6855 GI/2023

(3891)

रजजस्ट्री सं. डी.एल. (एन) 04/0007/2003—05

REGD. NO. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05

xxxGIDHxxx

xxxGIDExxx

प्राजधकार से प्रकाजित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप् ताजहक

WEEKLY

सं. 44]

नइ ददल् ली, ऄक् तूबर 29—नवम् बर 4, 2023, िजनवार/ कार्ततक 7—कार्ततक 13, 1945

No. 44]

NEW DELHI, OCTOBER 29—NOVEMBER 4, 2023, SATURDAY/KARTIKA 7—KARTIKA 13, 1945

आस भाग में जभन् न ृृ्‍ सं्‍ या दी जाती हज जजससे दक यह ृृथक संकलन के प ृ में रखा जा सके

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

भाग II—खण् ड 3—ईृ-खण् ड (ii)

PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)

भारत सरकार के मंत्रालयों (रक्षा मंत्रालय को छोड़कर) द्वारा जारी दकए गए सांजवजधक अदेि और ऄजधसूचनाएं

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

(Other than the Ministry of Defence)

कार्तमक, लोक जिकायत तथा ृेंिन मंत्रालय

(कार्तमक और प्रजिक्षण जवभाग)

नइ ददल् ली, 12 ऄक् तूबर, 2023

का.अ. 1722.—केन्र सरकार, एतद्द्वारा ददल्ली जविेष ृुजलस स्ट्थाृना ऄजधजनयम, 1946 (1946 का 25) की

धारा 5 की ईृ-धारा (1) सृठ त धारा 6 द्वारा प्रदत्त िजियों का प्रयोग करते हुए राजस्ट्थान राज्य सरकार की ऄजधसूचना

सं. एफ.19(47)गृह-5/2023 ददनांक 20.09.2023, गृह (गृ.-v) जवभाग, जयृुर के माध्यम से जारी सम्मजत से,

(1) श्री सुधीर िमाा (ृीएफ सं. 6995993), तत्कालीन िाखा प्रबंधक, भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक, बीओ टोंक रोड, दुगााृुरा (कोड

सं. 31765), जयृुर; (2) श्री ज्ञान ससह मीना, (ृीएफ सं. 7398778), सहायक प्रबंधक, भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक, बीओ टोंक

रोड, दुगााृुरा (कोड सं. 31765), जयृुर; (3) श्री चेतन िमाा, बहीर्स्रोतन कार्तमक, भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक, बीओ टोंक रोड,

दुगााृुरा (कोड सं. 31765), जयृुर; (4) श्री ृु्‍ृेन्र कुमार, एटीएम गाडा, भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक, बीओ टोंक रोड, दुगााृुरा

(कोड सं. 31765), जयृुर; (5) श्री जगरीि िमाा, ग्राहक सेवा केंर (सीएसृी), भारतीय स्ट्टेट बैंक, बीओ टोंक रोड,

दुगााृुरा (कोड सं. 31765), जयृुर; (6) ऄज्ञात ऄन्य द्वारा बैंक जनजध के दुर्तवजनयोजन के संबंध में भारतीय दंड संजहता की

धारा 120बी सृठ त धारा 409, 420, 467, 468 & 471 और भ्रष्टाचार जनवारण ऄजधजनयम, 1988 (2018 के

सी.जी.-डी.एल.-सा.-21112023-250171

CG-DL-W-21112023-250171

3892

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 4, 2023/KARTIKA 13, 1945

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ऄजधजनयम 16 द्वारा यथा संिोजधत) की धारा 13(2) सृठ त धारा 13(1)(ए) के तहत दंडनीय ऄृराध(धों) से संबंजधत,

सीबीअइ, भ्र.जन.िाखा, जयृुर में दजा एसअइ सं. एसअइ0302023ए0002 से ईत्ृन्न ऄृराध(धों) का ऄन्वेषण तथा ऐसे

ऄृराध(धों) से जुड़े या ईससे संबद्ध दकसी दु्‍प्रयास, दु्‍प्रेरणा एवं/ऄथवा षड्यंत्र एवं/ऄथवा ईसी संव्यवहार में दकए गए या

ईन्हीं तथ्यों से ईत्ृन्न दकसी ऄन्य ऄृराध का ऄन्वेषण करने के जलए ददल्ली जविेष ृुजलस स्ट्थाृना के सदस्ट्यों की िजियों

और क्षेत्राजधकार का जवस्ट्तार समस्ट्त राजस्ट्थान राज्य में करती हज।

[फा. सं. 228/59/2023-एवीडी-II]

संजय कुमार चौरजसया, ऄवर सजचव

MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS

(Department of Personnel and Training)

New Delhi, the 12th October, 2023

S.O. 1722.—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 Rajasthan, issued vide Notification No.F.19(47)Home-5/2023 dated 20.09.2023, Home (Gr.-V)

Department, Jaipur, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police

Establishment to the whole State of Rajasthan for investigation into the offence(s) punishable under section 120-B r/w

409, 420, 467, 468 & 471 of IPC and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended by Act 16

of 2018), arising out of SI No. SI0302023A0002 registered at CBI, ACB, Jaipur relating to misappropriation of bank

funds by (1) Shri Sudhir Sharma (PF No. 6995993), the then Branch Manager, State Bank of India, BO Tonk Road,

Durgapura (Code No. 31765), Jaipur; (2) Shri Gyan Singh Meena (PF No. 7398778), Assistant Manager, State Bank of

India, BO Tonk Road, Durgapura (Code No. 31765), Jaipur; (3) Shri Chetan Sharma, Outsourcing Employee at State

Bank of India, BO Tonk Road, Durgapura (Code No. 31765), Jaipur; (4) Shri Pushpendra Kumar, ATM Guard, State

Bank of India, BO Tonk Road Durgapura (Code No. 31765), Jaipur; (5) Shri Girish Sharma, Customer Service Point

(CSP) of State Bank of India, BO Tonk Road, Durgapura (Code No. 31765), Jaipur; (6) Unknown others, 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. 228/59/2023-AVD-II]

SANJAY KUMAR CHAURASIA, Under Secy.

नइ ददल् ली, 20 ऄक् तूबर, 2023

का.अ. 1723.—केन्र सरकार, एतद् द्वारा ददल्ली जविेष ृुजलस स्ट्थाृना ऄजधजनयम, 1946 (1946 का 25) की

धारा 5 की ईृ-धारा (1) सृठ त धारा 6 द्वारा प्रदत्त िजियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, ईत्तर प्रदेि राज्य सरकार के ृत्र

सं. 676/6-ृी-15/2022, ददनांक 14.09.2022 तथा ईत्तरवती िुजद्धृत्र ददनांक 13.09.2023, गृह (ृुजलस) भाग-15,

लखनउ के माध्यम से जारी सम्मजत से, नाबाजलग लड़की के यौन िोषण में संजलप्त होने तथा बच्चों को यौन कृत्य में स्ट्ृष्ट

प ृ से दिााने वाली बाल यौन िोषण सामग्री को संग्रजहत/प्रसाठरत/प्रकाजित करने के संबंध में मोबाआल सं्‍या +91

8896159886 एवं +91 8127983452 और इमेल-अइडी [email protected] के ईृभोिा श्री रजव कुमार

ृटेल, ृुत्र श्री घनश्याम ृटेल, जनवासी मधावन, लमही, वाराणसी, वाराणसी कैंट, ईत्तर प्रदेि द्वारा सूचना प्रौद्योजगकी

ऄजधजनयम, 2000 (2000 का 21) की धारा 67-बी, भारतीय दंड संजहता, 1860 (1860 का 45) की धाराएँ 376 एवं

506 और लैंजगक ऄृराधों से बालकों का संरक्षण ऄजधजनयम, 2012 (2012 का 32) की धारा 4 सृठ त

धारा 3(ए)(बी)(डी), धारा 6 सृठ त धारा 5(एल), धारा 8 सृठ त धारा 7, धारा 10 सृठ त धारा 9 (एल), धारा 12

सृठ त धारा 11(i)(ii)(iv)(vi) एवं धारा 14 सृठ त धारा 13 के तहत दकए गए ऄजभकजथत ऄृराध(धों) से संबंजधत

ददनांक 27.06.2022 को दजा सीबीअइ मामला अरसी-15(एस)/2022/एससी-III/एनडी का ऄन्वेषण करने तथा ऐसे

ऄृराध(धों) से जुड़े या ईससे संबद्ध दकसी दु्‍प्रयास, दु्‍प्रेरणा और/ऄथवा षड्यंत्र एवं/ऄथवा ईसी संव्यवहार में दकए गए

या ईन्हीं तथ्यों से ईत्ृन्न दकसी ऄन्य ऄृराध का ऄन्वेषण करने के जलए, ददल्ली जविेष ृुजलस स्ट्थाृना के सदस्ट्यों की

िजियों और क्षेत्राजधकार का जवस्ट्तार (ददनांक 27.06.2022 से कायोत्तर के प्रभाव से) समस्ट्त ईत्तर प्रदेि राज्य में

करती हज।

[फा. सं. 228/05/2023-एवीडी-II]

संजय कुमार चौरजसया, ऄवर सजचव

[भाग II—खण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का राजृत्र : नवम् बर 4, 2023/कार्ततक 13, 1945

3893

New Delhi, the 20th October, 2023

S.O. 1723.—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 Uttar Pradesh, issued vide letter No. -676/6-P-15/2022 dated 14.09.2022 and subsequent Corrigendum

dated 13.09.2023, Home (Police) Section-15, Lucknow, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of

the Delhi Special Police Establishment (ex post facto w.e.f. 27.06.2022) to the whole State of Uttar Pradesh for

investigation into the offence(s) under section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000), sections

376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860) and sections 4 r/w 3(a)(b)(d), 6 r/w 5(l), 8 r/w 7, 10 r/w 9 (l),

12 r/w 11 (i)(ii)(iv)(vi) and 14 r/w 13 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (32 of 2012)

alleged to have been committed by Shri Ravi Kumar Patel, S/o Shri Ghanshyam Patel, R/o Madhavan, Lamahi,

Varanasi, Varanasi Cantt., Uttar Pradesh, user of mobile numbers +91 8896159886 and +91 8127983452 and email-id

[email protected] pertaining to the involvement in sexual abuse of a minor girl and in collection/

transmission/publishing of Child Sexual Abuse Material, depicting children in sexually explicit manner, relating to the

CBI Case RC-15(S)/2022/SC-III/ND registered on 27.06.2022, 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. 228/05/2023-AVD-II]

SANJAY KUMAR CHAURASIA, Under Secy.

नइ ददल् ली, 20 ऄक् तूबर, 2023

का.अ. 1724.—केन्र सरकार, एतद् द्वारा ददल्ली जविेष ृुजलस स्ट्थाृना ऄजधजनयम, 1946 (1946 का 25)

की धारा 5 की ईृ-धारा (1) सृठ त धारा 6 द्वारा प्रदत्त िजियों का प्रयोग करते हुए झारखंड राज्य सरकार, गृह,

कारागार एवं अृदा प्रबंधन जवभाग, रांची की ऄजधसूचना सं. 10/सी.बी.अइ.-411 /2023-4039/रांची, ददनांक

06.09.2023 के माध्यम से जारी सम्मजत से श्री ऄरुण कुमार ससह, ृुत्र श्री सत्यनारायण ससह, जनवासी गृह सं. 17, जबग

बाजार के ृीछे, ृत्रालय एवं थाना-मानगो, जनलजगरी कॉलोनी, जमिेदृुर, द्वारा श्री मुकेि प्रसाद ईफा मुकेि कुमार,

िाखा प्रबंधक, सेंरल बैंक ऑफ आंजडया, टेल्को टाईन िाखा, जमिेदृुर के जवरुद्ध भ्रष्टाचार जनवारण ऄजधजनयम, 1988

(वषा 2018 में यथासंिोजधत) की धारा 7 के तहत ददनांक 23.08.2023 को दजा कराइ गइ जिकायत, जजसके अधार ृर

ददनांक 08.09.2023 को एक सीबीअइ मामला अरसी0242023ए0009 दजा दकया गया हज, से ईत्ृन्न ऄृराध(धों)

का ऄन्वेषण करने के जलए तथा ऐसे ऄृराध(धों) से जुड़े या ईससे संबद्ध दकसी दु्‍प्रयास, दु्‍प्रेरणा और/ऄथवा षड्यंत्र

एवं/ऄथवा ईसी संव्यवहार में दकए गए या ईन्हीं तथ्यों से ईत्ृन्न दकसी ऄन्य ऄृराध का ऄन्वेषण करने के जलए ददल्ली

जविेष ृुजलस स्ट्थाृना के सदस्ट्यों की िजियों और क्षेत्राजधकार का जवस्ट्तार (कायोत्तर प्रभाव से ददनांक 08.09.2023 से)

समस्ट्त झारखंड राज्य में करती हज।

[फा. सं. 228/61/2023-एवीडी-II]

संजय कुमार चौरजसया, ऄवर सजचव

New Delhi, the 20th October, 2023

S.O. 1724.—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 Jharkhand, issued vide Notification No.10/C.B.I-411/2023-4039/Ranchi dated 06.09.2023, Home,

Prisons and Disaster Management Department, Ranchi, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of

the Delhi Special Police Establishment (ex post facto w.e.f. 08.09.2023) to the whole State of Jharkhand for

investigation into the offence(s) arising out of the complaint dated 23.08.2023 lodged by Shri Arun Kumar Singh S/o

Shri Satyanarayan Singh, R/o House No. 17, Behind Big Bazar, PO & PS- Mango, Nilgiri Colony, Jamshedpur against

Shri Mukesh Prasad @ Mukesh Kumar, Branch Manager, Central Bank of India, Telco town branch, Jamshedpur u/s 7

of PC Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018), based on which a CBI case RC0242023A0009 has been registered on

08.09.2023 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. 228/61/2023-AVD-II]

SANJAY KUMAR CHAURASIA, Under Secy.

3894

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 4, 2023/KARTIKA 13, 1945

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नइ ददल् ली, 20 ऄक् तूबर, 2023

का.अ. 1725.—केन्र सरकार, एतद्द्वारा ददल्ली जविेष ृुजलस स्ट्थाृना ऄजधजनयम, 1946 (1946 का 25) की

धारा 5 की ईृ-धारा (1) सृठ त धारा 6 द्वारा प्रदत्त िजियों का प्रयोग करते हुए झारखंड राज्य सरकार, गृह, कारागार

एवं अृदा प्रबंधन जवभाग, रांची की ऄजधसूचना सं. 10/सी.बी.अइ.-414/2023-4502/रांची, ददनांक 03.10.2023 के

माध्यम से जारी सम्मजत से श्रीमती लता देवी, ृत्नी स्ट्वगीय राजू मुंडा द्वारा श्री संदीृ कुमार, जलजृक, जसरका कोजलयरी,

सीसीएल ऄरगडा, जजला-रामगढ़, जमिेदृुर के जवरुद्ध भ्रष्टाचार जनवारण ऄजधजनयम, 1988 (वषा 2018 में

यथासंिोजधत) की धारा 7 के तहत ददनांक 19.09.2023 को दजा कराइ गइ जिकायत, जजसके अधार ृर ददनांक

04.10.2023 को एक सीबीअइ मामला अरसी0242023ए0010 दजा दकया गया हज, से ईत्ृन्न ऄृराध(धों) का ऄन्वेषण

करने के जलए तथा ऐसे ऄृराध(धों) से जुड़े या ईससे संबद्ध दकसी दु्‍प्रयास, दु्‍प्रेरणा और/ऄथवा षड्यंत्र एवं/ऄथवा ईसी

संव्यवहार में दकए गए या ईन्हीं तथ्यों से ईत्ृन्न दकसी ऄन्य ऄृराध का ऄन्वेषण करने के जलए ददल्ली जविेष ृुजलस

स्ट्थाृना के सदस्ट्यों की िजियों और क्षेत्राजधकार का जवस्ट्तार (कायोत्तर प्रभाव से ददनांक 04.10.2023 से) समस्ट्त झारखंड

राज्य में करती हज।

[फा. सं. 228/62/2023-एवीडी-II]

संजय कुमार चौरजसया, ऄवर सजचव

New Delhi, the 20th October, 2023

S.O. 1725.—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 Jharkhand, issued vide Notification No.10/C.B.I-414/2023-4502/Ranchi dated 03.10.2023, Home,

Prisons and Disaster Management Department, Ranchi, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of

the Delhi Special Police Establishment (ex post facto w.e.f. 04.10.2023) to the whole State of Jharkhand for

investigation into the offence(s) arising out of the complaint dated 19.09.2023 lodged by Smt. Lata Devi W/o Late Raju

Munda, against Shri Sandeep Kumar, Clerk, Sirka Colliery, CCL Argada, Distt- Ramgarh, Jamshedpur u/s 7 of PC Act,

1988 (as amended in 2018), based on which a CBI case RC0242023A0010 has been registered on 04.10.2023 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. 228/62/2023-AVD-II]

SANJAY KUMAR CHAURASIA, Under Secy.

नइ ददल् ली, 20 ऄक् तूबर, 2023

का.अ. 1726.—केन्र सरकार एतद्द्वारा ददल्ली जविेष ृुजलस स्ट्थाृना ऄजधजनयम, 1946 (1946 का 25) की

धारा 5 की ईृधारा (1) सृठ त धारा 6 द्वारा प्रदत्त िजियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मजणृुर राज्य सरकार की ऄजधसूचना

सं. 12/1(4)/2023-एच(सीबीअइ) (ृाटा), ददनांक 07.10.2023, गृह जवभाग, आंफाल के माध्यम से जारी सम्मजत से राज्य

में हुइ हाल की सहसा से जुड़े जनम्नजलजखत 02 (दो) एफअइअर :-

(i) भा.दं.सं. की धारा 147/148/149/153ए/302 भा.दं.सं. की जोड़ी गइ धारा 34 & एससी एवं एसटी

(ृीओए) ऄजधजनयम, 1989 की धारा 3(2)(V) के तहत दजा एफअइअर सं. 8(05)2023 एनएसके-ृीएस; तथा

(ii) भा.दं.सं. की धारा 147/148/149/153ए/302 भा.दं.सं. की जोड़ी गइ धारा 34 & एससी एवं एसटी

(ृीओए) ऄजधजनयम 1989 की धारा 3(2)(V) के तहत दजा एफअइअर नंबर 10(05)2023 एनएसके-ृीएस

का ऄन्वेषण करने तथा ऐसे ऄृराध(धों) से जुड़े या ईससे संबद्ध दकसी दु्‍प्रयास, दु्‍प्रेरणा और/ऄथवा षड्यंत्र

एवं/ऄथवा ईसी संव्यवहार में दकए गए या ईन्हीं तथ्यों से ईत्ृन्न दकसी ऄन्य ऄृराध का ऄन्वेषण करने के जलए

ददल्ली जविेष ृुजलस स्ट्थाृना के सदस्ट्यों की िजियों और क्षेत्राजधकार का जवस्ट्तार समस्ट्त मजणृुर राज्य में

करती हज।

[फा. सं. 228/47/2023-एवीडी-II]

संजय कुमार चौरजसया, ऄवर सजचव

[भाग II—खण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का राजृत्र : नवम् बर 4, 2023/कार्ततक 13, 1945

3895

New Delhi, the 20th October, 2023

S.O. 1726.—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 Manipur, issued vide Notification No. 12/1(4)/2023-H(CBI) (Pt) dated 07.10.2023, Home Department,

Imphal, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the

whole State of Manipur for investigation of following 02 (two) FIRs in connection with recent violence in the State:

(i) FIR No. 8(05)2023 NSK-PS U/s 147/148/149/153A/302 IPC Added Sec. 34 IPC & 3(2)(v) of SC & ST

(PoA) Act 1989; and

(ii) FIR No. 10(05)2023 NSK-PS U/s 147/148/149/153A/302 IPC Added Sec. 34 IPC & 3(2)(v) of SC & ST

(PoA) Act 1989

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. 228/47/2023-AVD-II]

SANJAY KUMAR CHAURASIA, Under Secy.

कोयला मंत्रालय

नइ ददल्ली, 25 ऄगस्ट् त, 2023

का.अ. 1727.—केंर सरकार, कारखाना ऄजधजनयम, 1948 (1948 का 63) की धारा 2 के खंड (ढ) के प्रथम

ईृबंध के खंड (iii) द्वारा प्रदत्त िजियों के ऄनुसरण में एतदद्वारा जनम्न ताजलका के कॉलम (3) में जनर्ददष्ट ऄजधकाठरयों को

ईि ताजलका के कॉलम (2) में जनर्ददष्ट एनएलसी आंजडया जलजमटेड (एनएलसीअइएल), जजसका ृंजीकृत कायाालय

सं. 135, इवीअर ृेठरयार हाइ रोड, दकलृॉक, चेन्नइ -600010 में हज, के संबंजधत कारखाने या वकािॉृ के "ऄजधष्ठाता" के

प ृ में जनयुि करती हज, ऄथाातः-

क्र.सं.

कारखाने का नाम

(सौर जवद्युत संयंत्र)

ऄजधष्ठाता के प ृ में जनयुि दकए जाने वाले ऄजधकारी का

ृदनाम

एनएलसी आंजडया जलजमटेड 50 मेगावाट सौर जवद्युत संयंत्र

ब्लॉक -1, नेयवेली

ईृ महा प्रबंधक/महा प्रबंधक/मु्‍य महा प्रबंधक

एनएलसी आंजडया जलजमटेड 15 मेगावाट सौर जवद्युत संयंत्र

ब्लॉक -16, नेयवेली (जवल्लुददयानृट्टू मंददर के ृास )

एनएलसी आंजडया जलजमटेड 40 मेगावाट सौर जवद्युत संयंत्र

ब्लॉक -5, नेयवेली

एनएलसी आंजडया जलजमटेड 25 मेगावाट सौर जवद्युत संयंत्र

कोल्लीरुप्ृु, नेयवेली

एनएलसी आंजडया जलजमटेड 10 मेगावाट सौर जवद्युत संयंत्र

डॉलगंज, ऄंडमान और जनकोबार द्वीृ समूह

एनएलसी आंजडया जलजमटेड 10 मेगावाट सौर जवद्युत संयंत्र

ऄट्टमृहाड़, ऄंडमान और जनकोबार द्वीृ समूह

एनएलसी आंजडया जलजमटेड 10 मेगावाट कजजप्टव सौर जवद्युत

संयंत्र, ब्लॉक -28 एवं 29, नेयवेली

2. एनएलसी आंजडया जलजमटेड के ऄध्यक्ष-सह-प्रबंध जनदेिक एतदद्वारा संबंजधत ृदों ृर ऐसे ऄजधकाठरयों को

नाम से नामांदकत करने के जलए प्राजधकृत हैं, जो कारखानों के ऄजधष्ठाताओं के प ृ में ृदनाजमत हैं, जजसा दक उृर बताया

गया हज।

[फा. सं. 38026/1/2013-सीए II]

ऄलका िेखर, ऄवर सजचव

3896

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 4, 2023/KARTIKA 13, 1945

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

MINISTRY OF COAL

New Delhi, the 25th August, 2023

S.O. 1727.—In pursuance of the powers, conferred by clause (iii) of the first provision to clause (n) of

Section 2 of the Factories Act, 1948 (63 of 1948), the Central Government hereby appoints oﬃcers speciﬁed in

column (3) of the Table below as ―Occupier‖ of the respective factory or workshop of NLC India Limited

(NLCIL), speciﬁed in column (2) of the said Table having its registered office at No.135, EVR Periyar High Road,

Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010., namely:

Sl.No.

Name of the Factory

(Solar Power Plant)

Designation(s) of

Officer to be appointed as Occupier

NLC India Limited 50 MW Solar Power Plant,

Block-1, Neyveli

Deputy General Manager/ General

Manager/Chief General Manager

NLC India Limited 15 MW Solar Power Plant,

Block-16, Neyveli (near Villudiyanpattu Temple)

NLC India Limited 40 MW Solar Power Plant,

Block-5, Neyveli

NLC India Limited 25 MW Solar Power Plant,

Kolliruppu, Neyveli

NLC India Limited 10 MW Solar Power Plant,

Dollgunj, Andaman & Nicobar Islands

NLC India Limited 10 MW Solar Power Plant,

Attampahad, Andaman & Nicobar Islands

NLC India Limited 10 MW Captive Solar Power Plant,

Block-28 & 29, Neyveli

2. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director of NLC India Limited is hereby authorized to nominate by

name such oﬃcers to the respective positions, who are designated as occupiers of the factories, as indicated above

[F. No. 38026/1/2013-CA II]

ALKA SHEKHAR, Under Secy.

ubZ fnYyh] 31 vDrwcj] 2023

.—औद्योजगक जववाद ऄजधजनयम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के ऄनुसरण में, केन्रीय सरकार मेससा रामको सीमेंट्स

जलजमटेड; मेससा सीएसके कंससल्टग आंजजनीयसा प्राआवेट जलजमटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध जनयोजकों और रामको आंडस्ट्रीज जलजमटेड (सीमेंट ग्राआंसडग यूजनट

खरगृुर) कांरेक्टर वकासा यूजनयन के बीच ऄनुबंध में जनर्ददष्ट केन्रीय सरकार औद्योजगक ऄजधकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय, कोलकाता, ृंचाट (ठरफरेन्स न.-

09/2023) को जजसा दक ऄनुलग्नक में ददखाया गया हज, प्रकाजित करती हज जो केन्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉृी के साथ 31.10.2023 को प्राप्त हुअ था l

[la- एल -29011/50/2022- अइअर(एम)]

डी. के. जहमांिु, ऄवर सजचव

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

New Delhi, the 31st October, 2023

S.O. 1728.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (Reference No. 09/2023) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal

cum Labour Court, Kolkata as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to

M/s The Ramco Cements Limited; M/s CKS Consulting Engineers Pvt. Ltd. and Ramco Industries Ld. (Cement

Grinding Unit Kharagpur) Contractor Workers Union which was received along with soft copy of the award by

the Central Government on 31.10.2023.

[No. L-29011/50/2022-IR (M)]

D. K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.

[भाग II—खण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का राजृत्र : नवम् बर 4, 2023/कार्ततक 13, 1945

3897

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

Present : Justice K. D. Bhutia, Presiding Officer.

REF. No. 09 OF 2023

Parties : Employers in relation to the management of

M/s. The Ramco Cements Ltd. & Anr.

AND

Their Workmen/ Union

Appearance:

On behalf of the Management: Mr. Ranjay De, Advocate.

On behalf of the Workmen/ Union: None

Dated: 5th October, 2023

AWARD

Ld. Counsel of M/s. The Ramco Cement Ltd. is present but none appears on behalf from the side of the union

which has espoused the present dispute. The management of M/s. CKS Consulting Engineering Pvt. Ltd. has been

proceeded exparte as it has failed to appear despite due service of notice upon it.

Record shows notice of this case has been sent to the union in the address given in the order of reference

through Registered Post and as well through Speed Post, but both the notices have returned undelivered with postal

endorsement ―not known‖.

The order of reference dated 11-04-2023 also shows Ministry of Labour had sent a copy of the order of

reference to the concerned Union, which has espoused the dispute before the Labour Commissioner against it

employers for not considering its demand made through letter dated 16-11-2022 in respect of 71 permanent employees

of Ramco Cement Ltd. and on whose failure report submitted before the Ministry of Labour, the dispute has been

referred to this tribunal for adjudication. The order of reference further discloses that a specific direction has been

given to the union to file its claim statement along with relevant documents, list of reliance and witness before this

Tribunal within 15 days.

From such facts, it can be said the General Secretary, Ramco Industries Ltd. (Cement Grinding Unit,

Kharagpur), Contractor Workers Union, Paschim Medinipur, Dewanmaro Ayma, Hariatara, Kharagpur, Paschim

Medinipur- 721304, is very much well aware, the dispute which it had initially raised before Labour Commissioner,

the Conciliation Officer,in respect of 71 permanent employees of M/s. The Ramco Cement Ltd. vide its letter dated

16-11-2022 could not settled and it‘s dispute has been referred to this Tribunal for adjudication by the Ministry of

Labour. So, it cannot be said that union is not aware of the present reference case. Therefore, this Tribunal is of view

the union ought to have appeared voluntarily before this Tribunal as per the direction of the Ministry of Labour, Govt.

of India as given in order of reference.

Non-appearance of the union which has raised the dispute being well aware of the pendency of the present

reference case before this Tribunal an inference can be drawn that it is no more interested to pursue with the dispute or

it no longer has any dispute over the issue under reference.

However, the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour vide orders no.L-29011/50/2022-IR (M) dated 11-04-2023

has referred the following issue to this Tribunal for adjudication:—

―Whether claim of Ramco Industries Ltd. (Cement Grinding Unit, Kharagpur) Contractor Workers Union

Paschim Medinipur vide his letter dated 16-11-2022 that ‗71 workers (list attached) are permanent employees of

Ramco Cement Ltd. (Cement Grinding Unit, Kharagpur)‘ is proper, legal and justified? If yes, to what relief the

disputant is entitled and what directions, if any, are necessary in the matter‖.

Therefore, in view of the above no dispute award is passed and Reference Case No 09 of 2023 is disposed of.

Justice K. D. BHUTIA, Presiding Officer

3898

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 4, 2023/KARTIKA 13, 1945

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ubZ fnYyh] 31 vDrwcj] 2023

.—औद्योजगक जववाद ऄजधजनयम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के ऄनुसरण में, केन्रीय सरकार आस्ट्ृात जनरल

हॉजस्ट्ृटल, सेल के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध जनयोजकों और श्री गोृाल बेहेरा के बीच ऄनुबंध में जनर्ददष्ट केन्रीय सरकार औद्योजगक ऄजधकरण

एवं श्रम न्यायालय, भुबनेश्वर, ृंचाट (ठरफरेन्स न.-51/2012) को जजसा दक ऄनुलग्नक में ददखाया गया हज, प्रकाजित करती हज जो केन्रीय

सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉृी के साथ 31.10.2023 को प्राप्त हुअ था l

[la- ,y-43012/7/2011- अइअर(एम)]

डी. के. जहमांिु, ऄवर सजचव

New Delhi, the 31st October, 2023

S.O. 1729.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (Reference No. 51/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal

cum Labour Court, Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in

relation to Ispat General Hospital, SAIL and Shri Gopal Behera which was received along with soft copy of the

award by the Central Government on 31.10.2023.

[No. L-43012/7/2011-IR(M)]

D. K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT BHUBANESWAR

Present:

Sri Dinesh Kumar Singh,

Presiding Officer, C.G.I.T.-cum-Labour

Court, Bhubaneswar.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO. 51/2012

Date of Passing Award – 27^th September, 2023

Between:

The Director,

(Medical & Health Services),

Ispat General Hospital, SAIL,

Rourkela, Dist. Sundargarh, Orissa.

…

1^st Party-Management.

(And)

Shri Gopal Behera,

Nua Bazar, Small Shiva Mandir,

Sector – 21, Rourkela, Dist. Sundargarh.

…

2^nd Party-Workman.

Appearances:

Sri Subrat Mishra,

…

For the 1^st Party-

Advocate.

Management

Sri B.K. Das,

…

For the 2^nd Party-

Advocate.

Workman.

[भाग II—खण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का राजृत्र : नवम् बर 4, 2023/कार्ततक 13, 1945

3899

AWARD

The Government of India in the Ministry of Labour & Employment, New Delhi in exercising its powers

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

(14 of 1947) have referred a dispute between the Management of Ispat General Hospital, SAIL, Rourkela and

allegedly its workman vide Order No. L-43012/7/2011–IR(M), dated 01.05.2012 for its adjudication and the schedule

of the reference is as follows:-

―Whether the removal of service of Shri Gopal Behera, Ex-Workman by the management of Director

(Medical & Health Service) Ispat General Hospital, SAIL, Rourkela w.e.f. 23.12.2005, is legal and justified?

What relief the workman is entitled to ?‖

The case of the 2^nd Party-workman as per his statement of claim is as follows:—

That, the concerned workman was working as Senior Hospital Attendant under Ispat General Hospital,

SAIL, RSP, Rourkela and he was charge-sheeted on 26.02.2005 for his legitimate trade Union activities. Thereafter a

departmental enquiry was conducted and the same was merely a colourable exercise while denying the concerned

workman natural justice and reasonable opportunities. Further the workman was not allowed time to nominate a co-

worker to assist him during the course of the domestic enquiry as he was not able to depose evidence and cross

examination of the Management witnesses. The Enquiry Officer had allowed participation of the Presenting Officer

as Management Witness in the inquiry which vitiated the domestic enquiry. The Enquiry Officer and the Presenting

Officer had induced him to admit the charges of misconduct with an assurance that no action would be taken against

him. The Inquiry Officer had not properly analyzed the evidence of his witnesses and he had not been given any

reason of not accepting his evidence. The Disciplinary Authority had not applied his mind properly on the enquiry

report before imposing punishment on him and the decree of misconduct and punishment imposed was not properly

weighed by the disciplinary authority. The Disciplinary Authority was vindictive towards him because of his

legitimate Trade Union activities as an active member of the Rourkela Shramik Sangh. The action of the disciplinary

authority is prejudiced as the Management had neither issued a show cause notice to him nor followed the principles

of natural justice. He had appealed before the Managing Director designated as Chief Executive Officer of Rourkela

Steel Plant twice but his case was not considered. The Management has sought post facto approval in removing him

from service which they had not yet obtained and the Management had also not paid one month‘s wage to him.

A prayer has been made to set aside the order of removal dated 23.12.2005 declaring the same as illegal and

unjustified and disproportionate with an order of reinstatement in to his service with all consequential service

benefits.

The case of the Management in brief is as follows:-

That, the concerned workman while working as Senior Hospital Attendant in Medical Department of the

Ispat General Hospital, RSP, SAIL at Rourkela was charge-sheeted under Clause 28(v) of the Certified Standing

Order of the company on 26.02.2005 for remaining absent from duty unauthorizedly on different spells for 216 days

from 12.01.2004 to 24.02.2005 without obtaining sanction of leave. The concerned workman after receiving charge-

sheet on 10.03.2005 had not submitted any written explanation and subsequently an enquiry committee was

constituted to enquire into the matter. The concerned workman appeared before the enquiry committee and had

preferred not to take the assistance of any co-worker. The enquiry committee conducted the enquiry after following

the principles of natural justice and enquired into the charges brought against the concerned workman. The concerned

workman had been given sufficient opportunities to defend himself but the concerned workman had admitted the

charges voluntarily before the enquiry committee. The enquiry committee on the basis of evidence and documents on

record submitted the report on dated 10.06.2005 to the disciplinary authority holding the charges as established

against the concerned workman and the copy of the report, proceedings and the order were served to the concerned

workman vide letter dated 16.06.2005. The disciplinary authority after carefully examining the deposition of the

witnesses and relevant documents of the inquiry report confirmed the findings of the enquiring committee after being

satisfied holding that the concerned workman deserves punishment of removal from services of the company. The

disciplinary authority had also examined the past service records of the concerned workman but could not find any

material in his favour for taking lenient view whereas the concerned workman had been imposed punishment on two

counts vide order dated 26.10.2002 and 25.02.2005 for misconduct in separate enquiries and he had earned adverse

entries in his CCRs for the year 2002, 2003 and 2004. The Disciplinary Authority after finding that there is no scope

for imposing lessor punishment passed the order of removal of the concerned workman from services of the company

with effect from 23.12.2005 as disciplinary measures under Clause 29(2)(c) of the Certified Standing Order of the

Company. In view of this the concerned workman is not entitled for any relief and the punishment imposed for

misconduct of remaining absent unauthorizedly is just and proper.

The Management by way of reply has stated that the averments made in Para – 1, 2 3 and 4 of the Statement

of claim is baseless, misconceived and denied, unfounded and devoid of any merit. The averments made in Para-2 are

baseless and denied and the averments made in Para-3 is unfounded and devoid of any merit. A prayer has been made

3900

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 4, 2023/KARTIKA 13, 1945

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

to hold the enquiry as fair and proper and upheld the decision of the disciplinary authority regarding removal of the

workman from his services.

On the pleadings of the parties the following issues are framed:-

ISSUES

Whether the removal of service of Shri Gopal Behera, Ex-Workman by the Management of Director (Medical

& Health Service), Ispat General Hospital, SAIL, Rourkela w.e.f. 23.12.2005 is legal and justified?

Whether the domestic enquiry conducted by the Management against the workman is fair and proper?

To what relief the workman is entitled?

The 2^nd Party-Workman has examined two witnesses. They are W.W.-1 Sri Gopal Behera, the workman

himself and Sri Nabaghana Nayak, W.W.-2

The 2^nd Party-workman has proved the following documents which are marked as follows:-

Ext.-1 is the photocopy of the certificate of runners in boxing issued by the SAIL.

Ext.-2 is the xerox copy of the certificate of winner in boxing issued by Odisha Olympic Association.

Ext.-3 is the Xerox copy of participation certificate issued by IX Asian Games.

Ext.-4 is the Xerox copy of death certificate issued by NAC, Burla.

Ext.-5 is the Xerox copy of death certificate issued by the Municipality, Burla.

Ext.-6 is the Xerox copy of the Medical prescription issued by Dr. Ashok Prasad.

Ext.-7 is the Xerox copy of the Medical Certificate issued by Dr. A. Prasad.

The 1^st Party-Management has examined only one witness. He is M.W.-1 Sri Satyananda Biswal who was

working as Manager (PL-M&HS).

10. The 1^st Party-Management has proved following documents which are as follows:-

Ext.-A is the Xerox copy of the charge-sheet dated 26.02.2005.

Ext.-B is the Xerox copy of acknowledgement receipt dated 10.03.2005 of charge-sheet.

Ext.-C is the Xerox copy of the notification dated 07.04.2005 on constitution of enquiry committee.

Ext.-D is the Xerox copy of the enquiry proceedings along with exhibits.

Ext.-E is the Xerox copy of the findings of the enquiry officer dated 10.06.2005.

Ext.-F is the Xerox copy of the letter dated 16.6.2005 issued to the workman.

Ext.-G is the Xerox copy of the acknowledgement receipt dated 16.0.62005.

Ext.-H is the Xerox copy of the removal order dated 23.12.2005.

Ext.-J is the Xerox copy of the postal receipt No. RALD A-594 & RALDA A-595 dated 23.12.2005 showing

sending of removal order.

Ext.-K is the Xerox copy of the counter foil of pay-in-slip showing payment of one month wage for the

workman.

Ext.-L is the copies of the past punishment orders dated 26.10.2002 and 25.02.2005.

Ext.-M is the Xerox copy of the personal policy circular No. 654, dated 21.09.1992.

Ext.-N is the Xerox copy of the application filed under section 33-2(b) before the P.O., I.T., Rourkela registered

as ID Misc. Case No. 24/2005.

Ext.-P is the Xerox copy of the order dated 17,.02.2014 of the P.O., I.T. Rourkela.

Ext.-Q is the Xerox copy of the Certified Standing Order.

FINDINGS

11.

The Tribunal for the sake of convenience thinks it proper to discuss the Issue No. II first of all.

[भाग II—खण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का राजृत्र : नवम् बर 4, 2023/कार्ततक 13, 1945

3901

ISSUE NO. II

12.

At the outset of the discussion it is required to mention here that in course of argument the learned lawyer of

the workman has accepted that the enquiry proceedings by which enquiry was conducted against the concerned

workman was fair and proper and the principles of natural justice were followed in the enquiry proceeding.

13.

In view of the admission made by the learned lawyer of the 2^nd Party-workman it will be a fruitless exercise

to go into the inquiry proceeding conducted against the workman as fair and proper. This issue is decided in favour of

the 1^st Party-Management.

14.

Now the Tribunal will discuss the Issue No. I and III together as they are inter-linked.

ISSUE NO. I & III

15.

It is the pleading of the concerned workman that his removal from service was not proper, legal and

justified. It is the further pleadings of the workman that he has been awarded disproportionate punishment with

regard to his misconduct. It is also the further pleadings that in the Standing Order of the Management as per Order

No. 29(2) the first punishment of misconduct is (a) Stoppage of Increment (b) Reduction to a lower grade or post or

lower stage in a time scale (c) Removal from service which does not disqualify for future employment, but the 1^st

Party-Management without taking recourse of the said Clause 29(a)(b) of the Standing Order has taken a step of sub-

Clause 29(c) of the Certified Standing Order that his removal from service which is not just and proper.

16.

On the other it is the pleadings of the Management that after analyzing all the factors and findings of the

Enquiry Officer in the Enquiry Proceedings the competent authority has taken a decision of removal of workman

from his service.

17.

Both the parties have led their evidence on the basis of their pleadings and W.W.-1 Sri Gopal Behera and

W.W.-2 Nabaghana Nayak as well as M.W.-1, Satyananda Biswal have supported their respective case.

18.

The learned lawyer of the concerned workman in course of argument has submitted that the concerned

workman was awarded disproportionate punishment which is not justified as per the Order No. 29(2) of statutory

orders of Management so the order of removal of the concerned workman be set aside under section 11-A of the

Industrial Disputes Act. The learned lawyer of the Management has vehemently opposed the contentions of the

learned lawer for the workman.

19.

At this stage it is relevant to mention here the provision of Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act.

Section – 11(A) : The Section 11(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act reads as follows:—

―Where an industrial dispute relating to the discharge or dismissal of a workman has been referred to a

Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal for adjudication and, in the course of the adjudication

proceedings, the Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal, as the case may be, is satisfied that the order

of discharge or dismissal was not justified, it may, by its award, set aside the order of discharge or dismissal

and direct reinstatement of the workman on such terms and conditions, if any, as it thinks fit, or give such

other relief to the workman including the award of any lesser punishment in lieu of discharge or dismissal as

the circumstances of the case may require”.

20.

The Hon‘ble Supreme Court has been pleased to observe in a case reported in 1973 AIR 1227 (Workmen

of M/s. Firestone Tyre…. –versus- Managements and others) that :—

―The Act is beneficial piece of legislation enacted in the interest of employees, It is the well settled that in

construing the provisions of a welfare legislation, courts should adopt, what is described as a beneficial rule

of construction. If two constructions are reasonably possible to be placed on the section, it follows that the

construction which furthers the policy and object of the Act and is more beneficial to the employees has to

be preferred. The interpretation must be liberal enough to achieve the legislative purpose‖.

21.

However the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in another case as reported in 2005 (2) SCALE 302 (Mahindra and

Mihindra Ltd., -Vs. N.B. Narawade has been pleased to hold that:—

It is no doubt true that after introduction of Section 11-A in the Industrial Disputes Act certain amount of

discretion is vested with the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal in interfering with the quantum of punishment awarded

by the Management where the concerned workman is found guilty of misconduct. The said area of discretion has

been very well defined by the various judgements of this court referred to herein above and it is certainly not

unlimited as has been observed by the Division Bench of the High Court. The discretion which can be exercised

under Section 11-A is available only on the existence of certain factors like punishment being disproportionate to the

gravity of misconduct so as to disturb the conscience of the Court, or the existence of any mitigating circumstances

which requires the reduction of the sentence, or the past conduct of the workman which may be persuade the Labour

Court to reduce the punishment. In the absence of any such factor existing, the Labour Court cannot by way of

sympathy alone exercise the power under section 11-A of the Act and reduce the punishment.‖

3902

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 4, 2023/KARTIKA 13, 1945

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

22.

In view of the above discussions the Tribunal finds and hold that the punishment of removal from services

awarded to the 2^nd Party-workman because of his unauthorized absence from duty is highly disproportionate to the

gravity of misconduct and it disturbs the conscience of the Court. Moreover, there is a provision under Order No.

29(2) of the Certified Standing Order of the Management that the Management may in its discretion give its

employees other punishment in lieu of removal from services so the Tribunal comes to a conclusion that the 2^nd

Party-workman be awarded a lesser punishment of stoppage of two scale annual increments instead of removal from

services.

23.

After considering all the above facts and circumstances the Tribunal comes to a conclusion that the removal

of the 2^nd Party-workman by the Management of Director (Medical & health Service) I.G.H. of SAIL, Rourkela from

service is not legal and justified and he is entitled for relief.

24.

Hence, the Issue No. 1 and III are answered in favour of the 2^nd Party-workman and against the 1^st Party-

Management.

25.

After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal renders the following order:-

ORDER

26.

That the removal of service of the 2^nd Party-workman namely Gopal Behera by the Management of Director

(Medical & Health Service), Ispat General Hospital, SAIL, Rourkela with effect from 23.12.2005 is not justified and

legal and thus the removal order dated 23.12.2005 is set aside.

27.

The 1^st Party-Management is directed to reinstate the 2^nd Party-workman in the rolls of the company from

the date of his removal from Services i.e. 23.12.2005 withholding two scales of annual increments with cumulative

effect effecting from the date 23.12.2005.

28.

That, the 1^st Party-Management is directed to make payment of 50% of the wages to the 2^nd Party-workman

from the date 23.12.2005 till his superannuation (as per service record) along with all consequential benefits

including Bonus and all retiral benefits.

29.

The 1^st Party-Management is also directed to implement the Award of the Tribunal within one month from

the date of receipt of the copy of the Award after it is published in the official gazette by the appropriate Government.

30.

This is the Award of this Tribunal.

Dictated & Corrected by me

DINESH KUMAR SINGH, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 31 vDrwcj] 2023

.—औद्योजगक जववाद ऄजधजनयम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के ऄनुसरण में, केन्रीय सरकार

मेससा यादव ब्रदसा; जभलाइ स्ट्टील प्लांट के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध जनयोजकों और श्री प्रवीण कुमार के बीच ऄनुबंध में जनर्ददष्ट

केन्रीय सरकार औद्योजगक ऄजधकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय, भुबनेश्वर, ृंचाट (ठरफरेन्स न.-06/2023) को जजसा दक ऄनुलग्नक

में ददखाया गया हज, प्रकाजित करती हज जो केन्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉृी के साथ 31.10.2023 को प्राप्त हुअ था l

[सं. जेड -16025/04/2023- अइअर(एम)-69]

डी. के. जहमांिु, ऄवर सजचव

New Delhi, the 31st October, 2023

S.O. 1730.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (Reference No. 06/2023) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal

cum Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation

to M/s Yadav Brothers; Bhilai Steel Plant and Shri Praveen Kumar which was received along with soft copy of

the award by the Central Government on 31.10.2023.

[No. Z-16025/04/2023-IR(M)-69]

D. K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.

[भाग II—खण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का राजृत्र : नवम् बर 4, 2023/कार्ततक 13, 1945

3903

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

No. CGIT/LC/R/06/2023

Present: P.K.Srivastava

H.J.S..( Retd)

The

Shri Praveen Kumar,

Village- Singdehi, PO- Sarda,

District- Bemetara (CG) - 491332

Workman

Versus

The

M/s Yadav Brothers,

Rep. by Shri Chandrajit Singh Yadav- Proprietor,

Yadav Bhavan, Joratarai, Bhilai,

PO- Dundera (Utai), Dist. Durg (CG) 490021

The

Chief Executive Officer,

Bhilai Steel Plant, PO- Bhilai,

District- Bhilai (CG) 490001

Management

AWARD

(Passed on this 20^th day of October 2023.)

As per letter dated 14/02/2023 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is

received. The reference is made to this tribunal under section-10 of I.D. Act, 1947 as per reference number

No.RP-8(3-2)/2023-ES.III dt.14/02/2023 . The dispute under reference related to :—

―"Whether the services of the workman (Shri Praveen Kumar) have been illegally terminated by the

Contractor M/s Yadav Brothers, contractor of M's Bhilai Steel Plant ? Whether the workman is entitled

for reinstatement of his service ? and to, to what all remedies, is the workman entitled to, in relation to the

present industrial dispute?‖

After registering the case on the basis of reference, notices were sent to the parties.

Learned counsel for workman Shri Pranay Chaubey appeared and pressed his application, filed with affidavit, wherein

he has requested on behalf of the workmen that the dispute under the reference has been settled out of court and

management has provided required compensation to the workmen hence he does not wish to fight the case and has

further requested that are no dispute award be passed in the light of these facts. After hearing Learned counsel and

going through the record, the player is granted and no dispute Award is passed.

P. K. SRIVASTAVA, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 31 vDrwcj] 2023

.—औद्योजगक जववाद ऄजधजनयम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के ऄनुसरण में, केन्रीय सरकार

मेससा यादव ब्रदसा; जभलाइ स्ट्टील प्लांट के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध जनयोजकों और श्री महेंर कुमार के बीच ऄनुबंध में जनर्ददष्ट

केन्रीय सरकार औद्योजगक ऄजधकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय, भुबनेश्वर, ृंचाट (ठरफरेन्स न.-07/2023) को जजसा दक ऄनुलग्नक

में ददखाया गया हज,प्रकाजित करती हज जो केन्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉृी के साथ 31.10.2023 को प्राप्त हुअ था l

[सं. जेड -16025/04/2023- अइअर(एम)-70]

डी. के. जहमांिु, ऄवर सजचव

3904

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 4, 2023/KARTIKA 13, 1945

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi, the 31st October, 2023

S.O. 1731.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (Reference No. 07/2023) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal

cum Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation

to M/s Yadav Brothers; Bhilai Steel Plant and Shri Mahendra Kumar which was received along with soft copy of

the award by the Central Government on 31.10.2023.

[No. Z-16025/04/2023-IR(M)-70]

D. K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

No. CGIT/LC/R/07/2023

Present: P.K.Srivastava

H.J.S..( Retd)

The

Shri Mahendra Kumar,

Ward No. 38, Village- Somani, PO- Utai,

District- Durg (CG) - 491107

Workman

Versus

The

M/s Yadav Brothers,

Rep. by Shri Chandrajit Singh Yadav- Proprietor,

Yadav Bhavan, Joratarai, Bhilai,

PO- Dundera (Utai), Dist. Durg (CG) 490021

The

Chief Executive Officer,

Bhilai Steel Plant, PO- Bhilai,

District- Bhilai (CG) 490001

Management

AWARD

(Passed on this 20^th day of October 2023.)

As per letter dated 14/02/2023 by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received.

The reference is made to this tribunal under section-10 of I.D. Act, 1947 as per reference number no.RP-8(3-3)/2023-

ES.III dt.14/02/2023 . The dispute under reference related to :-

―"Whether the services of the workman (Shri Mahendra Kumar) have been illegally terminated by the

Contractor M/s Yadav Brothers, contractor of M's Bhilai Steel Plant ? Whether the workman is entitled

for reinstatement of his service ? and to, to what all remedies, is the workman entitled to, in relation to the

present industrial dispute?‖

After registering the case on the basis of reference, notices were sent to the parties.

Learned counsel for workman Shri Pranay Chaubey appeared and pressed his application, filed with affidavit, wherein

he has requested on behalf of the workmen that the dispute under the reference has been settled out of court and

management has provided required compensation to the workmen hence he does not wish to fight the case and has

further requested that are no dispute award be passed in the light of these facts. After hearing Learned counsel and

going through the record, the player is granted and no dispute Award is passed.

P. K. SRIVASTAVA, Presiding Officer

[भाग II—खण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का राजृत्र : नवम् बर 4, 2023/कार्ततक 13, 1945

3905

ubZ fnYyh] 31 vDrwcj] 2023

.—औद्योजगक जववाद ऄजधजनयम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के ऄनुसरण में, केन्रीय सरकार

आन्सुरेंस सेक्टर ऑफ़ ृजब्लक सेक्टर ऄंडरटेककग्स के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध जनयोजकों और ईनके कमाकार के बीच ऄनुबंध में

जनर्ददष्ट केन्रीय सरकार औद्योजगक ऄजधकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय, कोलकाता, ृंचाट (ठरफरेन्स न.-01/2007) को जजसा दक

ऄनुलग्नक में ददखाया गया हज,प्रकाजित करती हज जो केन्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉृी के साथ 31.10.2023 को प्राप्त

हुअ था l

[सं. एल -17011/4/2006- अइअर(एम)]

डी. के. जहमांिु, ऄवर सजचव

New Delhi, the 31st October, 2023

S.O. 1732.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (Reference No. 01/2007) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal

cum Labour Court, Kolkata as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to

Insurance Sector of Public Sector Undertakings and Their Workmen which was received along with soft copy of

the award by the Central Government on 31.10.2023.

[No. L-17011/4/2006-IR(M)]

D. K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

Present: Justice K. D. Bhutia, Presiding Officer.

REF. No. NT-01 OF 2007

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of

Insurance Sector of Public Sector Undertakings

AND

Their Workmen

Appearance :

On behalf of Management National Insurance Co. and Oriental

: Mr. R. De,

Insurance Co.

Advocate

On behalf of Union New India Insurance Co. Ltd.

: Absent

On behalf of the other seven Unions

: Absent

Dated 21^st September, 2023

AWARD

None of the seven unions whose name appear in the Corrigendum order of reference No. L-17011/4/2006-

IR(M) dated 29.06.2007 are found present when the matter is called today too like on other previous dates.

None appears on behalf of New India Insurance Co. Ltd. and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. when the

matter is called.

On other hand, National Insurance Co. and Oriental Insurance Co. are represented by their Ld. Counsel Mr.

R. De.

Today has been fixed for production of final order passed by Hon‘ble High Court of Delhi in Writ Petition

No. 2782 of 2007 or the decision taken by High Powered Committee on the issue under reference. Ld. Counsel Mr.

De candidly submits the Insurance Companies whom he represent are unable to produce the final report of High

Powered Committee on disputed transfer and mobility policy 2006 or the final order passed by Hon‘ble Writ Court of

Delhi High Court.

Record shows vide order dated 03.01.2008 the further proceeding of this reference has been stayed as the

disputed matter was referred to High Powered Committee as per the order of Hon‘ble High Court of Delhi.

3906

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 4, 2023/KARTIKA 13, 1945

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

None pursuance of the reference by the Union and none appearance of the Union which have challenged the

transfer and mobility policy 2006 and inability of parties to produce the final decision taken by High Powered

Committee and the final order passed by Hon‘ble High Court of Delhi in W.P. No. 2782 of 2007 on disputed issue

under reference inference can be drawn that disputed transfer and mobility pursuing 2006 stands as it is.

Ld. Central Govt., Ministry of Labour by issuing Corrigendum order dated 29.06.2007 has referred the

following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication.

―Whether the action of the management of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., National Insurance Co. Ltd., New

India Insurance Co. Ltd. and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. in formulating the transfer and mobility policy 2006 and

the administrative instructions issued thereunder is in violation of the Paragraphs 11 and 12 of the Notification issued

by the Ministry of Finance, published vide Gazette S.O. 1783 (E) dated 21.12.2005 (which relates to transfer policy,

cadre and allowances) (copy enclosed)? If yes, what relief are the workmen entitled to?‖

So, it appears the seven unions which are representing Supervisor, Clerk, Subs-staff of the above four

General Insurance Companies by filing the present reference, have challenged the transfer and mobility policy 2006

and have alleged such policy have changed their service conditions and done without following the due procedure laid

down in Industrial Dispute Act.

Pursued both the Gazette Notification as dated 21.12.2005 and the disputed transfer and mobility policy

2006.

Para-11 of notification dated 21.12.2005 relates to transfer policy of Supervisor, Clerk, Sub-ordinate and

other Staff of General Insurance Companies mentioned in Para-12.

So, it appears the staff mentioned in Para 12 of the notification dated 21.12.2005 are not immune from

transfer.

The copy of disputed policy of 2006 appear to be nothing but has discussed elaborate and specifically the

terms ―Job Rotations‖ ―Radius‖ ―Relocation‖ ―Job Rotation‖ ―Station‖ etc. which are not specifically discussed or

mentioned in the scheme of 1974 or notification dated 21.12.2005.

It has elaborate mentioned what is job rotation (within the same station), how transfer from one station to

another has to be effected and on what condition, how request transfer has to be effected and or what condition request

transfer has to be effected and how financial benefits of the staff/workmen have to be protected.

Therefore, it appears to this Tribunal by formulating transfer and mobility policy the management of four

General Insurance Companies want to bring more transparency in transfer policy of the staff mentioned in Para 12 of

the Gazette Notification dated 21.12.2005.

Further, nothing has come on record that those four Insurance Companies have not given effect to the

transfer and mobility scheme 2006 or that it still follows Gazette Notification dated 21.12.2005.

This tribunal is of view when transfer is incidental to the service, then policy 2006 does not appear to be a

new policy affecting the service condition of Non-managerial staff of there four Insurance Companies.

In view of above discussion and non-pursuance of the case by the Unions which have espoused the dispute

and its failure to prove non-implementation of disputed policy 2006 by the management and their failure to prove such

policy has been set aside by Delhi High Court in Writ Petition No. 2782 of 2007 or by the High Powered Committee

or modified by them, then it can be informed that union have accepted the transfer and mobility policy 2006.

Further, no evidence have come as record to prove that there four General Insurance Companies still follow

the Gazette Notification dated 21.12.2005 and has not acted upon the disputed transfer policy of 2006 in respect of

their staff who falls in the category mentioned in Para 12 of Gazette Notification dated 21.12.2005.

Accordingly, No Dispute Award is passed and Reference case No. NT-01/2007 is disposed of.

Justice K.D. BHUTIA, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 31 vDrwcj] 2023

.—औद्योजगक जववाद ऄजधजनयम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के ऄनुसरण में, केन्रीय सरकार

मेससा आंजस्ट्टट्यूट ऑफ़ जमनरल्स एंड मजटेठरयल्स टेक्नोलॉजी; मेससा बॉम्बे आंटेजलजेंस जसक्योठरटी (आंजडया) जलजमटेड; मेससा

आंडजस्ट्रयल जसक्योठरटी एंड ऄलाआड सर्तवसेज प्राआवेट जलजमटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध जनयोजकों और श्री जत्रनाथ प्रधान के

बीच ऄनुबंध में जनर्ददष्ट केन्रीय सरकार औद्योजगक ऄजधकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय, भुबनेश्वर, ृंचाट (ठरफरेन्स न.-

[भाग II—खण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का राजृत्र : नवम् बर 4, 2023/कार्ततक 13, 1945

3907

49/2021) को जजसा दक ऄनुलग्नक में ददखाया गया हज,प्रकाजित करती हज जो केन्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉृी के साथ

31.10.2023 को प्राप्त हुअ था l

[सं. जेड -16025/04/2023- अइअर(एम)-66]

डी. के. जहमांिु, ऄवर सजचव

New Delhi, the 31st October, 2023

S.O. 1733.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (Reference No. 49/2021) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal

cum Labour Court, Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in

relation to M/s. Institute of Minerals & Materials Technology; M/s. Bombay Intelligence Security (India) Ltd.;

M/s. Industrial Security & Allied Services Private Limited and Sri Trinath Pradhan which was received along

with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 31.10.2023.

[No. Z-16025/04/2023-IR(M)-66]

D. K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT BHUBANESWAR

Present:

Sri Dinesh Kumar Singh,

Presiding Officer, C.G.I.T.-cum-Labour

Court, Bhubaneswar.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO. 49/2021

Date of Passing Award – 18^th August, 2023

Between:

1. The Director,

M/s. Institute of Minerals & Materials Technology, (IMMT)

Sachivalaya Marg, RRL, Campus, Acharya Vihar,

Bhubaneswar, Odisha 751 013, Bhubaneswar.

2. The Director,

M/s. Bombay Intelligence Security (India) Ltd.,

101, Omega House, Hiranandani Gardens,

Powai, Mumbai – 400 076.

3. The Director, M/s. Industrial Security & Allied

Services Private Limited, F3-F5, Indradhanu

Market, IRC Village, Bhubaneswar.

…

1^st Party-Managements.

(And)

Sri Trinath Pradhan,

S/o. Udayanath Pradhan, At. S-3, 204-205,

P.O. Sailashree Vihar, Bhubaneswar, Odisha

…

2^nd Party-Workman.

3908

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 4, 2023/KARTIKA 13, 1945

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Appearances:

None.

…

For the 1^st Party-Managements.

None.

…

For the 2^nd Party-Workman.

ORDER

In the present case, a reference was received from the office of the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner

(Central), Bhubaneswar vide letter No. L.-8(36)/2020-B.IV dated 29.07.2021 under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and

sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Act, for adjudication of a dispute, under the following schedule:-

―Whether the action of M/s. Bombay Intelligence Security (India) Ltd., the Contractor of the

Management of M/s. Institute of Minerals of Materials Technology, Bhubaneswar, terminating the

services of Sri Trinath Pradhan (Security Guard) without retrenchment benefits is just, fair and legal? If

not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to?

In the reference order, the Deputy chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Bhubaneswar commanded the

parties raising the dispute to file statement of claim, complete with relevant documents, list of reliance and witnesses

with this Tribunal within 15 days of receipt of the reference order and to forward a copy of such statement of claim to

each one of the opposite parties involved in the dispute.

Despite directions so given, the 2^nd Party-Workman opted not to file the claim statement.

On receipt of the above reference, notice was sent to the 2^nd Party-Workman on 20.12.2021 and on dated

03.04.2023 for appearance and for filing of statement of claim. Neither the postal article sent to the 2^nd Party-

Workman, referred to above, was received back nor was it observed by the Tribunal that postal services remained

unserved in the period, referred to above. Therefore, every presumption lies in favour of the fact that the above notices

were served upon the 2^nd Party-Workman. Despite service of the notice, the 2^nd Party-Workman opted to abstain away

from the proceedings. No claim statement was filed on its behalf. Thus, it is clear that the 2^nd Party-Workman is not

interested in adjudication of the reference on merits.

Since the 2^nd Party-Workman has neither filed statement of claim nor has led any evidence so as to prove its

cause against the Managements, hence there is no claim of the workman against the Management.

In view of such, no claim award is passed by this Tribunal.

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

Act, 1947, for publication.

Dictated & Corrected by me.

DINESH KUMAR SINGH, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 31 vDrwcj] 2023

.—औद्योजगक जववाद ऄजधजनयम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के ऄनुसरण में, केन्रीय सरकार

आंडजस्ट्रयल जसक्योठरटी एंड ऄलाआड सर्तवसेज प्राआवेट जलजमटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध जनयोजकों और श्री ऄरसबद कुमार जेना

के बीच ऄनुबंध में जनर्ददष्ट केन्रीय सरकार औद्योजगक ऄजधकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय, भुबनेश्वर, ृंचाट (ठरफरेन्स न.-

48/2021) को जजसा दक ऄनुलग्नक में ददखाया गया हज,प्रकाजित करती हज जो केन्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉृी के साथ

31.10.2023 को प्राप्त हुअ था l

[सं. जेड -16025/04/2023- अइअर(एम)-67]

डी. के. जहमांिु, ऄवर सजचव

New Delhi, the 31st October, 2023

S.O. 1734.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the award (Reference No. 48/2021) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal

cum Labour Court, Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in

relation to M/s. Institute of Minerals & Materials Technology; M/s. Bombay Intelligence Security (India) Ltd.;

M/s. Industrial Security & Allied Services Private Limited and Sri Arbind Kumar Jena which was received

along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 31.10.2023.

[No. Z-16025/04/2023-IR(M)-67]

D. K. HIMANSHU, Under Secy.

[भाग II—खण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का राजृत्र : नवम् बर 4, 2023/कार्ततक 13, 1945

3909

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT BHUBANESWAR

Present:

Sri Dinesh Kumar Singh,

Presiding Officer, C.G.I.T.-cum-Labour

Court, Bhubaneswar.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO. 48/2021

Date of Passing Order – 18^th August, 2023

Between:

1. The Director,

M/s. Institute of Minerals & Materials Technology,

Bhubaneswar.

2. The Director,

M/s. Bombay Intelligence Security (India) Ltd.,

101, Omega House, Hiranandani Gardens,

Powai, Mumbai – 400 076.

3. The Director,

M/s. Industrial Security & Allied Services Private

Limited, F3-F5, Indradhanu Market Village,

Bhubaneswar.

…

1^st Party-Managements.

(And)

Sri Arbind Kumar Jena,

S/o. Gajendranath Jena, At. Sanuhapus,

P.O. Sidheswarpur, Jagatsinghpur, Odisha

…

2^nd Party-Workman.

Appearances:

None.

…

For the 1^st Party-Managements.

None.

…

For the 2^nd Party-Workman.

ORDER

In the present case, a reference was received from the office of the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner

(Central), Bhubaneswar vide letter No. L.-8(36)/2020-B.IV dated 29.07.2021 under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and

sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Act, for adjudication of a dispute, under the following schedule:—

―Whether the action of the Management of M/s. Bombay Intelligence Security (India) Ltd., the

Contractor of M/s. Instiute of Minerals Materials Technology, Bhubaneswar, terminating the services of

Sri Arbind Kumar Jena (Security Guard) without giving termination benefits is just, fair and legal? If

not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to?

In the reference order, the Deputy chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Bhubaneswar commanded the

parties raising the dispute to file statement of claim, complete with relevant documents, list of reliance and witnesses

with this Tribunal within 15 days of receipt of the reference order and to forward a copy of such statement of claim to

each one of the opposite parties involved in the dispute.

Despite directions so given, the 2^nd Party-Workman opted not to file the claim statement.

3910

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 4, 2023/KARTIKA 13, 1945

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

On receipt of the above reference, notice was sent to the 2^nd Party-Workman on 20.12.2021 and on dated

03.04.2023 for appearance and for filing of statement of claim. Neither the postal article sent to the 2^nd Party-

Workman, referred to above, was received back nor was it observed by the Tribunal that postal services remained

unserved in the period, referred to above. Therefore, every presumption lies in favour of the fact that the above notices

were served upon the 2^nd Party-Workman. Despite service of the notice, the 2^nd Party-Workman opted to abstain away

from the proceedings. No claim statement was filed on its behalf. Thus, it is clear that the 2^nd Party-Workman is not

interested in adjudication of the reference on merits.

Since the 2^nd Party-Workman has neither filed statement of claim nor has led any evidence so as to prove its

cause against the Management, hence there is no claim of workman against the Management.

In view of such, no claim Order is passed by this Tribunal.

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

Act, 1947, for publication.

Dictated & Corrected by me.

DINESH KUMAR SINGH, Presiding Officer

ubZ fnYyh] 1 uoEcj] 2023

.—vkS?kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947 (a1947 dk 14 ) dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj

ds izca/kr=] lac) fu;kstdks vkSj muds deZdkjks ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS?kksfxd fookn esa

dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS?kksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;

ds iapkV (47/2017) izdkf'kr djrh gSA

[la- ,y - 12025/01/2023- vkbZ vkj (ch-I)-91]

सलोनी, ईृ जनदेिक

New Delhi, the 1st November, 2023

S.O. 1735.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref.47/2017) of the Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Aurangabad as

shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of State Bank of India and their

workmen.

[No. L-12025/01/2023- IR(B.I)-91]

SALONI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

IN THE COURT OF JUDGE, 1st LABOUR COURT, AURANGABAD.

(Presided Over by SMT. M.Y. AMRUTKAR)

Ref-IDA/47/2017

( MHLC200009472016)

Between:

Dhansingh S/o. Bhikan Puse,

Age: 31 Years, Occ: Nil,

R/o. Bhadji

Tq Khultabad,Dist Aurangbad

… Second Party

and

1. The Branch Manager,

State Bank of India,

Branch Khultabad,

Tq. Khultabad, Dist Aurangabad

[भाग II—खण् ड 3(ii)]

भारत का राजृत्र : नवम् बर 4, 2023/कार्ततक 13, 1945

3911

2. The Assistant General Manager,

State Bank of India,

Region 1 Town Center, Aurangabad

...First Party

Advocates:

Shri. M.R. Singh for Second Party/Workman

Shri. Ruturaj Patil for First Party/Employer

Claim :- Reference under Section 2A (2) of the I.D. Act,1947.

AWARD

(Delivered on 27/11/2021)

The second party filed present Reference under Section 2A (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for

reinstatement in service with continuity and full back-wages w.e.f. 15/02/2017.

The brief facts of the case as under:

The second party was working as Daftary & Cash Peon on temporary basis on 22/10/2012 with first party for

10 years. The second party was worked with first party continuously for 240 days in each preceding year. The second

party was getting Rs. 7200/- towards salary. The Branch Manager sent proposal to sanction the post of part time

employee of skilled wages by letter dtd. 20.04.2016 and recommended the name of second party. However, on

15/02/2017 the services of the second party orally terminated by first party without following due procedure of law

prescribed in Section 25-F & 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The management were not taken cognizance

of demand notice issued by the second party to them. The second party sent a letter under section 2-A (2) of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to Central Labour Conciliation office at Pune and New Delhi for intervention and

commencement of Conciliation Proceeding but no response from both authorities. Therefore, second party approached

to this Court for adjudication. The second party prayed for reinstatement in service with full back wages

w.e.f. 15/02/2017.

The first party filed its Written Statement vide Ex.C-4. The first party contended that the second party was

working with first party on temporary basis. He performed the work related to cleaning branch premises, purchasing

stationary and Diesel. The first party denied that the second party worked with them from 22/10/2007. The first party

denied that the second party worked with them for 240 days continuously in any calendar year before termination.

Therefore, second party is not entitled for reinstatement and there is no question of back-wages. Hence, Reference

(IDA) may kindly be answered in negative.

After considering the contentions of both parties, my learned Predecessor framed issues vide Ex.O:3. They

are reproduced as under along with my findings thereon for the reasons given below.

Sr. No.

Issues

Findings

Whether the second party proves that his termination order dated 15.02.2017 is

illegal and liable to be set aside ?

In negative

Whether the second party proves that he is entitled for reinstatement in service along

with full back-wages and other consequential benefits ?

In negative

What Award ?

Reference is answered

in negative.

Reasons

The second party filed evidence affidavit vide Ex.U-12 in lieu of examination-in-chief and reiterated the

same facts as alleged in statement of claim. During the cross examination, he admitted that he was not issued with

any appointment letter by first party. He also admitted that he was appointed on temporary basis. The second party

further admitted that the first party has not published any advertisement in newspaper for recruitment.

The second party adduced documentary evidence on record vide Ex.U-3. These are bulky documents

contains Xerox Copies of bills, vouchers and delivery books, photographs and copy of proposal dtd.20/04/2016 sent

by Branch Manager to Assistant General Manager for sanction of post of part time employee, wherein, the name of

second party is mentioned. The documents filed by second party are xerox copies of document which are not proved

before Court.

Perused the entire documents 0n record, I have not found any document which shows that the second party

has completed 240 days continuous service with first party. It is settled position of law that initial burden lies on

3912

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : NOVEMBER 4, 2023/KARTIKA 13, 1945

[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

second party to prove that he worked for 240 days continuously with employer. If second party successfully proves

that he performed work for 240 days continuously with first party then provisions prescribed under section 25-F of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 are attracted.

The first party examined Mr. Sudhir kumar S/o. Niranjan Wakode. The second party cross examined the

witness but deposition of management witness deposed in cross examination not supported to the case of second

party.

Considering the oral and documentary evidence on record and arguments of both learned Counsels, it is not

in disputed that the second party worked with first party 0n temporary basis. The second party failed to prove that he

worked with first party for 240 days continuously in any calendar year before the date of termination. Therefore, while

terminating the services of second party, the first party has not bounded to follow the procedure laid down under

section 25-F of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Therefore, I answered issues no. 01 to 03 in negative and held that the

first party has not illegally terminated the services of the second party. Therefore, second party is not entitled to

reinstate in service along-with back-wages. With this I proceed to pass following Award.

Award

The Reference is answered in negative.

No order as to costs.

The copies of the Award be sent to the Appropriate Government for its publication.

M.Y.AMRUTKAR, Presiding Officer & Judge,

Labour Court-1, Aurangabad

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. MANOJ KUMAR

VERMA

Digitally signed by MANOJ

KUMAR VERMA

Date: 2023.11.21 19:10:14

+05'30'