committing theft of money and fraud in the Bank

lack integrity and honesty and are potential threats to the institution where they are employed. Management also

pleaded that, for any reason, if the enquiry conducted against the workman is found to be vitiated, they shall be given

an opportunity to prove the charges by leading independent evidence in this proceeding.

On completion of pleadings the enquiry file is marked as Exbt.M1 by consent. The Counsels pleaded that the

fairness of the enquiry proceedings may be decided as a preliminary issue. Hence the question whether the

disciplinary enquiry conducted by the Enquiry Officer is fair and proper following the principles of natural justice

was framed as a preliminary issue. This Tribunal vide order dt.16.12.2019 held that the enquiry was conducted

inafair and proper manner following the principles of natural justice.

The other issues to be considered in this industrial dispute are ;

Whether the finding of the Enquiry Officer and Disciplinary Authority are based on proper evidence?

Whether the punishment imposed by the Management on the workman is proportionate to the charges

proved against the workman ?

Issue No.1

As per Exbt.EE1 in the Exbt.M1 file a charge memo was issued to the workman. As per the charge sheet

on07.03.2013 Sri. Antony M. J. a customer of the Branch Poonithura informed/alerted Sri. Gopakumar

C. S., cashier of the Branch that he had seen Sri. Nizar T. M pocketing a bundle of cash from the cash drawer.

Sri. Nizar T. M. was inside the cash cabin at around 11.40 AM in connection with a P/L voucher payment.

Sri. Gopakumar C. S. questioned Sri. Nizar T. M about the swindling of cash, buthe denied the same.

Sri. Gopakumar C. Simmediately informed the mater to Smt. Dinu Joy, Cash Officer who appraised the matter to the

Chief Manager and further advised Sri. Gopakumar C. S to close the cash and tally the balance. On verifying the

cash balance, a cash shortage of Rs.50,000/- was confirmed. When confronted by Sri. Aliyas K. Kurian, Chief

Manager, Sri. Nizar T. M denied that he had taken cash from the cash cabin. Thereafter Sri. Nizar T. M left the

Branch at 5.15 PM without obtaining the permission of Chief Manager. Therefore, the Chief Manager summoned Sri.

Nizar T. M to the Branch and instructed him to return the money taken by him and warned him of the consequences.

However Sri. Nizar T. M refused to return the money. Meanwhile Smt. DinuJoy found Sri. Nizar T. M stretching his

hand into the cash cabin and throwing a bundle/packet. Smt. Dinu joy informed this matter to the Chief Manager and

on verification, a bundle of 90 pieces of 500 rupee notes were found lying on the counter table of cash cabin. When

Sri. Nizar T. M was further questioned by the Chief Manager with regard to the balance amount of Rs.5000/-, he

[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का रािृत्र : िुलाई 23, 2022/श्रावण 1, 1944

1409

admitted that he had taken the bundle of cash from the cash cabin and the same contained only Rs.45,000/- and he

had returned Rs.45,000/-. It is therefore alleged that Sri. Nizar T. M has stolen an amount of Rs.50,000/- from the

cash cabin and returned Rs.45,000/- when the theft was revealed. The acts of Sri. Nizar T. M entail depravity and

vileness of his character. Employees working in a financial institution like Bank are custodians of public money and

by committing theft Sri. Nizar T. M has proved himself to be dishonest and Bank has lost the trust and confidence

reposed on him. Accordingly the Management Bank charged the workman with gross misconduct of doing any

act prejudicial to the interest of the Bank or gross negligence involving or likely to involve the Bank in serious loss

as per the Bipartite Settlement dt.10.04.2002. The Management therefore appointed an Enquiry Officer and

Presenting Officer to conduct an enquiry against the workman. On the request of the workman the Management

allowed him to engage an Advocate to be the Defence Assistant for the workman. The Management examined MW1

to MW5 on the Management side. The workman examined himself as a defence witness. The Management

examined Sri. Antony M. J. as MW2. According to MW2, he is a customer of the Bank and was waiting in the queue

before the cash counter when he saw the workman pocketing a bundle of cash from the cash counter which he

reported to the cashier. The fact that MW2 is a customer of the Bank and he was available in the branch on

07.03.2013 is sufficiently proved in the enquiry. The defence assistant failed to discredit the evidence of MW2.

The cashier of the branch Sri. Gopakumar C.S was examined as MW3. He also deposed in the enquiry that the

workman came to his cabin at 11.30 AM on 07.03.2013 for taking payments of few P/L vouchers. He also deposed

that a customer in the queue in front of the cash cabin reported to him that he saw the workman pocketing a bundle

of cash. He reported the matter to the Cash Officer and as per Cash Officer’s advise closed the cash, verified cash

and found a shortage of Rs.50,000/-. After closing the cash in the evening and finding that there is deficit of

Rs.50,000/- the matter was reported to the Chief Manager. He further stated in evidence that by 5.15 PM the

workman has already left the Branch without permission and therefore he called back to the Branch by the Chief

Manager. The workman denied having taken the cash however after sometime the Cash Officer reported that she saw

the workman throwing something into the cash cabin. Accordingly the Chief Manager, the Cash Officer and another

Clerk came to the cash cabin, opened the same and found that there was a bundle of 500 rupee notes and when the

bundle was counted, they found that there was 90 numbers of 500 rupee notes amounting to Rs.45,000/-. When the

Chief Manager questioned the workman, he admitted that he has taken the bundle and it contained only Rs.45,000/-.

He gave it in writing as per Exbt.ME3 in the enquiry file. The Cash Officer was also examined in the enquiry as

MW4. She also gave evidence in line with the charge memo that the missing of cash from the cash cabin was

reported to her and later she saw the workman throwing something into the cash cabin which ultimately found to be

90 numbers 500 rupee notes amounting to Rs.45,000/-. The Chief Manager and the Officer who conducted the

investigation were also examined in the enquiry as MW1 and MW5 respectively. On a perusal of the evidence both

oral and documentary produced by the Management in the enquiry, it is seen that the workman failed to discredit

any of the Management witnesses. The chain of evidence would clearly establish the charges leveled against the

workman. The Apex Court in various judgments had considered the standard of proof required in a domestic

enquiry. It is also a settled law that in a domestic enquiry, the strict and sophisticated rule so fevidence under the

Indian Evidence Act may not apply. All materials which are logically probative for a prudent mind are permissible in

a disciplinary enquiry. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana and others Vs Rattan Singh, 1977 AIR

(SC) 1512 held that

“The simple point is, was there some evidence or was there no evidence not in the sense of the technical rules

governing regular court proceedings but in a fair common-sense way as men of understanding and worldly

wisdom will accept. Viewed in this way, sufficiency of evidence in proof of the finding by a domestic

tribunal is beyond scrutiny. Absence of any evidence in support of a ending is certainly available for the

court to look into because it amounts to an error of law apparent on the record ”.

Applying the above test in the present case, it is seen that there is adequate evidence to establish the case of

the Management in the charge sheet that the workman had stolen Rs.50,000/- from the cash counter on 07.03.2013.

Hence the issue regarding the adequacy of evidence to prove the charges against the workman is decided in

favour of the Management and against the workman.

Issue No. 2

According to the learned Counsel for the workman the punishment of dismissal imposed on the workman

is too harsh and disproportionate to the charges alleged and proved in the enquiry. The learned Counsel for the

Management on the other side pointed out that the law is settled that an official of the Bank who is dealing with

public money is supposed to act with honesty and integrity. Any misconduct alleged and proved against a Bank

employee with regard to dishonesty is to be viewed very seriously. According to him the punishment imposed on

the workman by the Management is proportionate to the charges proved against him. The law in this regard is

settled by various decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. In Chairman and Managing Director, United

Commercial Bank Vs P. C. Kakkar, 2003 4 SCC 364 the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that

“Para 14. A Bank Officer is required to exercise higher standards of honesty and integrity. He deals with

money of the depositors and customers. Every officer/employee of the Bank is required to take all possible

1410

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 23, 2022/SRAVANA 1, 1944

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

steps to protect the interest of the Bank and to discharge his duties with utmost integrity, honesty, devotion

and diligence and to do nothing which is unbecoming of a Bank officer. Good conduct and discipline

areinseparable from the functioning of every officer/employee of the Bank ”

In Regional Manager U.P.S.R.T.C.Vs Hoti Lal and another, 2003 3SCC 605 the Hon'ble Supreme Court

held that “If the charged employee holds a position of trust where honesty and integrity are inbuilt requirements of

functioning, it would not be proper to deal with matter leniently. Misconduct in such cases has to be dealt with iron

hands. Where the person deals with public money or is engaged in financial transactions or acts in a fiduciary

capacity, highest degree of integrity and trust-worthiness is a must and unexceptionable’’. In a recent decision

Union of India and others Vs M. Duraisamy, AIR 2022 SC 2002 the Hon'ble Supreme Court examined

whether the removal from service of employee on a proved misconduct of serious nature of defrauding public

money is required to be interfered by the higher Courts. The Hon'ble Supreme Court after examining all the

previous authorities held that “Once a conscious decision was taken by the Disciplinary Authority to remove an

employee on the proved misconduct of a very serious nature of defrauding public money, neither the Tribunal nor

the High Court should have interfered with the order of punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority, which

was after considering the gravity and seriousness of the misconduct ”.

In this case, it is already found that the disciplinary enquiry was conducted in a fair and proper manner

following the principles of natural justice and the findings of the Enquiry Officer and the Disciplinary Authority are

on the basis of the evidence and there is no perversity in the findings. The loss of confidence of the Management

is a primary factor in such cases. In the present case the workman is found to be guilty of stealing the funds of the

Management Bank. There is nothing wrong in the Bank losing confidence or faith in such an employee and awarding

punishment of dismissal.

Hence I find that the punishment dismissal awarded to the workman on proved charges of stealing cash

from the cash counter of the Management Bank is proportionate to the charges proved against him. Hence the issue

is decided in favour of the Management and against the workman.

Hence an award is passed holding that the disciplinary enquiry against the workman was conducted in a fair

and proper manner and also there is no perversity in the finding of the Enquiry Officer and also the Disciplinary

Authority. The punishment of dismissal imposed on the workman is proportionate to the charges proved against him.

Hence the claim of the workman for reinstatement is rejected.

The award will come into force one month after its publication in the official Gazette.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed and passed by me on this the 01^stday of April, 2022.

V. VIJAYA KUMAR, Presiding Officer

APPENDIX

Exhibits for the Management:-

Enquiry file

नई दिल्ली, 18 िुलाई, 2022

का.आ. 684.—औद्योजगक जववाि अजिजन म, 1947 (1947 का 14) की िारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्री

सरकार डा रेक्टर, एम्ृलॉईस स्ट्टेट इन्िुरन्स कॉृोरेिन ऑफ़ इंजड ा, ई.एस.आई. िॉजस्ट्ृटल, नई दिल्ली; वा ुिूत

जसक् ोररटी सर्वडसेि प्राइवेट जलजमटेड, ई.एस.आई. िॉजस्ट्ृटल, नई दिल्ली के प्रबंितंत्र के संबद्ध जन ोिकों और

श्रीमती बबली, थ्रू भारती इंिीजन ररंग एंड िनरल मज़िूर ूजन न, नई दिल्ली के बीच अनुबंि में जनर्िडष्ट औद्योजगक

जववाि में केन्री सरकार औद्योजगक अजिकरण एवं श्रम न् ा ाल -2, नई दिल्ली ृंचाट (संिभड सं्‍ ा (173/2019) को

प्रकाजित करती िज।

[सं. एल-15011/2/2019-आईआर (एम)]

डी. गुिा, अवर सजचव

[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का रािृत्र : िुलाई 23, 2022/श्रावण 1, 1944

1411

New Delhi, the 18th July, 2022

S.O. 684.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 173/2019) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour

Court-2, New Delhi now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the

management of The Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation of India, ESI Hospital, New Delhi; Vayudoot

Security Services Pvt. Ltd., ESI Hospital, New Delhi and Smt. Babli, through Bhartiya Engineering & General

Mazdoor Union, New Delhi.

[No. L-15011/2/2019-IR(M)]

D. GUHA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II, NEW DELHI

Present: Smt. Pranita Mohanty, Presiding Officer, C.G.I.T.-Cum-Labour

Court-II, New Delhi.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE No. 173/2019

Date of Passing Award- 06^th July, 2022

Between:

Smt. Babli,

Through:- Bhartiya Engineering & General Mazdoor Union,

Bharat Mill Charkhi Gate, Plot No.1, Nr. D-Block,

Karmpura, New Delhi-110015.

…Workman

Versus

The Director,

Employees State Insurance Corporation of India,

ESI Hospital, Basi Darapur, New Delhi-110015.

Vayudoot Security Services Pvt. Ltd.

ESI Hospital, Basi Darapur, New Delhi-110015.

…Managements

Appearances:-

Shri Bake Lal (A/R)

: For the Workman.

None for the management (A/R)

: For the Management

AWARD

The Government of India in Ministry of Labour & Employment has referred the present dispute existing

between employer i.e. the management of Vayudoot Security Services Pvt. Ltd. and other, and its workman/claimant

herein, under clause (d) of sub section (1)and sub section (2A) of section 10 of the Industrial Dispute Act 1947 vide

letter No. L- 15011/2/2019 (IR(M) dated 21.06.2019 to this tribunal for adjudication to the following effect.

“Whether termination of the services of Smt. Babli, worker by M/s Vayudoot Security Services Pvt. Ltd.,

contractor under ESI Hospital, Basi Darapur, New Delhi w.e.f 17.08.2017 is just, fair and legal? If not, what

relief Smt. Babli is entitled to and from which date? What directions, if any, are necessary in the matter?”

As per the claim petition the management No.1 ESIC is running hospitals at different locations. For

providing service in such hospitals contractors are engaged through tender for providing manpower. Previously one

Vishakha Group of company was the contractor and thereafter management No.2 M/s Vayudoot Security Services

Pvt. Ltd. was selected as the contractor. The said contractor had engaged the claimant to work in the ESI Hospital and

she was working as a housekeeping staff for 3 years. Her last drawn salary was Rs. 11000/- per month. When the

claimant was discharging her duties sincerely without giving opportunity of complaint, the management No.2

subjected her to unfair labour practice by not providing appointment letter, annual leave, casual leave, attendance

card, bonus and benefits under the EPF and ESI Act. The claimant was very often demanding the same as a legitimate

right. She was also demanding the minimum wage declared by the Government of Delhi. Being aggrieved by her

demand the management No.2 on 17.08.2017 illegally terminated her service. While doing so neither the notice of

termination nor termination compensation or duty pay were paid to her. She visited the office of the management no.2

on several occasions and requested for taking her back to duty. But the management No.2 never considered her

request. Having no other remedy available she approached the employees union who filed a complaint on her behalf

before the labour commissioner. Though the labour commissioner initiated a conciliation proceeding, the same failed

and the Appropriate Government referred the matter to this tribunal for adjudication as per the terms of the reference.

1412

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 23, 2022/SRAVANA 1, 1944

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Notices were sent to the respondent no.1 and 2 from this tribunal. Despite service of the notice none appeared

on behalf of the managements. Thus, by order dated 19^th February 2020 the managements were proceeded exparte and

the claimant was called upon to adduce evidence. Pursuant thereto the claimant filed his affidavit and produced certain

documents. The documents include the ESI Card the representation sent to management no.1 requesting reinstatement

into service documents showing the duty chart of the claimant and endorsement of the authorities on the same on

different dates the photocopy of the cheque paid by management no.2 to the claimant towards the salary etc. No cross

examination was done to the said statement of the claimant.

The undisputed documents filed by the claimant and the uncontroverted evidence filed by her lead to a

conclusion that she was working as a housekeeping staff in the premises of management no.1 by her employer

management no.2 for 3 years preceding to 17.08.2017 i.e the date of her illegal termination. The documents filed by

her and marked as exhibit WW1/6 (Colly) clearly proves that she had worked for more than 240 days in the preceding

calendar year to the date of her termination. But the management no.2 on 17.08.2017 illegally terminated her service

and at the time of termination, the provisions of section 25F of the Id Act was not complied. Not only that no list of

seniority was displayed and the rule of last come first go was not followed. Hence, it is held that action of the

management no. 2 in terminating the service of the claimant is in gross violation of the provisions of section 25F is

illegal and the claimant is entitled to the relief sought for. Hence, ordered.

ORDER

The reference be and the same is answered in affirmative in favour of the claimant. it is held that the action

management No.2 M/s. Vayudoot Security Service Pvt. Ltd. the contractor under ESI Hospital Basi Darapur New

Delhi in terminating the service of the claimant is illegal and unfair for non compliance of the provisions of section

25F of the ID Act. It is directed that the management No.2 shall reinstate the claimant into service within one month

from the date of publication of the award with her last drawn salary and shall also pay her 40% of the back wages

from the date of termination and till the date of reinstatement without interest within a further period of one month

from the date of reinstatement. If the management would fail to pay the back wages as directed, the amount shall carry

interest @6% per annum from the date of termination and till the actual payment is made. Send a copy of this award

to the appropriate government for notification as required under section 17 of the ID act 1947.

The reference is accordingly answered.

Dictated & Corrected by me.

PRANITA MOHANTY, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 18 िुलाई, 2022

का.आ. 685.—औद्योजगक जववाि अजिजन म, 1947 (1947 का 14) की िारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्री

श्रीमती ृरवीन, थ्रू भारती इंिीजन ररंग एंड िनरल मज़िूर ूजन न, नई दिल्ली के बीच अनुबंि में जनर्िडष्ट औद्योजगक

जववाि में केन्री सरकार औद्योजगक अजिकरण एवं श्रम न् ा ाल -2, नई दिल्ली ृंचाट (संिभड सं्‍ ा (174/2019) को

प्रकाजित करती िज।

[सं. एल-15011/3/2019-आईआर(एम)]

डी. गुिा, अवर सजचव

New Delhi, the 18th July, 2022

S.O. 685.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 174/2019) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour

Court-2, New Delhi now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the

management of The Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation of India, ESI Hospital, New Delhi; Vayudoot

Security Services Pvt. Ltd., ESI Hospital, New Delhi and Smt. Parveen, through Bhartiya Engineering & General

Mazdoor Union, New Delhi.

[No. L-15011/3/2019-IR(M)]

D. GUHA, Under Secy.

[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का रािृत्र : िुलाई 23, 2022/श्रावण 1, 1944

1413

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II, NEW DELHI

Present: Smt. Pranita Mohanty, Presiding Officer, C.G.I.T.-Cum-Labour

Court-II, New Delhi.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE No. 174/2019

Date of Passing Award- 06^th July, 2022

Between:

Smt. Parveen,

Through:- Bhartiya Engineering & General Mazdoor Union,

Bharat Mill Charkhi Gate, Plot No.1, Nr. D-Block,

Karmpura, New Delhi-110015.

…Workman

Versus

The Director,

Employees State Insurance Corporation of India,

ESI Hospital, Basi Darapur, New Delhi-110015.

Vayudoot Security Services Pvt. Ltd.

Shop No. D-7, Block-H, Sector-22,

Noida-201301.

…Managements

Appearances:-

Shri Bake Lal (A/R)

: For the Workman.

None for the management : For the Management

AWARD

The Government of India in Ministry of Labour & Employment has referred the present dispute existing

between employer i.e. the management of Vayudoot Security Services Pvt. Ltd. and other, and its workman/claimant

herein, under clause (d) of sub section (1)and sub section (2A) of section 10 of the Industrial Dispute Act 1947 vide

letter No. L- 15011/3/2019 (IR(M) dated 21.06.2019 to this tribunal for adjudication to the following effect.

“Whether termination of the services of Smt. Parveen, worker w.e.f 21.05.2016 by M/s Vayudoot Security

Services Pvt. Ltd., contractor under ESI Hospital, Basi Darapur, New Delhi is just, fair and legal? If not,

what relief Smt. Parveen is entitled to and from which date? What other directions, if any, are necessary in

the matter?”

As per the claim petition the management No.1 ESIC is running hospitals at different locations. For

providing service in such hospitals contractors are engaged through tender for providing manpower. Previously one

Vishakha Group of company was the contractor and thereafter management No.2 M/s Vayudoot Security Services

Pvt. Ltd. was selected as the contractor. The said contractor had engaged the claimant to work in the ESI Hospital and

she was working as a housekeeping staff for 8 years. Her last drawn salary was Rs. 9000/- per month. When the

claimant was discharging her duties sincerely without giving opportunity of complaint, the management No.2

subjected her to unfair labour practice by not providing appointment letter, annual leave, casual leave, attendance

card, bonus and benefits under the EPF and ESI Act. The claimant was very often demanding the same as a legitimate

right. She was also demanding the minimum wage declared by the Government of Delhi. Being aggrieved by her

demand the management No.2 on 21.05.2016 illegally terminated her service. While doing so neither the notice of