Servants of Knowledge
Weekly Gazette of India · Government of India

This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

Published 20 January 2024

Ministry
This Gazette may contains Multiple Ministry / Organization
Department
This Gazette may contains Multiple Departments
Office
This Gazette may contains Multiple Offices
Gazetteid
CG-DL-W-24012024-251580
Identifier
in.gazette.central.w.2024-01-20.251580
Languages
English, Hindi
Published at
Original source ↗

click here for IIIF manifest

रजिस्ट्री सं. डी.एल. (एन) 04/0007/2003—05 REGD. NO. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05

सी.जी.-डी.एल.-सा.-24012024-251580

CG-DL-W-24012024-251580

xxxGIDHxxx

xxxGIDExxx

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक WEEKLY

सं. 02] नई दिल्ली, जनवरी 14—जनवरी 20, 2024, शनिवार/ पौष 24—पौष 30, 1945

No. 02] NEW DELHI, JANUARY 14— JANUARY 20, 2024, SATURDAY/PAUSHA 24–PAUSHA 30, 1945

इस भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह पृथक संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation

भाग II—खण्ड 3—उप-खण्ड (ii)

PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)

भारत सरकार के मंत्रालयों (रक्षा मंत्रालय को छोड़कर) द्वारा जारी किए गए सांविधिक आदेश और अधिसूचनाएं Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India (Other than the Ministry of Defence)

वित्त मंत्रालय

(वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग)

नई दिल्ली, 10 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 04.—बीमा विनियामक और विकास प्राधिकरण अधिनियम, 1999 (1999 का 41) की धारा 4 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, के न्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्द्वारा, वतर्मान में एसबीआई कै पिटल मार्के ट्स लिमिटेड में प्रतिनियुक्ति पर प्रबंध निदेशक एवं मुख्य कार्यकारी अधिकारी श्री राजय कु मार सिन्हा को चार लाख रुपए प्रतिमाह (आवास और कार की सुविधा के बिना) के समेकित वेतन पैके ज पर कार्यभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले हो, भारतीय बीमा विनियामक और विकास प्राधिकरण (इरडाई) में पूर्णकालिक सदस्य (वित्त एवं निवेश) नियुक्त करती है।

[फा.सं. आर-12011/01/2023-बीमा-I]

विनोद कु मार, अवर सचिव

163 GI/2024

(3)

4 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department of Financial Services)

New Delhi, the 10th January 2024

S.O. 04.—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 4 of the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority Act, 1999 (41 of 1999), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Rajay Kumar Sinha, presently on deputation as Managing Director & Chief Executive Officer, SBI Capital Markets Limited as Whole-Time Member (Finance & Investment) in the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI), on a consolidated pay package of four lakh rupees per month (without facility of house and car), for a period of three years from the date of assumption of charge of the post or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

[F. No. R-12011/01/2023-Ins.I]

VINOD KUMAR, Under Secy.

पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृ तिक गैस मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 18 दिसम्बर, 2023

का.आ. 05.—भारत सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि पश्चिम बंगाल राज्य में जगदीशपुर- हल्दिया और बोकारो-धामरा पाइपलाइन (JHBDPL) और स्पर पाईप लाईन के माध्यम से प्राकृ तिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड द्वारा, एक पाईपलाईन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

और भारत सरकार को उक्त पाईपलाईन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में, जिसमें उक्त पाईपलाईन बिछाए जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना मे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित है, उपयोग के अधिकार का अजॅन किया जाए;

अत: अव, भारत सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाईपलाईन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अजॅन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उस भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अजॅन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है;

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसके उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1) के अधीन भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियॅा साधारन जनता की अपलव्ध कर दी जाती है, 21 दिन के भीतर, भूमि के नीचे पाईपलाईन बिछाए जाने के संबंध में, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सके गा ।

जगदीशपुर-हल्दिया -बोकारो-धामरा पाइपलाइन और स्पर पाईप लाईन प्रोजेक्ट, 3 बी सेक्सन, पश्चिम बंगाल

अनुसूची

राज्ज : पश्चिम बंगाल

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
पुरबा मेदिनीपुर 58 एल.आर 1008 00 00 88
1001 00 02 99
990 00 02 54
989 00 00 20
987 00 01 34
993 00 01 35
995 00 00 47

[फा. सं. एल –14014-148-2022-जी. पी.-II (ई-43457)]

रामजीलाल मीना, अवर सचिव5 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945

MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2023

S.O. 05.—Whereas it appears to Government of India that it is necessary in public interest that for transportation of natural gas through Jagadishpur-Haldia & Bokaro - Dhamra Pipeline (JHBDPL) & spur pipeline, in the State of West Bengal, a pipeline should be laid by GAIL (India) Limited;

And, whereas it appears to Government of India that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the Right of User in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;

Now, therefore, in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962, (50 of 1962) Government of India hereby declares its intention to acquire the Right of User therein;

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty-one days from the date of which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of User therein for laying of the pipeline under the land to Competent Authority, GAIL (India) Limited.

JAGADISHPUR-HALDIA-BOKARO-DHAMRA & SPUR PIPELINE PROJECT, 3B SECTION, WEST

BENGAL

SCHEDULE

District Block Mauza J.L. No. Map Survey No. Area
Hect. Are Sq. mtr.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Purba Medinipur Sutahata-2 Kumarpur 58 LR 1008 00 00 88
1001 00 02 99
990 00 02 54
989 00 00 20
987 00 01 34
993 00 01 35
995 00 00 47

[F. No. L-14014-148-2022-GP-II (E-43457)]

RAMJI LAL MEENA, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 18 दिसम्बर, 2023

का.आ. 06.—जबकि भारत सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि असम राज्य में नार्थ - इस्ट नेचुरल गैस पाइपलाइन ग्रिड परियोजना के गुवाहाटी – नुमालीगढ़ - दीमापुर खंड के माध्यम से प्राकृ तिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए मैसर्स इंद्रधनुष गैस ग्रिड लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

और भारत सरकार को उक्त पाइप लाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता हे कि उस भूमि में, जिसमे उक्त पाइप लाइन बिछाए जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना में संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित है, उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए;

अतः अब, भारत सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइप लाइन (भूमि मे उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) कि धारा 3 कि उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उस भूमि मे उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती हे;

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उकत अनुसूची मे वर्णित भूमि में हितबदध है, उस तारिख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1) के अधीन भारत के राजपत्र मे यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियों साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध कर6 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] दी जाती है, 21 दिन के भीतर, भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने की संबंध मे, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, मैसर्स इंद्रधनुष गैस ग्रिड लिमिटेड, असम राज्य, को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सके गा |

अनुसूची

जिला : गोलाघाट राज्य : असम
सर्क ल मौज़ा गाँव दाग नं क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेअर आर वर्ग मीटर
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
सरूपथार सरूपथार ब ेबेजिया 238 00 15 25
291 00 12 63
293 00 02 61
सरूपथार सरूपथार बरोघोरिया 547 00 22 80
548 00 17 94
549 00 13 68
537 00 04 81
553 00 23 22
534 00 17 76
560 00 16 08
616 00 03 12
562 00 28 48
564 00 13 43
618 00 18 63
600 00 22 43
535 00 23 22

[फा. सं. एल –14014/251/2022-जीपी- II (ई–45398)]

रामजीलाल मीना, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2023

S.O. 06.—Whereas it appears to the Government of India that it is necessary in public interest that for transportation of natural gas through Guwahati – Numaligarh – Dimapur Section of North - East Natural Gas Pipeline Grid Project in the State of Assam, a pipeline should be laid by M/s Indradhanush Gas Grid Limited;

And, whereas it appears to Government of India that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the Right of User in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;

Now, therefore, in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962, (50 of 1962) Government of India hereby declares its intention to acquire the Right of User therein;

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty-one days from the date of which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of User7 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 therein for laying of the pipeline under the land to Competent Authority, M/s Indradhanush Gas Grid Limited, State of Assam.

SCHEDULE

District: Golaghat State: Assam
Circle Mouza Name of Village Dag No. Area
Hectare Are Square Metre
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
Sarupathar Sarupathar Bebejia 238 00 15 25
291 00 12 63
293 00 02 61
Sarupathar Sarupathar Baroghoriya 547 00 22 80
548 00 17 94
549 00 13 68
537 00 04 81
553 00 23 22
534 00 17 76
560 00 16 08
616 00 03 12
562 00 28 48
564 00 13 43
618 00 18 63
600 00 22 43
535 00 23 22

[F. No. L-14014-251-2022-GP-II (E-45398)]

RAMJI LAL MEENA, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 18 दिसम्बर, 2023

का.आ. 07.—जब कि भारत सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि पश्चिम बंगाल राज्य में कनाई चट्टा – श्रीरामपुर प्राकृ तिक गैस पाइपलाइन खंड-1 के माध्यम से प्राकृ तिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए मैसर्स हुगली पाइपलाइन प्राइवेट लिमिटेड (एचपीपीएल), एच एनर्जी और एच एनर्जी ईस्ट कोस्ट प्राइवेट लिमिटेड के संघ द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिये।

और भारत सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में, जिस मे उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाऐ जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना में संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित है, उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए ।

अतःअब, भारत सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उस भूमि मे उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है ।

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची मे वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारिख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1) के आधीन भारत के राजपत्र मे यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध कर दी जाती है, 21 दिन के भीतर, भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने की सम्बंध मे, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, मैसर्स हुगली पाइपलाइन प्राइवेट लिमिटेड (एचपीपीएल), एच एनर्जी और एच एनर्जी ईस्ट कोस्ट प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, पश्चिम बंगाल राज्य, को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सके गा |8 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] अनुसूची

जिला : उत्तर 24 परगना राज्य : पश्चिम बंगाल

थाना मौजा थाना नं दाग नं क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेअर-आर-वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5
बनगा गोपीनाथपुर १३७ 1774 00 07 93
` 1633 00 07 85
1634 00 09 84
1635 00 00 10
1619 00 16 41
1618 00 01 40
1613 00 12 60
1616 00 00 85
1614 00 01 10
1427 00 05 40
1432 00 00 16
1428 00 06 15
1430 00 00 55
1429 00 04 03
1411 00 04 54
1407 00 00 40
1412 00 03 98
1413 00 04 45
1423 00 00 30
1414 00 05 65
1417 00 00 73
1415 00 03 40
1416 00 02 11
1382 00 08 01
1380 00 00 25
1383 00 01 75
1394 00 03 80
1384 00 03 05
1393 00 00 33
1392 00 07 53
1092 00 01 00
1391 00 08 00
1093 00 06 30
1097 00 06 70
1098 00 02 31
1099 00 04 23
1106 00 04 99
1108 00 05 25
1105 00 03 01
1109 00 08 58
1116 00 00 51
1117 00 04 74
1114 00 00 10
1121 00 17 18
1122 00 01 74
1124 00 08 89
2167 00 01 03
2166 00 08 04
2168 00 01 33
2169 00 10 34
2194 00 00 52
2193 00 07 38
2192 00 00 42
2195 00 03 85
2136 00 01 88
2204 00 07 02
2196 00 00 10
2205 00 12 78
2135 00 00 12
2131 00 00 30
2212 00 08 39
2211 00 01 84
2213 00 03 94
2217 00 00 86
2215 00 00 98
2216 00 05 77
2218 00 04 46
2497 00 00 10
2464 00 13 25
2463 00 00 10
2465 00 03 46
2462 00 02 43
2469 00 08 51
2467 00 02 00
2470 00 02 90
2476 00 01 29
2468 00 00 67
2477 00 00 10
2475 00 02 15
2474 00 03 63
2472 00 04 95
2473 00 01 21
2446 00 00 82
2601 00 02 64
2604 00 10 11
2603 00 00 19
2632 00 00 10
2631 00 09 37
2605 00 04 34
2630 00 01 49
2629 00 05 27
2628 00 05 25
2625 00 03 41
2624 00 05 99
2623 00 01 36
2785 00 07 84
2784 00 01 25
2786 00 13 09
2788 00 02 81
2792 00 00 61
2791 00 04 05
2790 00 04 83
2763 00 06 31
2838 00 00 26
2762 00 07 38
2761 00 06 55
2860 00 07 73
2859 00 01 46
2861 00 00 87
2862 00 00 78
2858 00 02 29
2867 00 04 76
3505 00 01 13
3513 00 00 60
2866 00 02 71
2865 00 05 12
2874 00 04 28
2875 00 03 43
2878 00 04 62
2959 00 04 54
2960 00 06 58
2885 00 02 81
2888 00 03 28
2889 00 00 72
गईघाटा गाझीपूर ४ 849 00 04 45
847 00 09 70
848 00 01 36
846 00 00 23
825 00 00 19
827 00 01 58
840 00 07 36
841 00 03 20
839 00 01 74
905 00 07 45
904 00 02 04
906 00 04 20
910 00 04 57
911 00 02 95
912 00 04 22
343 00 00 10
344 00 01 45
345 00 03 80
913 00 02 45
346 00 05 83
349 00 05 00
367 00 01 78
370 00 02 48
371 00 07 55
372/720 00 01 33
372 00 00 10
379 00 04 48
374 00 09 60
454 00 03 54
453 00 07 17
452 00 07 42
463 00 00 10
464 00 06 87
465 00 05 93
466 00 00 21
467 00 07 53
469 00 01 67
470 00 02 98
481 00 09 00
483 00 01 78
484 00 06 17
486 00 01 51
485 00 04 19
604/731 00 10 17
604 00 00 99
603 00 06 08
600 00 05 22
601 00 00 14
589 00 06 50
597 00 00 31
596 00 02 73
595 00 11 06
615 00 00 57
629 00 06 27
594 00 01 20
630 00 01 67
628 00 11 24
627 00 07 64
632 00 01 54
658 00 08 49
625/723 00 00 45
657 00 00 10
656 00 10 21
655 00 04 53
660 00 01 25
654 00 01 89
652 00 03 80
653 00 04 14
648 00 01 62
650 00 05 68
649 00 06 57
गईघाटा बांगलानी १ 1212 00 00 21
1211 00 10 09
1206 00 02 62
1213 00 01 87
1204 00 00 62
1203 00 10 64
1214 00 01 03
गईघाटा शेरगढ़ ३ 854 00 03 14
860 00 07 15
878 00 00 71
879 00 10 08
880 00 05 18
881 00 04 25
882 00 01 16
905 00 10 98
886 00 47 60
903 00 03 74
902 00 03 13
गईघाटा चन्दीगर २४ 1 00 12 94
1/509 00 00 10
1/510 00 03 45
178 00 06 04
180 00 05 70
274 00 05 53
273 00 00 53
270 00 03 20
272 00 04 18
271 00 00 35
278 00 09 08
279 00 10 69
265 00 01 93
264 00 04 78
263 00 08 31
256 00 03 88
261 00 00 69
257 00 02 45
258 00 02 94
259 00 03 99
260 00 00 19
344 00 05 65
343 00 05 08
342 00 09 64
341 00 04 20
340 00 04 24
339 00 01 20
338 00 04 72
360 00 05 08
361 00 00 26
381 00 03 46
380 00 00 10
384 00 06 94
379 00 03 29
378 00 06 94
377 00 01 79
375 00 00 35
374 00 03 38
373 00 01 38
369 00 08 01
368 00 00 10
370 00 09 20
434 00 03 40
433 00 04 11
437 00 01 72
436 00 00 21
438 00 11 54
439 00 01 60
440 00 00 10
1/516 00 02 49
गईघाटा ट ेंगरा २५ 1204 00 02 83
1205 00 00 40
1206 00 07 41
1203 00 05 97
1202 00 00 31
1207 00 01 06
1210 00 05 05
1208 00 06 88
1209 00 00 10
1266 00 00 49
1253 00 05 42
1254 00 00 23
1251 00 02 07
1252 00 07 26
1250 00 00 55
1249 00 05 37
1248 00 04 79
1247 00 03 89
1258 00 07 76
1040 00 00 87
1036 00 08 05
1306 00 00 24
1035 00 00 78
1033 00 14 48
1034 00 02 63
1017 00 09 26
1018 00 04 36
1001 00 05 73
1002 00 02 02
989 00 07 52
988 00 04 02
1003 00 00 56
1004 00 00 10
987 00 04 61
985 00 00 11
1006 00 04 83
984 00 16 11
983 00 00 20
661 00 15 87
गईघाटा गईघाटा २८ 726 00 04 31
722 00 09 60
727 00 04 89
693 00 01 61
728 00 03 77
729 00 03 27
730 00 00 77
828 00 01 23
772 00 13 99
827 00 00 60
826 00 00 10
773 00 05 74
817 00 07 57
816 00 07 72
775 00 05 26
776 00 02 57
778 00 00 10
777 00 01 97
811 00 04 57
805 00 04 01
804 00 09 04
801 00 09 45
802 00 02 27
885 00 06 71
887 00 01 46
886 00 05 10
888 00 00 73
943 00 04 34
945 00 00 97
944 00 07 68
938 00 06 94
937 00 06 06
575 00 00 83
932 00 06 85
930 00 08 19
929 00 10 52
996 00 03 36
997 00 00 92
1021 00 05 67
1020 00 00 73
1024 00 04 59
1022 00 00 55
1023 00 00 78
1025 00 01 17
1025/1323 00 03 30
1026 00 03 83
1027 00 00 17
1026/1324 00 00 44
1034 00 00 27
1035 00 05 29
1033 00 00 12
1036 00 00 83
1037 00 06 65
1038 00 04 21
1038/1325 00 01 80
1049 00 00 16
1181 00 17 60
1179 00 01 66
1182 00 14 45
1185 00 03 08
गईघाटा गुटरी ४१ 59 00 00 10
60 00 03 84
61 00 04 56
63 00 00 10
62 00 02 93
1238 00 01 22
1237 00 06 38
1241 00 00 34
1242 00 00 39
1244 00 05 55
1245 00 04 53
1246 00 00 10
1249 00 02 14
1272/1833 00 01 58
1249/1902 00 04 05
1272/1901 00 00 43
1271 00 01 86
1270 00 02 82
1269 00 02 60
1268 00 04 49
1267 00 01 69
1266 00 00 12
9 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 10 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 11 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 12 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 13 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 14 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 15 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 16 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 17 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945

[फा. सं. एल –14014/35/2023-जीपी-II (ई-48370)]

रामजीलाल मीना, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2023

S.O. 07.—Whereas it appears to the Government of India that it is necessary in public interest that for transportation of natural gas through Kanai Chatta – Srirampur" Natural Gas Pipeline (Phase-1) Project in the State of West Bengal, a pipeline should be laid by Hooghly Pipelines Private Limited (HPPL), a Consortium of H-Energy and H-Energy East Coast Pvt Ltd.

And, whereas it appears to Government of India that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the Right of User in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;

Now, therefore, in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962, (50 of 1962) Government of India hereby declares its intention to acquire the Right of User therein;

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date of which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of User therein for laying of the pipeline under the land to Competent Authority, Hooghly Pipelines Private Limited (HPPL), a Consortium of H-Energy and H-Energy East Coast Pvt Ltd., State of West Bengal.

SCHEDULE

District : North 24 Pargana State : West Bengal

Thana Mouza JL No. Dag No. Area
Hect.- Are - Sq. mtr.
1 2 3 4 5
Banga Gopinathpur 137 1774 00 07 93
1633 00 07 85
1634 00 09 84
1635 00 00 10
1619 00 16 41
1618 00 01 40
1613 00 12 60
1616 00 00 85
1614 00 01 10
1427 00 05 40
1432 00 00 16
1428 00 06 15
1430 00 00 55
1429 00 04 03
1411 00 04 54
1407 00 00 40
1412 00 03 98
1413 00 04 45
1423 00 00 30
1414 00 05 65
1417 00 00 73
1415 00 03 40
1416 00 02 11
1382 00 08 01
1380 00 00 25
1383 00 01 75
1394 00 03 80
1384 00 03 05
1393 00 00 33
1392 00 07 53
1092 00 01 00
1391 00 08 00
1093 00 06 30
1097 00 06 70
1098 00 02 31
1099 00 04 23
1106 00 04 99
1108 00 05 25
1105 00 03 01
1109 00 08 58
1116 00 00 51
1117 00 04 74
1114 00 00 10
1121 00 17 18
1122 00 01 74
1124 00 08 89
2167 00 01 03
2166 00 08 04
2168 00 01 33
2169 00 10 34
2194 00 00 52
2193 00 07 38
2192 00 00 42
2195 00 03 85
2136 00 01 88
2204 00 07 02
2196 00 00 10
2205 00 12 78
2135 00 00 12
2131 00 00 30
2212 00 08 39
2211 00 01 84
2213 00 03 94
2217 00 00 86
2215 00 00 98
2216 00 05 77
2218 00 04 46
2497 00 00 10
2464 00 13 25
2463 00 00 10
2465 00 03 46
2462 00 02 43
2469 00 08 51
2467 00 02 00
2470 00 02 90
2476 00 01 29
2468 00 00 67
2477 00 00 10
2475 00 02 15
2474 00 03 63
2472 00 04 95
2473 00 01 21
2446 00 00 82
2601 00 02 64
2604 00 10 11
2603 00 00 19
2632 00 00 10
2631 00 09 37
2605 00 04 34
2630 00 01 49
2629 00 05 27
2628 00 05 25
2625 00 03 41
2624 00 05 99
2623 00 01 36
2785 00 07 84
2784 00 01 25
2786 00 13 09
2788 00 02 81
2792 00 00 61
2791 00 04 05
2790 00 04 83
2763 00 06 31
2838 00 00 26
2762 00 07 38
2761 00 06 55
2860 00 07 73
2859 00 01 46
2861 00 00 87
2862 00 00 78
2858 00 02 29
2867 00 04 76
3505 00 01 13
3513 00 00 60
2866 00 02 71
2865 00 05 12
2874 00 04 28
2875 00 03 43
2878 00 04 62
2959 00 04 54
2960 00 06 58
2885 00 02 81
2888 00 03 28
2889 00 00 72
Gaighata Gazipur 4 849 00 04 45
847 00 09 70
848 00 01 36
846 00 00 23
825 00 00 19
827 00 01 58
840 00 07 36
841 00 03 20
839 00 01 74
905 00 07 45
904 00 02 04
906 00 04 20
910 00 04 57
911 00 02 95
912 00 04 22
343 00 00 10
344 00 01 45
345 00 03 80
913 00 02 45
346 00 05 83
349 00 05 00
367 00 01 78
370 00 02 48
371 00 07 55
372/720 00 01 33
372 00 00 10
379 00 04 48
374 00 09 60
454 00 03 54
453 00 07 17
452 00 07 42
463 00 00 10
464 00 06 87
465 00 05 93
466 00 00 21
467 00 07 53
469 00 01 67
470 00 02 98
481 00 09 00
483 00 01 78
484 00 06 17
486 00 01 51
485 00 04 19
604/731 00 10 17
604 00 00 99
603 00 06 08
600 00 05 22
601 00 00 14
589 00 06 50
597 00 00 31
596 00 02 73
595 00 11 06
615 00 00 57
629 00 06 27
594 00 01 20
630 00 01 67
628 00 11 24
627 00 07 64
632 00 01 54
658 00 08 49
625/723 00 00 45
657 00 00 10
656 00 10 21
655 00 04 53
660 00 01 25
654 00 01 89
652 00 03 80
653 00 04 14
648 00 01 62
650 00 05 68
649 00 06 57
Gaighata Banglani 1 1212 00 00 21
1211 00 10 09
1206 00 02 62
1213 00 01 87
1204 00 00 62
1203 00 10 64
1214 00 01 03
Gaighata Shergarh 3 854 00 03 14
860 00 07 15
878 00 00 71
879 00 10 08
880 00 05 18
881 00 04 25
882 00 01 16
905 00 10 98
886 00 47 60
903 00 03 74
902 00 03 13
Gaighata Chandigar 24 1 00 12 94
1/509 00 00 10
1/510 00 03 45
178 00 06 04
180 00 05 70
274 00 05 53
273 00 00 53
270 00 03 20
272 00 04 18
271 00 00 35
278 00 09 08
279 00 10 69
265 00 01 93
264 00 04 78
263 00 08 31
256 00 03 88
261 00 00 69
257 00 02 45
258 00 02 94
259 00 03 99
260 00 00 19
344 00 05 65
343 00 05 08
342 00 09 64
341 00 04 20
340 00 04 24
339 00 01 20
338 00 04 72
360 00 05 08
361 00 00 26
381 00 03 46
380 00 00 10
384 00 06 94
379 00 03 29
378 00 06 94
377 00 01 79
375 00 00 35
374 00 03 38
373 00 01 38
369 00 08 01
368 00 00 10
370 00 09 20
434 00 03 40
433 00 04 11
437 00 01 72
436 00 00 21
438 00 11 54
439 00 01 60
440 00 00 10
1/516 00 02 49
Gaighata Tengra 25 1204 00 02 83
1205 00 00 40
1206 00 07 41
1203 00 05 97
1202 00 00 31
1207 00 01 06
1210 00 05 05
1208 00 06 88
1209 00 00 10
1266 00 00 49
1253 00 05 42
1254 00 00 23
1251 00 02 07
1252 00 07 26
1250 00 00 55
1249 00 05 37
1248 00 04 79
1247 00 03 89
1258 00 07 76
1040 00 00 87
1036 00 08 05
1306 00 00 24
1035 00 00 78
1033 00 14 48
1034 00 02 63
1017 00 09 26
1018 00 04 36
1001 00 05 73
1002 00 02 02
989 00 07 52
988 00 04 02
1003 00 00 56
1004 00 00 10
987 00 04 61
985 00 00 11
1006 00 04 83
984 00 16 11
983 00 00 20
661 00 15 87
Gaighata Gaighata 28 726 00 04 31
722 00 09 60
727 00 04 89
693 00 01 61
728 00 03 77
729 00 03 27
730 00 00 77
828 00 01 23
772 00 13 99
827 00 00 60
826 00 00 10
773 00 05 74
817 00 07 57
816 00 07 72
775 00 05 26
776 00 02 57
778 00 00 10
777 00 01 97
811 00 04 57
805 00 04 01
804 00 09 04
801 00 09 45
802 00 02 27
885 00 06 71
887 00 01 46
886 00 05 10
888 00 00 73
943 00 04 34
945 00 00 97
944 00 07 68
938 00 06 94
937 00 06 06
575 00 00 83
932 00 06 85
930 00 08 19
929 00 10 52
996 00 03 36
997 00 00 92
1021 00 05 67
1020 00 00 73
1024 00 04 59
1022 00 00 55
1023 00 00 78
1025 00 01 17
1025/1323 00 03 30
1026 00 03 83
1027 00 00 17
1026/1324 00 00 44
1034 00 00 27
1035 00 05 29
1033 00 00 12
1036 00 00 83
1037 00 06 65
1038 00 04 21
1038/1325 00 01 80
1049 00 00 16
1181 00 17 60
1179 00 01 66
1182 00 14 45
1185 00 03 08
Gaighata Gutri 41 59 00 00 10
60 00 03 84
61 00 04 56
63 00 00 10
62 00 02 93
1238 00 01 22
1237 00 06 38
1241 00 00 34
1242 00 00 39
1244 00 05 55
1245 00 04 53
1246 00 00 10
1249 00 02 14
1272/1833 00 01 58
1249/1902 00 04 05
1272/1901 00 00 43
1271 00 01 86
1270 00 02 82
1269 00 02 60
1268 00 04 49
1267 00 01 69
1266 00 00 12
18 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 19 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 20 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 21 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 22 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 23 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 24 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 25 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 26 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

[F. No. L-14014/35/2023-GP-II (E-48370)]

RAMJI LAL MEENA, Under Secy.

27 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945

नई दिल्ली, 18 दिसम्बर, 2023

का.आ. 08.—जब कि भारत सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि पश्चिम बंगाल राज्य में कनाई चट्टा – श्रीरामपुर प्राकृ तिक गैस पाइपलाइन खंड-1 के माध्यम से प्राकृ तिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए मैसर्स हुगली पाइपलाइन प्राइवेट लिमिटेड (एचपीपीएल), एच एनर्जी और एच एनर्जी ईस्ट कोस्ट प्राइवेट लिमिटेड के संघ द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिये।

और भारत सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में, जिस मे उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाऐ जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना में संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित है, उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए ।

अतःअब, भारत सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइप लाइन (भूमि मे उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उस भूमि मे उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है ।

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची मे वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1) के आधीन भारत के राजपत्र मे यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध कर दी जाती है, 21 दिन के भीतर, भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने की सम्बंध मे, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, मैसर्स हुगली पाइपलाइन प्राइवेट लिमिटेड (एचपीपीएल), एच एनर्जी और एच एनर्जी ईस्ट कोस्ट प्राइवेट लिमिटेड, पश्चिम बंगाल राज्य, को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सके गा |

कनाई चट्टा – श्रीरामपुर प्राकृ तिक गैस पाइपलाइन परियोजना

जिला : नदिया राज्य : पश्चिम बंगाल
थाना गाँव/मौजा थाना नं नक्शा प्लॉट नं क्षेत्रफल
एकड़ हैक्टर
1 2 3 4 5 6
चकदह श्रीकृ ष्णपुर चार १८९ आर.एस. 1 0.323 0.1307
184 0.254 0.1028
183 0.090 0.0364
182 0.135 0.0546
20 0.001 0.0004
21 0.010 0.0040
22 0.040 0.0162
23 0.055 0.0223
26 0.122 0.0494
27 0.045 0.0182
28 0.077 0.0312
29 0.072 0.0291
30 0.068 0.0275
31 0.094 0.0380
32 0.117 0.0473
33 0.102 0.0413
34 0.085 0.0344
35 0.080 0.0324
36 0.090 0.0364
28 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
  53       0.091  0.0368
  58       0.050  0.0202
  59       0.054  0.0219
  61       0.122  0.0494
  62       0.150  0.0607
  63       0.083  0.0336
  65       0.038  0.0154
  66       0.032  0.0130
  67       0.099  0.0401
  81       0.220  0.0890
  314      0.050  0.0202
  315      0.118  0.0478
  316      0.126  0.0510
  317      0.059  0.0239
318/768    0.059  0.0239
  320      0.116  0.0469
  325      0.131  0.0530
  326      0.144  0.0583
  329      0.139  0.0563
  331      0.067  0.0271
  338      0.047  0.0190
  339      0.012  0.0049
  346      0.090  0.0364
  349      0.094  0.0380
  350      0.262  0.1060
  353      0.061  0.0247
  354      0.137  0.0554
  357      0.099  0.0401
  358      0.077  0.0312
  361      0.092  0.0372
  362      0.042  0.0170
  363      0.054  0.0219
  364      0.121  0.0490
  365      0.174  0.0704
  366      0.112  0.0453
  367      0.083  0.0336
  368      0.084  0.0340
  369      0.210  0.0850
  370      0.097  0.0393
  457      0.355  0.1437
  763      0.025  0.0101
29 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945
   480      0.192  0.0777
   479      0.148  0.0599
   478      0.150  0.0607
   477      0.150  0.0607
   476      0.131  0.0530
   475      0.107  0.0433
   474      0.054  0.0219
   473      0.057  0.0231
   472      0.047  0.0190
   471      0.122  0.0494
   470      0.084  0.0340
   469      0.046  0.0186
   468      0.123  0.0498
   467      0.041  0.0166
   466      0.095  0.0384
   465      0.130  0.0526
   464      0.036  0.0146
   463      0.035  0.0142
   462      0.046  0.0186
   461      0.044  0.0178
   460      0.048  0.0194
   459      0.058  0.0235
   458      0.055  0.0223
  1292      0.080  0.0324
  1293      0.095  0.0384
  1294      0.120  0.0486
  1295      0.202  0.0817
  1296      0.111  0.0449
  1297      0.147  0.0595
  1298      0.068  0.0275
  1299      0.015  0.0061
  1503      0.080  0.0324
1781/2080   0.010  0.0040
1810/2083   0.015  0.0061
  1781      0.209  0.0846
  1780      0.045  0.0182
  1779      0.083  0.0336
  1778      0.075  0.0304
  1773      0.201  0.0813
  1771      0.214  0.0866
30 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
  1750      0.204  0.0826
  1751      0.085  0.0344
  1752      0.075  0.0304
  1741      0.105  0.0425
  1742      0.098  0.0397
  1740      0.060  0.0243
  1726      0.116  0.0469
  1725      0.107  0.0433
  1703      0.106  0.0429
  1702      0.093  0.0376
  1701      0.085  0.0344
  1693      0.069  0.0279
  1694      0.054  0.0219
  1696      0.225  0.0911
1695/2111   0.007  0.0028
1682/2110   0.014  0.0057
  1681      0.079  0.0320
  1680      0.098  0.0397
  1682      0.020  0.0081
  1678      0.106  0.0429
  1672      0.254  0.1028
  1668      0.086  0.0348
  1667      0.075  0.0304
  1666      0.088  0.0356
  1662      0.106  0.0429
  1648      0.317  0.1283
  1620      0.025  0.0101
  1621      0.027  0.0109
  1622      0.024  0.0097
  1623      0.029  0.0117
  1624      0.025  0.0101
  1645      0.090  0.0364
  1625      0.092  0.0372
  1644      0.005  0.0020
  1643      0.035  0.0142
  1642      0.050  0.0202
  1641      0.007  0.0028
  1640      0.320  0.1295
  1639      0.128  0.0518
  1638      0.095  0.0384
  1637      0.020  0.0081
31 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945
2027 0.088 0.0356
2024 0.050 0.0202
2023 0.001 0.0004
2025 0.195 0.0789
2026 0.070 0.0283
2019 0.035 0.0142
2014 0.150 0.0607
2028 0.026 0.0105
2030 0.410 0.1659
2066 0.005 0.0020
2031 0.020 0.0081
2032 0.015 0.0061
2033 0.001 0.0004
2065 0.065 0.0263
2064 0.074 0.0299
2063 0.253 0.1024
2062 0.081 0.0328
2061 0.155 0.0627
2060 0.158 0.0639
चकदह श्रीकृ ष्णपुर चार १८९ एल.आर. 3742 0.233 0.0943
3741 0.197 0.0797
3740 0.167 0.0676
3739 0.273 0.1105
3762 0.045 0.0182
3763 0.038 0.0154
3764 0.040 0.0162
3765 0.040 0.0162
3786 0.038 0.0154
3785 0.075 0.0304
3784 0.130 0.0526
3783 0.060 0.0243
3782 0.075 0.0304
3781 0.245 0.0992
3790 0.068 0.0275
3791 0.048 0.0194
3792 0.045 0.0182
3796 0.034 0.0138
3797 0.035 0.0142
3801 0.040 0.0162
3802 0.027 0.0109
3805 0.048 0.0194
3806 0.038 0.0154
3807 0.068 0.0275
3812 0.027 0.0109
3813 0.024 0.0097
3814 0.027 0.0109
3815 0.035 0.0142
3818 0.046 0.0186
3844 0.027 0.0109
3843 0.055 0.0223
3842 0.057 0.0231
3841 0.460 0.1862
3830 0.005 0.0020
3839 0.046 0.0186
3831 0.110 0.0445
3832 0.080 0.0324
3837 0.035 0.0142
3838 0.025 0.0101
3859 0.062 0.0251
3886 0.050 0.0202
3885 0.052 0.0210
3884 0.035 0.0142
3883 0.020 0.0081
3882 0.025 0.0101
3881 0.055 0.0223
3880 0.090 0.0364
3879 0.060 0.0243
3878 0.007 0.0028
3892 0.425 0.1720
3893 0.019 0.0077
3888 0.002 0.0008
3966 0.018 0.0073
3891 0.128 0.0518
3967 0.010 0.0040
चकदह प्रिय नगर ३९ एल.आर. 571 0.020 0.0081
572 0.024 0.0097
569 0.041 0.0166
568 0.072 0.0291
574 0.155 0.0627
575 0.186 0.0753
580 0.097 0.0393
583 0.103 0.0417
582 0.146 0.0591
637 0.073 0.0295
639 0.178 0.0720
638 0.010 0.0041
640 0.034 0.0138
668 0.041 0.0166
667 0.201 0.0813
664 0.019 0.0077
666 0.001 0.0004
665 0.215 0.0870
672 0.035 0.0142
676 0.117 0.0474
673 0.001 0.0004
675 0.147 0.0595
680 0.128 0.0518
679 0.080 0.0324
688 0.043 0.0174
689 0.046 0.0186
690 0.162 0.0656
695 0.083 0.0336
696 0.033 0.0134
694 0.071 0.0287
697 0.054 0.0219
चकदह चन्दूरिया ३८ एल.आर. 1406 0.093 0.0376
1405 0.071 0.0287
1404 0.010 0.0041
1407 0.005 0.0020
1410 0.248 0.1004
1411 0.200 0.0809
1409 0.028 0.0113
1431 0.226 0.0915
1426 0.082 0.0332
1425 0.141 0.0571
1420 0.001 0.0004
1421 0.037 0.0150
1423 0.084 0.0340
1424 0.073 0.0295
1521 0.092 0.0372
1522 0.010 0.0041
1523 0.223 0.0903
1524 0.221 0.0894
1525 0.064 0.0259
1509 0.030 0.0121
1505 0.125 0.0506
1506 0.120 0.0486
1504 0.041 0.0166
1507 0.258 0.1044
1495 0.030 0.0121
1496 0.150 0.0607
1480 0.022 0.0089
1479 0.055 0.0223
1478 0.094 0.0380
1476 0.035 0.0142
1477 0.158 0.0639
1475 0.242 0.0979
1658 0.011 0.0045
1474 0.021 0.0085
1659 0.161 0.0652
चकदह कौतुक पूर ९७ एल.आर. 345 0.026 0.0105
344 0.151 0.0611
342 0.045 0.0182
343 0.145 0.0587
340 0.055 0.0223
333 0.340 0.1376
334 0.033 0.0134
337 0.082 0.0332
336 0.014 0.0057
391 0.083 0.0336
211 0.142 0.0575
392 0.001 0.0004
209 0.001 0.0004
210 0.146 0.0591
208 0.014 0.0057
207 0.152 0.0615
206 0.096 0.0389
194 0.123 0.0498
195 0.094 0.0380
193 0.155 0.0627
191 0.038 0.0154
1 0.110 0.0445
190 0.061 0.0247
188 0.146 0.0591
729 0.035 0.0142
730 0.203 0.0822
732 0.095 0.0385
चकदह उचित पूर ९८ एल.आर. 3 0.010 0.0041
5 0.101 0.0409
7 0.142 0.0575
270 0.152 0.0615
269 0.143 0.0579
273 0.196 0.0793
274 0.015 0.0061
277 0.379 0.1534
276 0.056 0.0227
282 0.151 0.0611
261 0.029 0.0117
254 0.236 0.0955
255 0.001 0.0004
256 0.078 0.0316
241 0.214 0.0866
257 0.033 0.0134
240 0.005 0.0020
239 0.204 0.0826
259 0.013 0.0053
238 0.109 0.0441
160 0.212 0.0858
161 0.127 0.0514
162 0.064 0.0259
163 0.150 0.0607
232 0.005 0.0020
164 0.003 0.0012
224 0.216 0.0874
165/556 0.001 0.0004
223 0.039 0.0158
226 0.080 0.0324
225 0.019 0.0077
227 0.012 0.0049
222 0.145 0.0587
228 0.056 0.0227
515 0.013 0.0053
516 0.104 0.0421
514 0.093 0.0376
513 0.081 0.0328
512 0.076 0.0308
517 0.005 0.0020
511 0.095 0.0385
511/557 0.026 0.0105
508 0.122 0.0494
507 0.091 0.0368
527 0.102 0.0413
506 0.001 0.0004
532 0.172 0.0696
533 0.107 0.0433
531 0.003 0.0012
534 0.132 0.0534
535 0.105 0.0425
530 0.020 0.0081
चकदह रामेश्वर पूर १०० एल.आर. 20 0.231 0.0935
21 0.154 0.0623
22 0.003 0.0012
45 0.064 0.0259
16 0.120 0.0486
57 0.034 0.0138
46 0.047 0.0190
48 0.105 0.0425
49 0.075 0.0304
50 0.171 0.0692
40 0.119 0.0482
39 0.178 0.0720
51 0.010 0.0041
189 0.031 0.0126
190 0.173 0.0700
185 0.130 0.0526
204 0.215 0.0870
205 0.135 0.0546
224 0.121 0.0490
225 0.001 0.0004
223 0.057 0.0231
226 0.135 0.0546
222 0.177 0.0716
276 0.002 0.0008
277 0.205 0.0830
278 0.025 0.0101
281 0.363 0.1469
282 0.015 0.0061
293 0.502 0.2032
313 0.110 0.0445
314 0.089 0.0360
319 0.002 0.0008
318 0.019 0.0077
317 0.265 0.1073
334 0.335 0.1356
335 0.163 0.0660
337 0.009 0.0036
336 0.017 0.0069
चकदह हरिस पूर १०१ 539 0.119 0.0482
538 0.001 0.0004
542 0.214 0.0866
543 0.026 0.0105
541 0.020 0.0081
544 0.093 0.0376
545 0.170 0.0688
546 0.002 0.0008
566 0.004 0.0016
559 0.199 0.0805
552 0.029 0.0117
551/600 0.126 0.0510
553 0.023 0.0093
554 0.155 0.0627
555 0.060 0.0243
चकदह आटालिया १०२ 37/550 0.018 0.0073
36 0.165 0.0668
38 0.530 0.2145
44 0.197 0.0797
43 0.009 0.0036
56 0.174 0.0704
55 0.002 0.0008
57 0.053 0.0214
58 0.171 0.0692
59 0.126 0.0510
83 0.139 0.0563
68 0.156 0.0631
77 0.193 0.0781
69 0.151 0.0611
76 0.142 0.0575
333 0.021 0.0085
339 0.034 0.0138
75 0.205 0.0830
74 0.058 0.0235
चकदह नरपति पारा १०३ 1468 0.280 0.1133
1469 0.080 0.0324
1470 0.150 0.0607
1471 0.010 0.0040
1472 0.060 0.0243
1473 0.017 0.0069
1474 0.215 0.0870
1476 0.140 0.0567
1477 0.110 0.0445
1478 0.010 0.0040
1504 0.075 0.0304
1754 0.030 0.0121
1772 0.345 0.1396
1774 0.027 0.0109
1775 0.020 0.0081
1776 0.520 0.2104
1778 0.215 0.0870
हरीनघाटा चन्दीरामपूर ५ एल.आर. 45 0.035 0.0142
46 0.005 0.0020
48 0.065 0.0263
65 0.018 0.0073
66 0.350 0.1417
68 0.150 0.0607
69 0.213 0.0862
70 0.010 0.0041
71 0.020 0.0081
77 0.007 0.0028
78 0.110 0.0445
79 0.190 0.0769
80 0.112 0.0453
81 0.100 0.0405
83 0.065 0.0263
425 0.010 0.0041
427 0.075 0.0304
428 0.035 0.0142
429 0.180 0.0729
430 0.135 0.0546
432 0.100 0.0405
463 0.145 0.0587
464 0.015 0.0061
465 0.110 0.0445
466 0.115 0.0465
475 0.165 0.0668
476 0.285 0.1153
477 0.008 0.0032
478 0.055 0.0223
482 0.172 0.0696
585 0.327 0.1323
586 0.230 0.0931
589 0.135 0.0546
591 0.110 0.0445
592 0.080 0.0324
599 0.010 0.0041
607 0.020 0.0081
612 0.220 0.0890
613 0.048 0.0194
614 0.265 0.1073
615 0.090 0.0364
616 0.038 0.0154
617 0.035 0.0142
621 0.145 0.0587
622 0.125 0.0506
623 0.185 0.0749
624 0.125 0.0506
625 0.002 0.0008
788 0.045 0.0182
800 0.002 0.0008
46/2155 0.110 0.0445
46/2156 0.130 0.0526
427/2348 0.180 0.0729
हरीनघाटा बिरही ४ एल.आर. 346 0.103 0.0417
374 0.112 0.0453
375 0.010 0.0041
32 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 33 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 34 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 35 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 36 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 37 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 38 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 39 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 40 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

378 0.152 0.0615

381 0.058 0.0235

382 0.140 0.0567

383 0.010 0.0041

387 0.130 0.0526

388 0.122 0.0494

389 0.085 0.0344

410 0.047 0.0190

440 0.032 0.0130

441 0.170 0.0688

442 0.133 0.0538

449 0.053 0.0215

659 0.070 0.0283

660 0.150 0.0607

663 0.017 0.0069

664 0.225 0.0911

665 0.005 0.0020

688 0.320 0.1295

689 0.001 0.0004

702 0.025 0.0101

703 0.075 0.0304

704 0.160 0.0648

715 0.018 0.0071

716 0.270 0.1093

718 0.085 0.0344

719 0.115 0.0465

720 0.107 0.0433

721 0.060 0.0243

722 0.020 0.0081

905 0.100 0.0405

906 0.245 0.0992

907 0.120 0.0486

909 0.070 0.0283

910 0.001 0.0004

912 0.085 0.0344

913 0.100 0.0405

914 0.015 0.0061

915 0.001 0.0004

920 0.001 0.0004

921 0.130 0.0526

928 0.110 0.044541 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945

929 0.040 0.0162
939 0.100 0.0405
940 0.230 0.0931
941 0.095 0.0385
942 0.010 0.0041
943 0.001 0.0004
1000 0.045 0.0182
हरीनघाटा सोनाखलि ३ एल.आर. 216 0.165 0.0668
217 0.113 0.0457
225 0.001 0.0004
226 0.405 0.1639
227 0.280 0.1133
241 0.005 0.0020
247 0.015 0.0061
249 0.185 0.0749
250 0.052 0.0210
258 0.320 0.1295
259 0.002 0.0008
261 0.200 0.0809
262 0.105 0.0425
263 0.100 0.0405
264 0.007 0.0028
258/557 0.004 0.0016
1196 0.001 0.0004
258/556 0.080 0.0324
258/558 0.055 0.0223
258/1158 0.070 0.0283
258/559 0.170 0.0688
हरीनघाटा उत्तर राजापुर १२ एल.आर. 5 0.240 0.0971
10 0.200 0.0809
6 0.050 0.0202
7 0.010 0.0041
8 0.160 0.0648
24/1485 0.020 0.0081
24/1486 0.027 0.0109
24/1487 0.030 0.0121
27 0.242 0.0979
26 0.195 0.0789
29 0.070 0.0283
43 0.250 0.1012
42 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
   42       0.158  0.0639
   41       0.075  0.0304
   45       0.040  0.0162
   46       0.310  0.1255
   51       0.010  0.0041
   52       0.180  0.0729
   59       0.200  0.0809
   60       0.205  0.0830
   83       0.130  0.0526
   85       0.001  0.0004
  331       0.115  0.0465
  332       0.001  0.0004
192/1431    0.085  0.0344
  192       0.680  0.2752
  266       0.025  0.0101
  265       0.105  0.0425
265/1346    0.270  0.1093
  263       0.020  0.0081
  264       0.103  0.0417
264/1345    0.090  0.0364
  277       0.006  0.0024
282/1350    0.150  0.0607
  282       0.068  0.0275
  1351      0.200  0.0809
  281       0.082  0.0332
  279       0.003  0.0012
  280       0.125  0.0506
  289       0.150  0.0607
295/1353    0.024  0.0097
  290       0.150  0.0607
  295       0.010  0.0041
  294       0.190  0.0769
  293       0.090  0.0364
  311       0.001  0.0004
  316       0.152  0.0617
  317       0.050  0.0202
  315       0.023  0.0093
  318       0.090  0.0364
  321       0.175  0.0708
  319       0.012  0.0049
  320       0.033  0.0134
43 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945
323 0.160 0.0648
325 0.135 0.0546
326 0.270 0.1093
327 0.020 0.0081
705 0.050 0.0202
707 0.002 0.0008
706 0.370 0.1497
708 0.185 0.0749
हरीनघाटा चक बिरही १३ एल.आर. 47 0.010 0.0041
49 0.020 0.0081
50 0.142 0.0575
51 0.170 0.0688
52 0.035 0.0142
142 0.005 0.0020
143 0.135 0.0546
144 0.095 0.0385
147 0.200 0.0809
148 0.013 0.0053
149 0.095 0.0385
150 0.020 0.0081
179 0.010 0.0041
184 0.220 0.0890
185 0.050 0.0202
188 0.015 0.0061
189 0.080 0.0324
190 0.145 0.0587
191 0.055 0.0223
202 0.185 0.0749
203 0.090 0.0364
204 0.190 0.0769
205 0.025 0.0101
206 0.010 0.0041
207 0.015 0.0061
208 0.080 0.0324
209 0.002 0.0008
203/240 0.025 0.0101
166/267 0.045 0.0182
148/251 0.005 0.0020
151/243 0.130 0.0526
49/245 0.195 0.0789
49/269 0.105 0.0425
49/270 0.095 0.0385
हरीनघाटा बाहिर सोनाखलि १५ एल.आर. 176 0.045 0.0182
191 0.185 0.0749
192 0.055 0.0223
193 0.040 0.0162
194 0.092 0.0372
198 0.070 0.0283
199 0.069 0.0279
200 0.020 0.0081
201 0.450 0.1821
207 0.056 0.0227
208 0.070 0.0283
209 0.040 0.0162
210 0.025 0.0101
211 0.057 0.0231
212 0.035 0.0142
221 0.060 0.0243
222 0.070 0.0283
223 0.015 0.0061
225 0.010 0.0041
226 0.002 0.0008
227 0.060 0.0243
228 0.025 0.0101
229 0.020 0.0081
230 0.045 0.0182
231 0.020 0.0081
232 0.001 0.0004
234 0.005 0.0020
236 0.080 0.0324
237 0.006 0.0024
238 0.005 0.0020
241 0.010 0.0041
242 0.070 0.0283
244 0.070 0.0283
246 0.060 0.0243
247 0.080 0.0324
546 0.002 0.0008
547 0.120 0.0486
553 0.001 0.0004
554 0.065 0.0263
555 0.095 0.0385
556 0.096 0.0389
557 0.030 0.0121
558 0.001 0.0004
559 0.225 0.0911
560 0.030 0.0121
568 0.220 0.0890
586 0.029 0.0117
588 0.020 0.0081
235/646 0.130 0.0526
236/648 0.020 0.0081
236/649 0.070 0.0283
546/685 0.016 0.0065
546/686 0.007 0.0028
546/687 0.029 0.0117
547/689 0.095 0.0385
588/693 0.170 0.0688
207/645 0.003 0.0012
हरीनघाटा हाज़राबेलिया २२ एल.आर. 322 0.520 0.2104
395 0.150 0.0607
396 0.065 0.0263
397 0.250 0.1012
401 0.025 0.0101
419 0.092 0.0372
420 0.075 0.0304
422 0.090 0.0364
423 0.065 0.0263
424 0.023 0.0093
449 0.003 0.0012
450 0.110 0.0445
451 0.255 0.1032
454 0.180 0.0729
456 0.020 0.0081
464 0.185 0.0749
465 0.150 0.0607
466 0.130 0.0526
467 0.028 0.0111
470 0.002 0.0008
471 0.021 0.0085
हरीनघाटा बसंतपूर २१ एल.आर. 449 0.130 0.0526
450 0.120 0.0486
442 0.005 0.0020
446 0.295 0.1194
445 0.035 0.0142
463 0.035 0.0142
464 0.140 0.0567
465 0.275 0.1113
471 0.032 0.0129
470 0.010 0.0040
472 0.135 0.0546
435 0.513 0.2076
474 0.005 0.0020
418 0.001 0.0004
417 0.015 0.0061
416 0.055 0.0223
413 0.050 0.0202
412 0.150 0.0607
386 0.210 0.0850
387 0.080 0.0324
385 0.030 0.0121
384 0.130 0.0526
388 0.075 0.0304
382 0.065 0.0263
381 0.038 0.0154
375 0.055 0.0223
376 0.146 0.0591
380 0.002 0.0008
377 0.075 0.0304
378 0.132 0.0534
369 0.093 0.0376
366 0.145 0.0587
368 0.005 0.0020
367 0.046 0.0186
352 0.050 0.0202
329 0.203 0.0822
330 0.132 0.0534
332 0.030 0.0121
332/704 0.190 0.0769
हरीनघाटा उत्तर दत्तापारा २५ आर.एस. 827 0.307 0.1242
1098 0.047 0.0190
1099 0.204 0.0827
1100 0.085 0.0344
1096 0.030 0.0121
1095 0.260 0.1052
1083 0.012 0.0048
1085 0.090 0.0364
1094 0.011 0.0046
1087 0.063 0.0255
1086 0.056 0.0227
1069 0.102 0.0412
1068 0.177 0.0716
1118 0.222 0.0899
1119 0.143 0.0580
1064 0.020 0.0081
1120 0.010 0.0042
1130/3978 0.075 0.0304
1130 0.130 0.0526
1131 0.042 0.0170
1164 0.120 0.0486
1133 0.030 0.0121
1165 0.013 0.0053
1163 0.072 0.0291
1134 0.124 0.0502
1162 0.023 0.0094
1161 0.002 0.0007
1158 0.102 0.0414
1157 0.049 0.0200
1159 0.043 0.0173
1156 0.020 0.0081
1155 0.045 0.0181
1154 0.060 0.0243
1376 0.239 0.0969
1378 0.008 0.0033
1379 0.020 0.0081
1380 0.330 0.1335
2446 0.075 0.0304
1386 0.065 0.0263
1387 0.015 0.0061
44 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 45 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 46 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 47 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 48 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
  2443      0.080  0.0324
  2442      0.120  0.0486
  1388      0.002  0.0009
  2441      0.112  0.0453
  2440      0.080  0.0324
  2439      0.003  0.0013
  2438      0.042  0.0171
  2436      0.102  0.0414
  1463      0.060  0.0243
  1464      0.050  0.0201
  2435      0.095  0.0386
  1465      0.002  0.0008
  1466      0.168  0.0681
  1467      0.175  0.0708
  1468      0.078  0.0316
  1469      0.082  0.0332
  1470      0.040  0.0163
  1471      0.056  0.0225
  1476      0.100  0.0406
  1478      0.082  0.0330
  1479      0.040  0.0164
  2263      0.005  0.0020
  2116      0.030  0.0121
2120/3986   0.070  0.0283
  2115      0.021  0.0086
  2114      0.017  0.0069
  2113      0.007  0.0027
  2121      0.081  0.0327
  2122      0.002  0.0008
  2131      0.068  0.0277
  2132      0.077  0.0313
  2133      0.019  0.0077
  2136      0.093  0.0377
  2135      0.091  0.0368
  2140      0.037  0.0151
  2141      0.088  0.0357
  2142      0.101  0.0410
  2143      0.042  0.0170
  2144      0.015  0.0060
1515/4006   0.035  0.0142
  2096      0.113  0.0457
49 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945
2095 0.190 0.0769
2094 0.026 0.0104
2093 0.010 0.0039
हरीनघाटा उत्तर दत्तापारा २५ एल.आर. 2889 0.070 0.0283
2890 0.072 0.0291
2891 0.063 0.0256
2892 0.066 0.0268
2897 0.082 0.0331
2898 0.002 0.0009
2898/3916 0.077 0.0312
2899 0.044 0.0178
2901 0.034 0.0137
2902 0.029 0.0116
2903 0.045 0.0182
2905 0.040 0.0161
2906 0.043 0.0173
2907 0.113 0.0456
2913 0.045 0.0182
2912 0.045 0.0182
2918 0.051 0.0206
2919 0.038 0.0155
2920 0.030 0.0120
2926 0.011 0.0043
2925 0.263 0.1065
2927 0.008 0.0032
2929 0.060 0.0243
2930 0.023 0.0093
2931 0.026 0.0103
2933 0.025 0.0100
3784 0.035 0.0140
3783 0.040 0.0162
3782 0.035 0.0142
2934 0.023 0.0093
3780 0.013 0.0053
3781 0.110 0.0445
3822 0.036 0.0145
3823 0.086 0.0346
2935 0.013 0.0053
2936 0.007 0.0028
3824 0.079 0.0320
3825 0.087 0.0354
3826 0.095 0.0384
3827 0.079 0.0318
3829 0.105 0.0425
3828 0.150 0.0607
3830 0.040 0.0162
हरीनघाटा माध पूर ३८ एल.आर. 764/1173 0.305 0.1234
763 0.020 0.0081
764 0.265 0.1072
798 0.165 0.0668
799 0.095 0.0384
800 0.020 0.0081
809 0.012 0.0049
809/1391 0.110 0.0445
808 0.063 0.0255
810 0.133 0.0538
818 0.005 0.0020
811 0.080 0.0324
812 0.070 0.0283
816 0.035 0.0142
813 0.210 0.0850
814 0.035 0.0142
862 0.055 0.0223
831 0.107 0.0431
832 0.015 0.0059
861 0.040 0.0162
852 0.510 0.2064
851 0.127 0.0514
853 0.173 0.0699
941 0.070 0.0283
942 0.210 0.0850
943 0.050 0.0202
951 0.170 0.0688
944 0.112 0.0453
946 0.010 0.0040
945 0.050 0.0202
948 0.003 0.0012
950 0.029 0.0117
959 0.215 0.0870
960 0.119 0.0482
961 0.035 0.0142
986 0.130 0.0526
986/1238 0.135 0.0546
979 0.001 0.0003
983 0.148 0.0598
982 0.150 0.0607
981 0.005 0.0020
1079 0.010 0.0040
1080 0.111 0.0451
1081/1393 0.120 0.0486
1081 0.045 0.0182
1082 0.059 0.0237
1083 0.005 0.0019
1085 0.870 0.3521
1131 0.050 0.0202
1132 0.050 0.0202
1133 0.024 0.0097
हरीनघाटा बामन बारिया ३९ एल.आर. 1109 0.015 0.0061
284/1110 0.038 0.0155
284/1111 0.052 0.0212
1112 0.065 0.0263
284/1113 0.230 0.0931
284/1117 0.285 0.1153
284/1119 0.455 0.1840
284/1118 0.012 0.0049
285/1025 0.250 0.1012
285 0.050 0.0202
हरीनघाटा कष्टदांगा ३७ एल.आर. 750/2506 0.290 0.1174
1258 0.079 0.0321
1259 0.250 0.1012
1268 0.129 0.0522
1269 0.146 0.0592
1270 0.054 0.0217
1279 0.052 0.0212
1280 0.029 0.0119
1281 0.030 0.0121
1283 0.018 0.0072
1282 0.026 0.0106
1286 0.005 0.0022
1401 0.185 0.0749
1402 0.130 0.0526
1403 0.023 0.0093
हरीनघाटा ज ुलकरमपुर ३६ एल.आर. 967 0.030 0.0121
983 0.030 0.0121
984 0.040 0.0162
985 0.041 0.0165
986 0.052 0.0211
989 0.270 0.1093
996 0.275 0.1112
1910 0.135 0.0546
997 0.131 0.0531
1909 0.138 0.0557
1058 0.015 0.0059
1060 0.030 0.0121
1061 0.056 0.0227
1064 0.160 0.0646
1066 0.078 0.0316
1069 0.051 0.0206
1070 0.169 0.0685
1071 0.002 0.0008
1079 0.061 0.0248
1080 0.070 0.0283
1081 0.055 0.0224
1082 0.076 0.0306
1084 0.110 0.0444
1085 0.002 0.0008
1086 0.124 0.0503
1091 0.014 0.0057
1090 0.035 0.0143
1089 0.028 0.0113
1092 0.025 0.0101
1093 0.127 0.0513
1095 0.095 0.0385
1103 0.090 0.0364
1102 0.095 0.0384
1101 0.087 0.0351
1100 0.012 0.0049
1110 0.052 0.0209
1160 0.002 0.0008
1111 0.039 0.0158
1159 0.003 0.0012
1156 0.030 0.0121
1113 0.014 0.0057
1112 0.029 0.0117
1117 0.005 0.0021
1154 0.027 0.0108
1153 0.041 0.0168
1152 0.050 0.0204
1150 0.155 0.0625
1150/1917 0.005 0.0019
1149 0.061 0.0247
1146 0.023 0.0092
1147 0.020 0.0082
1144 0.039 0.0159
1142 0.042 0.0170
1141 0.008 0.0032
1139 0.001 0.0004
1138 0.045 0.0183
1135 0.037 0.0149
1137 0.110 0.0445
1136 0.035 0.0142
1304 0.170 0.0688
हरीनघाटा स ेके न्दरपूर ३५ एल.आर. 22 0.240 0.0971
23 0.001 0.0004
24 0.010 0.0040
25 0.061 0.0247
21 0.248 0.1005
157 0.158 0.0639
156 0.023 0.0093
152 0.037 0.0150
151 0.010 0.0040
155 0.028 0.0113
153 0.080 0.0323
148 0.130 0.0526
146 0.062 0.0250
145 0.007 0.0027
144 0.030 0.0121
331 0.138 0.0558
135 0.029 0.0117
132 0.018 0.0073
172 0.003 0.0011
50 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 51 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 52 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 53 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 54 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

134 0.080 0.0322

173 0.089 0.0359

175 0.135 0.0546

179 0.120 0.0486

180 0.110 0.0445

183 0.090 0.0364

184 0.090 0.0365

192 0.012 0.0049

191 0.175 0.0708

195 0.035 0.0142

196 0.025 0.0101

202 0.175 0.0708

201 0.080 0.0324

200 0.001 0.0004

203 0.133 0.0539

208 0.130 0.0524

215 0.124 0.0500

216 0.085 0.0344

214 0.151 0.0610

221 0.104 0.0420

223 0.113 0.0459

230 0.012 0.0049

224 0.105 0.0425

225 0.115 0.0465

228 0.220 0.0890

249 0.147 0.0594

248 0.086 0.0347

250 0.126 0.0509

252 0.122 0.0493

253 0.133 0.0540

254 0.069 0.0279

255 0.110 0.0444

256 0.125 0.0506

1365 0.385 0.1558

1367 0.192 0.0775

1370 0.045 0.0182

1371 0.050 0.0202

1372 0.051 0.0205

1373 0.040 0.0164

1391 0.050 0.0202

1392 0.058 0.023455 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 1393 0.070 0.0283

1395 0.030 0.0121

2541 0.229 0.0929

2547 0.002 0.0008

2548 0.026 0.0106

2588 0.125 0.0507

2589 0.100 0.0405

2590 0.092 0.0372

2602 0.155 0.0626

2603 0.193 0.0781

2604 0.064 0.0260

2605 0.044 0.0180

2599 0.019 0.0075

2901 0.158 0.0640

2902 0.065 0.0263

2903 0.055 0.0224

2904 0.041 0.0165

2905 0.108 0.0435

2906 0.010 0.0040

2907 0.072 0.0291

2925 0.026 0.0103

2924 0.190 0.0769

2908 0.002 0.0008

2921 0.055 0.0221

2922 0.178 0.0720

2988 0.010 0.0040

2920 0.055 0.0221

2989 0.060 0.0243

2990 0.181 0.0731

2972 0.002 0.0008

2991 0.025 0.0101

2992 0.120 0.0487

2994 0.019 0.0077

2993 0.205 0.0830

3010 0.045 0.0182

3013 0.005 0.0022

3011 0.087 0.0354

3012 0.006 0.0023

3009 0.001 0.0006

3026 0.170 0.068856 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

3030 0.075 0.0304
3031 0.015 0.0061
3029 0.165 0.0668
3060 0.015 0.0061
3028 0.015 0.0061
3060/3622 0.275 0.1113
3059 0.195 0.0789
3058 0.155 0.0627
3051 0.032 0.0129
3052 0.092 0.0372
3057 0.001 0.0004
3053 0.160 0.0647
3054 0.180 0.0728
3055 0.049 0.0196
3457 0.127 0.0515
3458 0.140 0.0567
3602 0.108 0.0437
3603 0.220 0.0890
3604 0.257 0.1042
3585 0.070 0.0283
3584 0.242 0.0978
3575 0.164 0.0665
3620 0.526 0.2131
हरीनघाटा स ूबूद्धिपूर ३३ एल.आर. 358 0.025 0.0101
359 0.030 0.0123
360 0.023 0.0093
366 0.030 0.0121
368 0.076 0.0306
369 0.075 0.0304
373 0.071 0.0288
374 0.123 0.0497
375 0.120 0.0486
381 0.140 0.0567
380 0.001 0.0004
382 0.055 0.0223
383 0.120 0.0486
384 0.022 0.0089
385 0.200 0.0809
386 0.225 0.0911
388 0.325 0.1315
389 0.001 0.0004
396 0.040 0.0161
397 0.236 0.0954
399 0.210 0.0850
402 0.143 0.0578
445/2248 0.022 0.0088
401 0.041 0.0165
403 0.270 0.1093
404 0.015 0.0061
405 0.174 0.0703
414 0.170 0.0688
417 0.116 0.0468
418 0.200 0.0809
2128 0.185 0.0749
2129 0.200 0.0809
2186 0.045 0.0182
2185 0.290 0.1174
2184 0.197 0.0797
2187 0.117 0.0473
2188 0.215 0.0870
हरीनघाटा पुरबा सातबेड़िया ३४ एल.आर. 379/543 0.220 0.0890
379/544 0.185 0.0751
380 0.085 0.0344
381 0.090 0.0364
375 0.035 0.0140
374 0.110 0.0445
308 0.290 0.1174
309 0.020 0.0081
371 0.225 0.0911
370 0.162 0.0654
368 0.050 0.0202
369 0.120 0.0486
364 0.192 0.0778
363 0.015 0.0060
316 0.155 0.0629
362 0.010 0.0040
360 0.002 0.0008
361 0.185 0.0748
359 0.120 0.0486
358 0.025 0.0102
353 0.105 0.0425
351 0.023 0.0092
354 0.065 0.0263
355 0.276 0.1116
345 0.136 0.0551
344 0.215 0.0870
482 0.104 0.0423
483 0.200 0.0809
343 0.105 0.0425
494 0.072 0.0293
181/499 0.400 0.1619
57 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 58 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

[फा. सं. एल –14014/36/2023-जीपी-II (ई-48371)]

रामजीलाल मीना, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2023

S.O. 08.—Whereas it appears to the Government of India that it is necessary in public interest that for transportation of natural gas through Kanai Chatta – Srirampur" Natural Gas Pipeline (Phase-1) Project in the State of West Bengal, a pipeline should be laid by Hooghly Pipelines Private Limited (HPPL), a Consortium of H-Energy and H-Energy East Coast Pvt Ltd.

And, whereas it appears to Government of India that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the Right of User in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;

Now, therefore, in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962, (50 of 1962) Government of India hereby declares its intention to acquire the Right of User therein;

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date of which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of User therein for laying of the pipeline under the land to Competent Authority, Hooghly Pipelines Private Limited (HPPL), a Consortium of H-Energy and H-Energy East Coast Pvt Ltd., State of West Bengal.

SCHEDULE

KANAI CHATTA – SRIRAMPUR NATURAL GAS PIPE LINE PROJECT

District : Nadia State : West Bengal
Thana Village/Mouza JL No. MAP Plot No Area
Acre Hectare
1 2 3 4 5 6
Chakdaha Shrikrishnapur Char 189 RS 1 0.323 0.1307
184 0.254 0.1028
183 0.090 0.0364
182 0.135 0.0546
20 0.001 0.0004
21 0.010 0.0040
22 0.040 0.0162
23 0.055 0.0223
26 0.122 0.0494
27 0.045 0.0182
28 0.077 0.0312
29 0.072 0.0291
30 0.068 0.0275
31 0.094 0.0380
32 0.117 0.0473
33 0.102 0.0413
34 0.085 0.0344
35 0.080 0.0324
36 0.090 0.0364
53 0.091 0.0368
58 0.050 0.0202
59 0.054 0.0219
61 0.122 0.0494
62 0.150 0.0607
63 0.083 0.0336
65 0.038 0.0154
66 0.032 0.0130
67 0.099 0.0401
81 0.220 0.0890
314 0.050 0.0202
315 0.118 0.0478
316 0.126 0.0510
317 0.059 0.0239
318/768 0.059 0.0239
320 0.116 0.0469
325 0.131 0.0530
326 0.144 0.0583
329 0.139 0.0563
331 0.067 0.0271
338 0.047 0.0190
339 0.012 0.0049
346 0.090 0.0364
349 0.094 0.0380
350 0.262 0.1060
353 0.061 0.0247
354 0.137 0.0554
357 0.099 0.0401
358 0.077 0.0312
361 0.092 0.0372
362 0.042 0.0170
363 0.054 0.0219
364 0.121 0.0490
365 0.174 0.0704
366 0.112 0.0453
367 0.083 0.0336
368 369 0.084 0.210 0.0340 0.0850
370 0.097 0.0393
457 0.355 0.1437
763 0.025 0.0101
480 0.192 0.0777
479 0.148 0.0599
478 0.150 0.0607
477 0.150 0.0607
476 0.131 0.0530
475 0.107 0.0433
474 0.054 0.0219
473 0.057 0.0231
472 0.047 0.0190
471 0.122 0.0494
470 0.084 0.0340
469 0.046 0.0186
468 0.123 0.0498
467 0.041 0.0166
466 0.095 0.0384
465 0.130 0.0526
464 0.036 0.0146
463 0.035 0.0142
462 0.046 0.0186
461 0.044 0.0178
460 0.048 0.0194
459 0.058 0.0235
458 0.055 0.0223
1292 0.080 0.0324
1293 0.095 0.0384
1294 0.120 0.0486
1295 0.202 0.0817
1296 0.111 0.0449
1297 0.147 0.0595
1298 0.068 0.0275
1299 0.015 0.0061
1503 0.080 0.0324
1781/2080 0.010 0.0040
1810/2083 0.015 0.0061
1781 0.209 0.0846
1780 0.045 0.0182
1779 0.083 0.0336
1778 0.075 0.0304
1773 0.201 0.0813
1771 0.214 0.0866
1750 0.204 0.0826
1751 0.085 0.0344
1752 0.075 0.0304
1741 0.105 0.0425
1742 0.098 0.0397
1740 0.060 0.0243
1726 0.116 0.0469
1725 0.107 0.0433
1703 0.106 0.0429
1702 0.093 0.0376
1701 0.085 0.0344
1693 0.069 0.0279
1694 0.054 0.0219
1696 0.225 0.0911
1695/2111 0.007 0.0028
1682/2110 0.014 0.0057
1681 0.079 0.0320
1680 0.098 0.0397
1682 0.020 0.0081
1678 0.106 0.0429
1672 0.254 0.1028
1668 0.086 0.0348
1667 0.075 0.0304
1666 0.088 0.0356
1662 0.106 0.0429
1648 0.317 0.1283
1620 0.025 0.0101
1621 0.027 0.0109
1622 0.024 0.0097
1623 0.029 0.0117
1624 0.025 0.0101
1645 0.090 0.0364
1625 0.092 0.0372
1644 0.005 0.0020
1643 0.035 0.0142
1642 0.050 0.0202
1641 0.007 0.0028
1640 0.320 0.1295
1639 0.128 0.0518
1638 0.095 0.0384
1637 0.020 0.0081
2027 0.088 0.0356
2024 0.050 0.0202
2023 0.001 0.0004
2025 0.195 0.0789
2026 0.070 0.0283
2019 0.035 0.0142
2014 0.150 0.0607
2028 0.026 0.0105
2030 0.410 0.1659
2066 0.005 0.0020
2031 0.020 0.0081
2032 0.015 0.0061
2033 0.001 0.0004
2065 0.065 0.0263
2064 0.074 0.0299
2063 0.253 0.1024
2062 0.081 0.0328
2061 0.155 0.0627
2060 0.158 0.0639
Chakdaha Shrikrishnapur Char 189 LR 3742 0.233 0.0943
3741 0.197 0.0797
3740 0.167 0.0676
3739 0.273 0.1105
3762 0.045 0.0182
3763 0.038 0.0154
3764 0.040 0.0162
3765 0.040 0.0162
3786 0.038 0.0154
3785 0.075 0.0304
3784 0.130 0.0526
3783 0.060 0.0243
3782 0.075 0.0304
3781 0.245 0.0992
3790 0.068 0.0275
3791 0.048 0.0194
3792 0.045 0.0182
3796 0.034 0.0138
3797 0.035 0.0142
3801 0.040 0.0162
3802 0.027 0.0109
3805 0.048 0.0194
3806 0.038 0.0154
3807 0.068 0.0275
3812 0.027 0.0109
3813 0.024 0.0097
3814 0.027 0.0109
3815 0.035 0.0142
3818 0.046 0.0186
3844 0.027 0.0109
3843 0.055 0.0223
3842 0.057 0.0231
3841 0.460 0.1862
3830 0.005 0.0020
3839 0.046 0.0186
3831 0.110 0.0445
3832 0.080 0.0324
3837 0.035 0.0142
3838 0.025 0.0101
3859 0.062 0.0251
3886 0.050 0.0202
3885 0.052 0.0210
3884 0.035 0.0142
3883 0.020 0.0081
3882 0.025 0.0101
3881 0.055 0.0223
3880 0.090 0.0364
3879 0.060 0.0243
3878 0.007 0.0028
3892 0.425 0.1720
3893 0.019 0.0077
3888 0.002 0.0008
3966 0.018 0.0073
3891 0.128 0.0518
3967 0.010 0.0040
Chakdaha PRIYANAGAR 39 LR 571 0.020 0.0081
572 0.024 0.0097
569 0.041 0.0166
568 0.072 0.0291
574 0.155 0.0627
575 0.186 0.0753
580 0.097 0.0393
583 0.103 0.0417
582 0.146 0.0591
637 0.073 0.0295
639 0.178 0.0720
638 0.010 0.0041
640 0.034 0.0138
668 0.041 0.0166
667 0.201 0.0813
664 0.019 0.0077
666 0.001 0.0004
665 0.215 0.0870
672 0.035 0.0142
676 0.117 0.0474
673 0.001 0.0004
675 0.147 0.0595
680 0.128 0.0518
679 0.080 0.0324
688 0.043 0.0174
689 0.046 0.0186
690 0.162 0.0656
695 0.083 0.0336
696 0.033 0.0134
694 0.071 0.0287
697 0.054 0.0219
Chakdaha CHANDURIA 38 LR 1406 0.093 0.0376
1405 0.071 0.0287
1404 0.010 0.0041
1407 0.005 0.0020
1410 0.248 0.1004
1411 0.200 0.0809
1409 0.028 0.0113
1431 0.226 0.0915
1426 0.082 0.0332
1425 0.141 0.0571
1420 0.001 0.0004
1421 0.037 0.0150
1423 0.084 0.0340
1424 0.073 0.0295
1521 0.092 0.0372
1522 0.010 0.0041
1523 0.223 0.0903
1524 0.221 0.0894
1525 0.064 0.0259
1509 0.030 0.0121
1505 0.125 0.0506
1506 0.120 0.0486
1504 0.041 0.0166
1507 0.258 0.1044
1495 0.030 0.0121
1496 0.150 0.0607
1480 0.022 0.0089
1479 0.055 0.0223
1478 0.094 0.0380
1476 0.035 0.0142
1477 0.158 0.0639
1475 0.242 0.0979
1658 0.011 0.0045
1474 0.021 0.0085
1659 0.161 0.0652
Chakdaha KAUTUKPUR 97 LR 345 0.026 0.0105
344 0.151 0.0611
342 0.045 0.0182
343 0.145 0.0587
340 0.055 0.0223
333 0.340 0.1376
334 0.033 0.0134
337 0.082 0.0332
336 0.014 0.0057
391 0.083 0.0336
211 0.142 0.0575
392 0.001 0.0004
209 0.001 0.0004
210 0.146 0.0591
208 0.014 0.0057
207 0.152 0.0615
206 0.096 0.0389
194 0.123 0.0498
195 0.094 0.0380
193 0.155 0.0627
191 0.038 0.0154
1 0.110 0.0445
190 0.061 0.0247
188 0.146 0.0591
729 0.035 0.0142
730 0.203 0.0822
732 0.095 0.0385
Chakdaha UCHITPUR 98 LR 3 0.010 0.0041
5 0.101 0.0409
7 0.142 0.0575
270 0.152 0.0615
269 0.143 0.0579
273 0.196 0.0793
274 0.015 0.0061
277 0.379 0.1534
276 0.056 0.0227
282 0.151 0.0611
261 0.029 0.0117
254 0.236 0.0955
255 0.001 0.0004
256 0.078 0.0316
241 0.214 0.0866
257 0.033 0.0134
240 0.005 0.0020
239 0.204 0.0826
259 0.013 0.0053
238 0.109 0.0441
160 0.212 0.0858
161 0.127 0.0514
162 0.064 0.0259
163 0.150 0.0607
232 0.005 0.0020
164 0.003 0.0012
224 0.216 0.0874
165/556 0.001 0.0004
223 0.039 0.0158
226 0.080 0.0324
225 0.019 0.0077
227 0.012 0.0049
222 0.145 0.0587
228 0.056 0.0227
515 0.013 0.0053
516 0.104 0.0421
514 0.093 0.0376
513 0.081 0.0328
512 0.076 0.0308
517 0.005 0.0020
511 0.095 0.0385
511/557 0.026 0.0105
508 0.122 0.0494
507 0.091 0.0368
527 0.102 0.0413
506 0.001 0.0004
532 0.172 0.0696
533 0.107 0.0433
531 0.003 0.0012
534 0.132 0.0534
535 0.105 0.0425
530 0.020 0.0081
Chakdaha RAMESWARPUR 100 LR 20 0.231 0.0935
21 0.154 0.0623
22 0.003 0.0012
45 0.064 0.0259
16 0.120 0.0486
57 0.034 0.0138
46 0.047 0.0190
48 0.105 0.0425
49 0.075 0.0304
50 0.171 0.0692
40 0.119 0.0482
39 0.178 0.0720
51 0.010 0.0041
189 0.031 0.0126
190 0.173 0.0700
185 0.130 0.0526
204 0.215 0.0870
205 0.135 0.0546
224 0.121 0.0490
225 0.001 0.0004
223 0.057 0.0231
226 0.135 0.0546
222 0.177 0.0716
276 0.002 0.0008
277 0.205 0.0830
278 0.025 0.0101
281 0.363 0.1469
282 0.015 0.0061
293 0.502 0.2032
313 0.110 0.0445
314 0.089 0.0360
319 0.002 0.0008
318 0.019 0.0077
317 0.265 0.1073
334 0.335 0.1356
335 0.163 0.0660
337 0.009 0.0036
336 0.017 0.0069
Chakdaha HARISHPUR 101 LR 539 0.119 0.0482
538 0.001 0.0004
542 0.214 0.0866
543 0.026 0.0105
541 0.020 0.0081
544 0.093 0.0376
545 0.170 0.0688
546 0.002 0.0008
566 0.004 0.0016
559 0.199 0.0805
552 0.029 0.0117
551/600 0.126 0.0510
553 0.023 0.0093
554 0.155 0.0627
555 0.060 0.0243
Chakdaha ATALIYA 102 LR 37/550 0.018 0.0073
36 0.165 0.0668
38 0.530 0.2145
44 0.197 0.0797
43 0.009 0.0036
56 0.174 0.0704
55 0.002 0.0008
57 0.053 0.0214
58 0.171 0.0692
59 0.126 0.0510
83 0.139 0.0563
68 0.156 0.0631
77 0.193 0.0781
69 0.151 0.0611
76 0.142 0.0575
333 0.021 0.0085
339 0.034 0.0138
75 0.205 0.0830
74 0.058 0.0235
Chakdaha NARAPATIPARA 103 LR 1468 0.280 0.1133
1469 0.080 0.0324
1470 0.150 0.0607
1471 0.010 0.0040
1472 0.060 0.0243
1473 0.017 0.0069
1474 0.215 0.0870
1476 0.140 0.0567
1477 0.110 0.0445
1478 0.010 0.0040
1504 0.075 0.0304
1754 0.030 0.0121
1772 0.345 0.1396
1774 0.027 0.0109
1775 0.020 0.0081
1776 0.520 0.2104
1778 0.215 0.0870
Haringhata CHANDIRAMPUR 5 LR 45 0.035 0.0142
46 0.005 0.0020
48 0.065 0.0263
65 0.018 0.0073
66 0.350 0.1417
68 0.150 0.0607
69 0.213 0.0862
70 0.010 0.0041
71 0.020 0.0081
77 0.007 0.0028
78 0.110 0.0445
79 0.190 0.0769
80 0.112 0.0453
81 0.100 0.0405
83 0.065 0.0263
425 0.010 0.0041
427 0.075 0.0304
428 0.035 0.0142
429 0.180 0.0729
430 0.135 0.0546
432 0.100 0.0405
463 0.145 0.0587
464 0.015 0.0061
465 0.110 0.0445
466 0.115 0.0465
475 0.165 0.0668
476 0.285 0.1153
477 0.008 0.0032
478 0.055 0.0223
482 0.172 0.0696
585 0.327 0.1323
586 0.230 0.0931
589 0.135 0.0546
591 0.110 0.0445
592 0.080 0.0324
599 0.010 0.0041
607 0.020 0.0081
612 0.220 0.0890
613 0.048 0.0194
614 0.265 0.1073
615 0.090 0.0364
616 0.038 0.0154
617 0.035 0.0142
621 0.145 0.0587
622 0.125 0.0506
623 0.185 0.0749
624 0.125 0.0506
625 0.002 0.0008
788 0.045 0.0182
800 0.002 0.0008
46/2155 0.110 0.0445
46/2156 0.130 0.0526
427/2348 0.180 0.0729
Haringhata BIROHI 4 LR 346 0.103 0.0417
374 0.112 0.0453
375 0.010 0.0041
378 0.152 0.0615
381 0.058 0.0235
382 0.140 0.0567
383 0.010 0.0041
387 0.130 0.0526
388 0.122 0.0494
389 0.085 0.0344
410 0.047 0.0190
440 0.032 0.0130
441 0.170 0.0688
442 0.133 0.0538
449 0.053 0.0215
659 0.070 0.0283
660 0.150 0.0607
663 0.017 0.0069
664 0.225 0.0911
665 0.005 0.0020
688 0.320 0.1295
689 0.001 0.0004
702 0.025 0.0101
703 0.075 0.0304
704 0.160 0.0648
715 0.018 0.0071
716 0.270 0.1093
718 0.085 0.0344
719 0.115 0.0465
720 0.107 0.0433
721 0.060 0.0243
722 0.020 0.0081
905 0.100 0.0405
906 0.245 0.0992
907 0.120 0.0486
909 0.070 0.0283
910 0.001 0.0004
912 0.085 0.0344
913 0.100 0.0405
914 0.015 0.0061
915 0.001 0.0004
920 0.001 0.0004
921 0.130 0.0526
928 0.110 0.0445
929 0.040 0.0162
939 0.100 0.0405
940 0.230 0.0931
941 0.095 0.0385
942 0.010 0.0041
943 0.001 0.0004
1000 0.045 0.0182
Haringhata SONAKHALI 3 LR 216 0.165 0.0668
217 0.113 0.0457
225 0.001 0.0004
226 0.405 0.1639
227 0.280 0.1133
241 0.005 0.0020
247 0.015 0.0061
249 0.185 0.0749
250 0.052 0.0210
258 0.320 0.1295
259 0.002 0.0008
261 0.200 0.0809
262 0.105 0.0425
263 0.100 0.0405
264 0.007 0.0028
258/557 0.004 0.0016
1196 0.001 0.0004
258/556 0.080 0.0324
258/558 0.055 0.0223
258/1158 0.070 0.0283
258/559 0.170 0.0688
Haringhata UTTAR RAJAPUR 12 LR 5 0.240 0.0971
10 0.200 0.0809
6 0.050 0.0202
7 0.010 0.0041
8 0.160 0.0648
24/1485 0.020 0.0081
24/1486 0.027 0.0109
24/1487 0.030 0.0121
27 0.242 0.0979
26 0.195 0.0789
29 0.070 0.0283
43 0.250 0.1012
42 0.158 0.0639
41 0.075 0.0304
45 0.040 0.0162
46 0.310 0.1255
51 0.010 0.0041
52 0.180 0.0729
59 0.200 0.0809
60 0.205 0.0830
83 0.130 0.0526
85 0.001 0.0004
331 0.115 0.0465
332 0.001 0.0004
192/1431 0.085 0.0344
192 0.680 0.2752
266 0.025 0.0101
265 0.105 0.0425
265/1346 0.270 0.1093
263 0.020 0.0081
264 0.103 0.0417
264/1345 0.090 0.0364
277 0.006 0.0024
282/1350 0.150 0.0607
282 0.068 0.0275
1351 0.200 0.0809
281 0.082 0.0332
279 0.003 0.0012
280 0.125 0.0506
289 0.150 0.0607
295/1353 0.024 0.0097
290 0.150 0.0607
295 0.010 0.0041
294 0.190 0.0769
293 0.090 0.0364
311 0.001 0.0004
316 0.152 0.0617
317 0.050 0.0202
315 0.023 0.0093
318 0.090 0.0364
321 0.175 0.0708
319 0.012 0.0049
320 0.033 0.0134
323 0.160 0.0648
325 0.135 0.0546
326 0.270 0.1093
327 0.020 0.0081
705 0.050 0.0202
707 0.002 0.0008
706 0.370 0.1497
708 0.185 0.0749
Haringhata CHAK BIROHI 13 LR 47 0.010 0.0041
49 0.020 0.0081
50 0.142 0.0575
51 0.170 0.0688
52 0.035 0.0142
142 0.005 0.0020
143 0.135 0.0546
144 0.095 0.0385
147 0.200 0.0809
148 0.013 0.0053
149 0.095 0.0385
150 0.020 0.0081
179 0.010 0.0041
184 0.220 0.0890
185 0.050 0.0202
188 0.015 0.0061
189 0.080 0.0324
190 0.145 0.0587
191 0.055 0.0223
202 0.185 0.0749
203 0.090 0.0364
204 0.190 0.0769
205 0.025 0.0101
206 0.010 0.0041
207 0.015 0.0061
208 0.080 0.0324
209 0.002 0.0008
203/240 0.025 0.0101
166/267 0.045 0.0182
148/251 0.005 0.0020
151/243 0.130 0.0526
49/245 0.195 0.0789
49/269 0.105 0.0425
49/270 0.095 0.0385
Haringhata BAHIR SONAKHALI 15 LR 176 0.045 0.0182
191 0.185 0.0749
192 0.055 0.0223
193 0.040 0.0162
194 0.092 0.0372
198 0.070 0.0283
199 0.069 0.0279
200 0.020 0.0081
201 0.450 0.1821
207 0.056 0.0227
208 0.070 0.0283
209 0.040 0.0162
210 0.025 0.0101
211 0.057 0.0231
212 0.035 0.0142
221 0.060 0.0243
222 0.070 0.0283
223 0.015 0.0061
225 0.010 0.0041
226 0.002 0.0008
227 0.060 0.0243
228 0.025 0.0101
229 0.020 0.0081
230 0.045 0.0182
231 0.020 0.0081
232 0.001 0.0004
234 0.005 0.0020
236 0.080 0.0324
237 0.006 0.0024
238 0.005 0.0020
241 0.010 0.0041
242 0.070 0.0283
244 0.070 0.0283
246 0.060 0.0243
247 0.080 0.0324
546 0.002 0.0008
547 0.120 0.0486
553 0.001 0.0004
554 0.065 0.0263
555 0.095 0.0385
556 0.096 0.0389
557 0.030 0.0121
558 0.001 0.0004
559 0.225 0.0911
560 0.030 0.0121
568 0.220 0.0890
586 0.029 0.0117
588 0.020 0.0081
235/646 0.130 0.0526
236/648 0.020 0.0081
236/649 0.070 0.0283
546/685 0.016 0.0065
546/686 0.007 0.0028
546/687 0.029 0.0117
547/689 0.095 0.0385
588/693 0.170 0.0688
207/645 0.003 0.0012
Haringhata HAJRABELIA 22 LR 322 0.520 0.2104
395 0.150 0.0607
396 0.065 0.0263
397 0.250 0.1012
401 0.025 0.0101
419 0.092 0.0372
420 0.075 0.0304
422 0.090 0.0364
423 0.065 0.0263
424 0.023 0.0093
449 0.003 0.0012
450 0.110 0.0445
451 0.255 0.1032
454 0.180 0.0729
456 0.020 0.0081
464 0.185 0.0749
465 0.150 0.0607
466 0.130 0.0526
467 0.028 0.0111
470 0.002 0.0008
471 0.021 0.0085
Haringhata BASANTPUR 21 LR 449 0.130 0.0526
450 0.120 0.0486
442 0.005 0.0020
446 0.295 0.1194
445 0.035 0.0142
463 0.035 0.0142
464 0.140 0.0567
465 0.275 0.1113
471 0.032 0.0129
470 0.010 0.0040
472 0.135 0.0546
435 0.513 0.2076
474 0.005 0.0020
418 0.001 0.0004
417 0.015 0.0061
416 0.055 0.0223
413 0.050 0.0202
412 0.150 0.0607
386 0.210 0.0850
387 0.080 0.0324
385 0.030 0.0121
384 0.130 0.0526
388 0.075 0.0304
382 0.065 0.0263
381 0.038 0.0154
375 0.055 0.0223
376 0.146 0.0591
380 0.002 0.0008
377 0.075 0.0304
378 0.132 0.0534
369 0.093 0.0376
366 0.145 0.0587
368 0.005 0.0020
367 0.046 0.0186
352 0.050 0.0202
329 0.203 0.0822
330 0.132 0.0534
332 0.030 0.0121
332/704 0.190 0.0769
Haringhata UTTAR DATTAPARA 25 RS 827 0.307 0.1242
1098 0.047 0.0190
1099 0.204 0.0827
1100 0.085 0.0344
1096 0.030 0.0121
1095 0.260 0.1052
1083 0.012 0.0048
1085 0.090 0.0364
1094 0.011 0.0046
1087 0.063 0.0255
1086 0.056 0.0227
1069 0.102 0.0412
1068 0.177 0.0716
1118 0.222 0.0899
1119 0.143 0.0580
1064 0.020 0.0081
1120 0.010 0.0042
1130/3978 0.075 0.0304
1130 0.130 0.0526
1131 0.042 0.0170
1164 0.120 0.0486
1133 0.030 0.0121
1165 0.013 0.0053
1163 0.072 0.0291
1134 0.124 0.0502
1162 0.023 0.0094
1161 0.002 0.0007
1158 0.102 0.0414
1157 0.049 0.0200
1159 0.043 0.0173
1156 0.020 0.0081
1155 0.045 0.0181
1154 0.060 0.0243
1376 0.239 0.0969
1378 0.008 0.0033
1379 0.020 0.0081
1380 0.330 0.1335
2446 0.075 0.0304
1386 0.065 0.0263
1387 0.015 0.0061
2443 0.080 0.0324
2442 0.120 0.0486
1388 0.002 0.0009
2441 0.112 0.0453
2440 0.080 0.0324
2439 0.003 0.0013
2438 0.042 0.0171
2436 0.102 0.0414
1463 0.060 0.0243
1464 0.050 0.0201
2435 0.095 0.0386
1465 0.002 0.0008
1466 0.168 0.0681
1467 0.175 0.0708
1468 0.078 0.0316
1469 0.082 0.0332
1470 0.040 0.0163
1471 0.056 0.0225
1476 0.100 0.0406
1478 0.082 0.0330
1479 0.040 0.0164
2263 0.005 0.0020
2116 0.030 0.0121
2120/3986 0.070 0.0283
2115 0.021 0.0086
2114 0.017 0.0069
2113 0.007 0.0027
2121 0.081 0.0327
2122 0.002 0.0008
2131 0.068 0.0277
2132 0.077 0.0313
2133 0.019 0.0077
2136 0.093 0.0377
2135 0.091 0.0368
2140 0.037 0.0151
2141 0.088 0.0357
2142 0.101 0.0410
2143 0.042 0.0170
2144 0.015 0.0060
1515/4006 0.035 0.0142
2096 0.113 0.0457
2095 0.190 0.0769
2094 0.026 0.0104
2093 0.010 0.0039
Haringhata UTTAR DATTAPARA 25 LR 2889 0.070 0.0283
2890 0.072 0.0291
2891 0.063 0.0256
2892 0.066 0.0268
2897 0.082 0.0331
2898 0.002 0.0009
2898/3916 0.077 0.0312
2899 0.044 0.0178
2901 0.034 0.0137
2902 0.029 0.0116
2903 0.045 0.0182
2905 0.040 0.0161
2906 0.043 0.0173
2907 0.113 0.0456
2913 0.045 0.0182
2912 0.045 0.0182
2918 0.051 0.0206
2919 0.038 0.0155
2920 0.030 0.0120
2926 0.011 0.0043
2925 0.263 0.1065
2927 0.008 0.0032
2929 0.060 0.0243
2930 0.023 0.0093
2931 0.026 0.0103
2933 0.025 0.0100
3784 0.035 0.0140
3783 0.040 0.0162
3782 0.035 0.0142
2934 0.023 0.0093
3780 0.013 0.0053
3781 0.110 0.0445
3822 0.036 0.0145
3823 0.086 0.0346
2935 0.013 0.0053
2936 0.007 0.0028
3824 0.079 0.0320
3825 0.087 0.0354
3826 0.095 0.0384
3827 0.079 0.0318
3829 0.105 0.0425
3828 0.150 0.0607
3830 0.040 0.0162
Haringhata MADHPUR 38 LR 764/1173 0.305 0.1234
763 0.020 0.0081
764 0.265 0.1072
798 0.165 0.0668
799 0.095 0.0384
800 0.020 0.0081
809 0.012 0.0049
809/1391 0.110 0.0445
808 0.063 0.0255
810 0.133 0.0538
818 0.005 0.0020
811 0.080 0.0324
812 0.070 0.0283
816 0.035 0.0142
813 0.210 0.0850
814 0.035 0.0142
862 0.055 0.0223
831 0.107 0.0431
832 0.015 0.0059
861 0.040 0.0162
852 0.510 0.2064
851 0.127 0.0514
853 0.173 0.0699
941 0.070 0.0283
942 0.210 0.0850
943 0.050 0.0202
951 0.170 0.0688
944 0.112 0.0453
946 0.010 0.0040
945 0.050 0.0202
948 0.003 0.0012
950 0.029 0.0117
959 0.215 0.0870
960 0.119 0.0482
961 0.035 0.0142
964 0.190 0.0769
986 0.130 0.0526
986/1238 0.135 0.0546
979 0.001 0.0003
983 0.148 0.0598
982 0.150 0.0607
981 0.005 0.0020
1079 0.010 0.0040
1080 0.111 0.0451
1081/1393 0.120 0.0486
1081 0.045 0.0182
1082 0.059 0.0237
1083 0.005 0.0019
1085 0.870 0.3521
1131 0.050 0.0202
1132 0.050 0.0202
1133 0.024 0.0097
Haringhata BAMANBARIA 39 LR 1109 0.015 0.0061
284/1110 0.038 0.0155
284/1111 0.052 0.0212
1112 0.065 0.0263
284/1113 0.230 0.0931
284/1117 0.285 0.1153
284/1119 0.455 0.1840
284/1118 0.012 0.0049
285/1025 0.250 0.1012
285 0.050 0.0202
Haringhata KASTADANGA 37 LR 750/2506 0.290 0.1174
1258 0.079 0.0321
1259 0.250 0.1012
1268 0.129 0.0522
1269 0.146 0.0592
1270 0.054 0.0217
1279 0.052 0.0212
1280 0.029 0.0119
1281 0.030 0.0121
1283 0.018 0.0072
1282 0.026 0.0106
1286 0.005 0.0022
1401 0.185 0.0749
1402 0.130 0.0526
1403 0.023 0.0093
Haringhata JULKARAMPUR 36 LR 967 0.030 0.0121
983 0.030 0.0121
984 0.040 0.0162
985 0.041 0.0165
986 0.052 0.0211
989 0.270 0.1093
996 0.275 0.1112
1910 0.135 0.0546
997 0.131 0.0531
1909 0.138 0.0557
1058 0.015 0.0059
1060 0.030 0.0121
1061 0.056 0.0227
1064 0.160 0.0646
1066 0.078 0.0316
1069 0.051 0.0206
1070 0.169 0.0685
1071 0.002 0.0008
1079 0.061 0.0248
1080 0.070 0.0283
1081 0.055 0.0224
1082 0.076 0.0306
1084 0.110 0.0444
1085 0.002 0.0008
1086 0.124 0.0503
1091 0.014 0.0057
1090 0.035 0.0143
1089 0.028 0.0113
1092 0.025 0.0101
1093 0.127 0.0513
1095 0.095 0.0385
1103 0.090 0.0364
1102 0.095 0.0384
1101 0.087 0.0351
1100 0.012 0.0049
1110 0.052 0.0209
1160 0.002 0.0008
1111 0.039 0.0158
1159 0.003 0.0012
1156 0.030 0.0121
1113 0.014 0.0057
1112 0.029 0.0117
1117 0.005 0.0021
1154 0.027 0.0108
1153 0.041 0.0168
1152 0.050 0.0204
1150 0.155 0.0625
1150/1917 0.005 0.0019
1149 0.061 0.0247
1146 0.023 0.0092
1147 0.020 0.0082
1144 0.039 0.0159
1142 0.042 0.0170
1141 0.008 0.0032
1139 0.001 0.0004
1138 0.045 0.0183
1135 0.037 0.0149
1137 0.110 0.0445
1136 0.035 0.0142
1304 0.170 0.0688
Haringhata SEKENDARPUR 35 LR 22 0.240 0.0971
23 0.001 0.0004
24 0.010 0.0040
25 0.061 0.0247
21 0.248 0.1005
157 0.158 0.0639
156 0.023 0.0093
152 0.037 0.0150
151 0.010 0.0040
155 0.028 0.0113
153 0.080 0.0323
148 0.130 0.0526
146 0.062 0.0250
145 0.007 0.0027
144 0.030 0.0121
331 0.138 0.0558
135 0.029 0.0117
132 0.018 0.0073
172 0.003 0.0011
134 0.080 0.0322
173 0.089 0.0359
175 0.135 0.0546
179 0.120 0.0486
180 0.110 0.0445
183 0.090 0.0364
184 0.090 0.0365
192 0.012 0.0049
191 0.175 0.0708
195 0.035 0.0142
196 0.025 0.0101
202 0.175 0.0708
201 0.080 0.0324
200 0.001 0.0004
203 0.133 0.0539
208 0.130 0.0524
215 0.124 0.0500
216 0.085 0.0344
214 0.151 0.0610
221 0.104 0.0420
223 0.113 0.0459
230 0.012 0.0049
224 0.105 0.0425
225 0.115 0.0465
228 0.220 0.0890
249 0.147 0.0594
248 0.086 0.0347
250 0.126 0.0509
252 0.122 0.0493
253 0.133 0.0540
254 0.069 0.0279
255 0.110 0.0444
256 0.125 0.0506
1365 0.385 0.1558
1367 0.192 0.0775
1370 0.045 0.0182
1371 0.050 0.0202
1372 0.051 0.0205
1373 0.040 0.0164
1391 0.050 0.0202
1392 0.058 0.0234
1393 0.070 0.0283
1395 0.030 0.0121
2541 0.229 0.0929
2547 0.002 0.0008
2548 0.026 0.0106
2588 0.125 0.0507
2589 0.100 0.0405
2590 0.092 0.0372
2602 0.155 0.0626
2603 0.193 0.0781
2604 0.064 0.0260
2605 0.044 0.0180
2599 0.019 0.0075
2901 0.158 0.0640
2902 0.065 0.0263
2903 0.055 0.0224
2904 0.041 0.0165
2905 0.108 0.0435
2906 0.010 0.0040
2907 0.072 0.0291
2925 0.026 0.0103
2924 0.190 0.0769
2908 0.002 0.0008
2921 0.055 0.0221
2922 0.178 0.0720
2988 0.010 0.0040
2920 0.055 0.0221
2989 0.060 0.0243
2990 0.181 0.0731
2972 0.002 0.0008
2991 0.025 0.0101
2992 0.120 0.0487
2994 0.019 0.0077
2993 0.205 0.0830
3010 0.045 0.0182
3013 0.005 0.0022
3011 0.087 0.0354
3012 0.006 0.0023
3009 0.001 0.0006
3026 0.170 0.0688
3030 0.075 0.0304
3031 0.015 0.0061
3029 0.165 0.0668
3060 0.015 0.0061
3028 0.015 0.0061
3060/3622 0.275 0.1113
3059 0.195 0.0789
3058 0.155 0.0627
3051 0.032 0.0129
3052 0.092 0.0372
3057 0.001 0.0004
3053 0.160 0.0647
3054 0.180 0.0728
3055 0.049 0.0196
3457 0.127 0.0515
3458 0.140 0.0567
3602 0.108 0.0437
3603 0.220 0.0890
3604 0.257 0.1042
3585 0.070 0.0283
3584 0.242 0.0978
3575 0.164 0.0665
3620 0.526 0.2131
Haringhata SUBUDDHIPUR 33 LR 358 0.025 0.0101
359 0.030 0.0123
360 0.023 0.0093
366 0.030 0.0121
368 0.076 0.0306
369 0.075 0.0304
373 0.071 0.0288
374 0.123 0.0497
375 0.120 0.0486
381 0.140 0.0567
380 0.001 0.0004
382 0.055 0.0223
383 0.120 0.0486
384 0.022 0.0089
385 0.200 0.0809
386 0.225 0.0911
388 0.325 0.1315
389 0.001 0.0004
396 0.040 0.0161
397 0.236 0.0954
399 0.210 0.0850
402 0.143 0.0578
445/2248 0.022 0.0088
401 0.041 0.0165
403 0.270 0.1093
404 0.015 0.0061
405 0.174 0.0703
414 0.170 0.0688
417 0.116 0.0468
418 0.200 0.0809
2128 0.185 0.0749
2129 0.200 0.0809
2186 0.045 0.0182
2185 0.290 0.1174
2184 0.197 0.0797
2187 0.117 0.0473
2188 0.215 0.0870
Haringhata PURBA SATBEDIA 34 LR 379/543 0.220 0.0890
379/544 0.185 0.0751
380 0.085 0.0344
381 0.090 0.0364
375 0.035 0.0140
374 0.110 0.0445
308 0.290 0.1174
309 0.020 0.0081
371 0.225 0.0911
370 0.162 0.0654
368 0.050 0.0202
369 0.120 0.0486
364 0.192 0.0778
363 0.015 0.0060
316 0.155 0.0629
362 0.010 0.0040
360 0.002 0.0008
361 0.185 0.0748
359 0.120 0.0486
358 0.025 0.0102
353 0.105 0.0425
351 0.023 0.0092
354 0.065 0.0263
355 0.276 0.1116
345 0.136 0.0551
344 0.215 0.0870
482 0.104 0.0423
483 0.200 0.0809
343 0.105 0.0425
494 0.072 0.0293
181/499 0.400 0.1619
59 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 60 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 61 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 62 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 63 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 64 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 65 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 66 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 67 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 68 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 69 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 70 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 71 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 72 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 73 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 74 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 75 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 76 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 77 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 78 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 79 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 80 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 81 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 82 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 83 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 84 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 85 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 86 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

[F. No. L-14014/36/2023-GP-II (E-48371)]

RAMJI LAL MEENA, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 29 दिसम्बर, 2023

का.आ. 09.—भारत सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1) के अधीन जारी भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृ तिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.अ. 1014(अ)तारीख 27.02.2023 द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड द्वारा पश्चिम बंगाल राज्य में धामरा-हल्दियापाइपलाइन( डिएचपिएल)( जगदीशपुर-हल्दिया-बोकारो-धामरापाइपलाइनके विस्तारके रूपमें ) के माध्यम से प्राकृ तिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

और उक्त राजपत्रित अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी;

और, सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप-धारा (1) के अधीन भारत सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है;

87 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945

और भारत सरकार ने, उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात और यह संतुष्ट हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइनें बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है, उस में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है;

अतः अब, भारत सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप-धारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुये, यह घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइनें बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है;

और भारत सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम कि धारा 6 कि उप-धारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुये, निर्देश देती है कि पाइपलाइनें बिछाने के लिए भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार, इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को, भारत सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए, पाइपलाइनें बिछाने का प्रस्ताव करने वाली गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड में निहित होगा और तदुपरि, भूमि में ऐसे उपयोग का अधिकार, इस प्रकार अधिरोपित निबंधनों और शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुये, सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड में निहित होगा।

जगदिशपुर - हल्दिया एवं बोकारो -धामरा पाइपलाइन परियोजना

अनुभाग - धामरा से हल्दिया

6(1) अनुसूची

राज्य :पश्चिम बंगाल

जिला खण्ड गांव जे. ऐल. न नक्शा सर्वे नंबर क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेयर आर वर्ग मीटर एकड़
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
पश्चिम मेदिनीपुर मोहनपुर अठारबाटीया 345 आरएस 249 00 08 40 0.2075

[फा. सं. एल –14014/64/2022-जीपी-II (ई-42137)]

रामजीलाल मीना, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 29th December, 2023

S.O. 09.—Whereas by the notification of Government of India in Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas vide S.O. No. 1014(E) Dated 27.02.2023 issued under sub- section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline ( Acquisition of Right of Users in Land ) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), Government of India declared its intention to acquire the Right of User in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of natural gas through Dhamra-Haldia Pipeline (DHPL) as an expansion of Jagdishpur- Haldia-Bokaro-Dhamra Pipeline in the State of West Bengal by GAIL (India) Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public;

And, whereas the Competent Authority has, under sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the said Act, submitted his report to Government of India;

And whereas Government of India after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipelines, has decided to acquire the Right of User therein;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act, Government of India hereby declares that the Right of User in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

And, further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act, Government of India hereby directs that the Right of User in the land for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in Government of India, vest, on this date of the publication of the declaration, in the GAIL(India) Limited, free from all encumbrances.

88 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

JAGDISHPUR - HALDIA & BOKARO - DHAMRA PIPELINE PROJECT

DHAMRA TO HALDIA SECTION

6(1) LAND SCHEDULE

State : West Bengal

District Block Mouza J.L. No. Map Survey No. Area
Hec. Are. Sq.mtr. Acre.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Paschim Medinipur Mohanpur Atharbatia 345 R.S 249 00 08 40 0.2075

[F. No. L-14014/64/2022-GP-II)(E-42137)]

RAMJI LAL MEENA, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 29 दिसम्बर, 2023

का.आ. 10.—के न्दीय सरकार को यह प्रतीत होता है कि लोकहित मैं यह आवश्यक है कि आँध्र प्रदेश राज्य में श्रीकाकु लम जिला में श्रीकाकु लम से अंगुल पाइप्लाइन(एसएपीएळ) परियोजना के माध्यम से प्राक्रु तिक ग्यस के परिवहन के लिए गेल (इडिया) लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानिइ चाहिए;

और कि ऐसी पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि के उपयोग का अधिकार अर्जित करना आवश्यक है;

अतः, अब के न्द्रीय सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि के उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शाक्तियॅ का प्रयोग करते हुए, उनमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय कि घोषणा करती है;

उक्त्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि के हितबद्ध कोई व्यक्ति, राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतिया साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दिए जाने की तारीख से 23(तेईस) दिनॉ के भीतर, उसमे उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन या भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के सबध में आक्षेप लिखित रुप से सक्षम प्रधीकारी, गेल (इडिया) लिमिटेड, के .जी. बेसिन परियोजना, होटल सनराइज, अरसावल्ली रोड जंक्शन, श्रीकाकु लम - 532001, आँध्र प्रदेश को कर सके गा.

श्रीकाकु लम -अंगुल पाइपलाइन (एसएपीएल) परियोजना
भूमि अनुसूची
जिला-श्रीकाकु लम राज्य : आंध्र प्रदेश
मंडल का नाम गाँव का नाम सर्वे नं० क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टर आरे वर्ग मीटर
श्रीकाकु लम करजादा 68/1 00 1 1
नंदीगम पेड्डालावुनिपल्ली 195 00 2 2
सोम्पेटा सनकिडी 152/14 00 1 71
मेलियापुट्टी मर्रीपाडु 28/20 00 0 20

[फा. सं. एल –14014/90/2022-जीपी-II (ई-42827)]

रामजीलाल मीना, अवर सचिव89 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945

New Delhi, the 29th December, 2023

S.O. 10.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of Natural Gas from SRIKAKULAM ANGUL PIPELINE (SAPL)PROJECT in Srikakulam District in Andhra Pradesh state, a pipeline should be laid by the GAIL ( India) Ltd.,

AND whereas it appears that for the purpose of laying such pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the Right of User in the land described in the Schedule annexed to this Notification.

NOW, Therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub Section (i) of the Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline (Acquisition of Right of User in the land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the Right of User therein.

Any Person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may within 21 days from the date on which the copies of this Notification, as published in the Gazette of India, are made available to the General Public object in writing to the acquisition of the Right of User therein or laying of the pipeline under the land to the Competent Authority, GAIL (India) Ltd., Srikakulam-Angul Pipeline Project, Hotel Sunrise, Arasavalli road junction, Srikakulam-532001, Andhra Pradesh.

SRIKAKULAM- ANGUL PIPELINE (SAPL) PROJECT
LAND SCHEDULE
District-Srikakulam State : Andhra Pradesh
Name of Mandal Name of Village Survey no. Area
Hector Are. Sq.mtr.
Srikakulam Karajada 68/1 00 1 1
Nandhigam Peddalavunipalli 195 00 2 2
Sompeta Sunkidi 152/14 00 1 71
Meliyaputti Marripadu(k) 28/20 00 0 20

[F. No. L-14014/90/2022-GP-II (E-42827)]

RAMJI LAL MEENA, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 29 दिसम्बर, 2023

का.आ. 11.—भारत सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1) के अधीन जारी भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृ तिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 3575(अ) तारीख 27.07.2022 द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड द्वारा ओडिसा राज्य में श्रीकाकु लम-अनूगुल पाईपलाइन (एस ए पी एल) और स्पर पाईप लाईन के माध्यम से प्राकृ तिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

और उक्त राजपत्रित अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी;

और, सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप-धारा (1) के अधीन भारत सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है;

और भारत सरकार ने, उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात और यह संतुष्ट हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइनें बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है, उस में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है;

अतः अब, भारत सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप-धारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुये, यह घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइनें बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है;

90 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

और भारत सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम कि धारा 6 कि उप-धारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुये, निर्देश देती है कि पाइपलाइनें बिछाने के लिए भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार, इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को, भारत सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए, पाइपलाइनें बिछाने का प्रस्ताव करने वाली गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड में निहित होगा और तदुपरि, भूमि में ऐसे उपयोग का अधिकार, इस प्रकार अधिरोपित निबंधनों और शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुये, सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड में निहित होगा।

श्रिकाकु लम –अनगुल पाईपलाईन
(स्पर गैसपाईपलाइन)
भुमि अनुसुचि
जिला-रायगडा राज्य : ओडिशा
तहसील का नाम गाँव का नाम-थाना नं. सर्वे नं. क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेअर आरे. वगर्मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6
कोलनारा गौरालीलीबारी-74 217 00 01 10
71 00 12 19
59 00 11 18
रायगडा जापाखल-122 220 00 32 95

[फा. सं. एल –14014/156/2023-जीपी-II (ई-43767)]

रामजीलाल मीना, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 29th December, 2023

S.O. 11.—Whereas by the notification of Government of India in Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas vide S. O. No. 3575(E) dated 27.07.2022 issued under sub- section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline (Acquisition of Right of Users in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), Government of India declared its intention to acquire the Right of User in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of natural gas through Srikakulam - Angul Pipeline (SAPL) & Spur pipeline in the State of Odisha by GAIL (India) Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public;

91 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945

And, whereas the Competent Authority has, under sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the said Act, submitted his report to Government of India;

And whereas Government of India after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipelines, has decided to acquire the Right of User therein;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act, Government of India hereby declares that the Right of User in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

And, further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act, Government of India hereby directs that the Right of User in the land for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in Government of India, vest, on this date of the publication of the declaration, in the GAIL (India) Limited, free from all encumbrances.

SRIKAKULAM-ANGUL PIPE LINE
(SPUR GAS PIPE LINE)
LAND SCHEDULE
District- Rayagada State-Odisha
Name of Tehsil Name of Village-Thana no Survey no. Area
Hector Are. Sq.mtr.
1 2 3 4 5 6
Kolnara Gauralilibari -74 217 00 01 10
71 00 12 19
59 00 11 18
Rayagada Japakhal -122 220 00 32 95

[F. No. L-14014/156/2022-GP-II (E-43767)]

RAMJI LAL MEENA, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 29 दिसम्बर, 2023

का.आ. 12.—के न्दीय सरकार को यह प्रतीत होता है कि लोकहित में यह आवश्यक है कि आँध्र प्रदेश राज्य में श्रीकाकु लम जिला में श्रीकाकु लम से अंगुल पाइप्लाइन (एसएपीएल) परियोजना के माध्यम से प्राकृ तिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए गेल (इडिया) लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

और कि ऐसी पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि के उपयोग का अधिकार अर्जित करना आवश्यक है;

92 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

अतः अब के न्द्रीय सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि के उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उनमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय कि घोषणा करती है;

उक्त्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि के हितबद्ध कोई व्यक्ति, राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतिया साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दिए जाने की तारीख से 21 (इक्कीस) दिनो के भीतर, उसमे उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन या भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के सबंध में आक्षेप लिखित रुप से सक्षम प्राधिकारी, गेल (इडिया) लिमिटेड, के . जी.

बेसिन परियोजना, होटल सनराइज, अरसावल्ली रोड जंक्शन – 532001, आँध्र प्रदेश को कर सके गा.

श्रीकाकु लम – अंगुल पाइप्लाइन(एसएपीएल) प्रोजेक्ट
भुमि अनुसूचि
जिला : श्रीकाकु लम: आंध्र प्रदेश
मंडल का नाम ग्राम का नाम सर्वे नम्बर क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेयर एयर वगर्मीटर
श्रीकाकु लम गुडम 242/2 00 12 73
261/1A 00 10 56

[फा. सं. एल –14014/196/2022-जीपी-II (ई-44469)]

रामजीलाल मीना, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 29th December, 2023

S.O. 12.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of Natural Gas from SRIKAKULAM ANGUL PIPELINE (SAPL)PROJECT in Srikakulam District in Andhra Pradesh state, a pipeline should be laid by the GAIL ( India) Ltd.,

AND whereas it appears that for the purpose of laying such pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the Right of User in the land described in the Schedule annexed to this Notification.

NOW, Therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub Section (i) of the Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline (Acquisition of Right of User in the land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the Right of User therein.

Any Person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may within 21 days from the date on which the copies of this Notification, as published in the Gazette of India, are made available to the General Public object in writing to the acquisition of the Right of User therein or laying of the pipeline under the land to the Competent Authority, GAIL (India) Ltd., Srikakulam-Angul Pipeline Project, Hotel Sunrise, Arasavalli road junction, Srikakulam-532001, Andhra Pradesh.

SRIKAKULAM - ANUGL PIPELINE (SAPL) PROJECT
LAND SCHEDULE
DISTRICT: Srikakulam STATE: ANDHRA PRADESH
MANDAL VILLAGE SURVEY NO. AREA
Hectare Are Sq. Mt.
Srikakulam Gudam 242/2 00 12 73
261/1A 00 10 56

[F. No. L-14014/196/2022-GP-II (E-44469)]

RAMJI LAL MEENA, Under Secy.

93 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945

नई दिल्ली, 29 दिसम्बर, 2023

का.आ. 13.—के न्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसा प्रतीत होता है कि लोक हित में यह आवश्यक है कि श्रीकाकु लम-अंगुल पाईपलाइन (एस ए पी एल) और स्पर पाईप लाईनके परियोजना के अन्तर्गत खनिज उत्पाद के परिवहन हेतु अंगुल से श्रीकाकु लम तक गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड द्वारा ओडिशा राज्य में पाईपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ।

और के न्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसी पाईपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में जिसके भीतर उक्त पाईपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची मे वर्णित है, उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए ।

अतः अब के न्द्रीय सरकार पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाईपलाइन (भूमि मे उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम 1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा 3 कि उप धारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उस भूमि मे उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है ।

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1) अधीन भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, 21 दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाईप लाइन बिछाये जाने की सबंध मे, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, ओडिशा, गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड 612 उत्क्ल सिग्नेचर, पाहाल, एन हच- 16 भुबनेस्वर -751032 को लिखित रूप मे आक्षेप भेज सके गा ।

श्रिकाकु लम –अनगुल गैस पाइपलाइन
भूमि अनुसूची
जिला-अंगुल राज्य : ओडिशा
तहसील का नाम गाँव का नाम-थाना नं. सर्वे नं/ नया सर्वे नं. अधिसूचित क्षेत्र स ंशोधितक्षेत्र
हेक्टेअर आरे. वगर्मीटर हेक्टेअर आरे. वगर्मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
बनारपाल गोतमारा-111 5314/9343 00 00 00 00 03 25
हिन्दोल इस्वोरपाल -55 1919/2875 00 00 00 00 02 75
1898 00 00 00 00 00 03
1897 00 00 00 00 00 63
1897/3082 00 00 00 00 01 91
ओडपाड़ा कोतम-107 282 00 00 00 00 02 78
289 00 00 00 00 01 78
296 00 00 00 00 00 87
ओडपाड़ा रानीपाल-103 1274/2234 00 03 77 00 03 66
ढ ेंकानाल बनियासाही-147 1725 00 04 15 00 05 61
तिगिरिआ पांचगांव -8 1989 00 02 68 00 02 83
तिगिरिआ स ेसगं-7 51 00 04 09 00 02 04
तिगिरिआ भीरूड़ा-3 7852 00 00 47 00 00 53
7495 00 00 00 00 01 21
तिगिरिआ गोपीनाथपुर शासन-11 882/1422 00 00 00 00 01 82
882/1596 00 00 00 00 01 61
पात्रपुर खमारिगांव-174 535 00 00 00 00 07 43
पात्रपुर गोपालपल्ली-185 516 00 04 54 00 00 32
517 00 00 32 00 04 54
पात्रपुर नूआगड-172 2950 00 02 59 00 06 68
पात्रपुर च ुड़िआलांजी -176 237 00 00 00 00 01 21
447 00 00 00 00 00 61
393 00 00 04 00 05 74
317 00 04 26 00 01 58
22 00 06 36 00 09 59
21 00 04 03 00 05 75
पात्रपुर लालकमागा◌ा◌ँ-175 909 00 00 89 00 00 08
911 00 01 92 00 00 81
912 00 00 38 00 02 30
ब ुगुडा घोलापुर-114 4272 00 05 63 00 04 25
4273 00 03 24 00 03 12
4275 00 06 07 00 07 69
ब ुगुडा कानकु टुरु-113 683 00 00 04 00 00 65
684 00 00 00 00 00 73
679 00 00 32 00 05 38
680 00 02 39 00 01 21
601 00 01 54 00 00 97
602 00 01 98 00 02 63
600 00 00 85 00 00 32
606 00 02 75 00 02 83
605 00 00 40 00 01 21
610 00 00 57 00 00 69
609 00 00 85 00 00 81
जगन्नाथप्रसाद क ु मु ंडी-46 3613/3971 00 11 33 00 09 11
3609/3833 00 03 49 00 05 26
3608 00 02 57 00 00 40
3609 00 06 33 00 09 00
3683 00 03 71 00 04 85
3690/3887 00 04 46 00 07 29
3687 00 00 25 00 01 41
ओडागां नौरिगोड़ा-208 453 00 05 35 00 05 52
456 00 00 45 00 00 44
454 00 05 40 00 03 05
452 00 05 63 00 06 39
451 00 00 10 00 02 16
162 00 04 46 00 00 28
163 00 06 14 00 10 84
249 00 00 20 00 00 88
164 00 04 33 00 04 08
94 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 95 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945

[फा. सं. एल –14014/209/2022-जीपी-II (ई-44587)]

रामजीलाल मीना, अवर सचिव96 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi, the 29th December, 2023

S.O. 13.—Whereas, it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest under the Srikakulam-Angul Pipeline Project(SAPL) and Spur pipeline for the transportation of Petroleum Product from Angul to Srikakulam in the state of Odisha a pipeline should be laid by Gail (India) Limited.

And whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying such pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the right of user in land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid and which is described in the Schedule annexed hereto;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;

Any person interested in the land describe in the said schedule may, within twenty one days from the date of which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section(1) of the Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the Right of User therein for laying of the pipeline under the land to competent Authority,(Odisha) Gail (India) Limited, 612 Utkal Signature, Pahal, NH-16 Bhubaneswar- 751032.

SRIKAKULAM-ANGUL GAS PIPELINE
LAND SCHEDULE
District- Angul State : Odisha
Name of Tehsil Name of Village- Thana no. Survey No./ New Survey No. NOTIFIED AREA REVISED AREA
Hector Are. Sq.mtr. Hector Are. Sq.mtr.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Banarpal Gotamara-111 5314/9343 00 00 00 00 03 25
Hindol Iswarapal-55 1919/2875 00 00 00 00 02 75
1898 00 00 00 00 00 03
1897 00 00 00 00 00 63
1897/3082 00 00 00 00 01 91
Odapada Kottama-107 282 00 00 00 00 02 78
289 00 00 00 00 01 78
296 00 00 00 00 00 87
Odapada Ranipal-103 1274/2234 00 03 77 00 03 66
Dhenkanal Baniasahi-147 1725 00 04 15 00 05 61
Tigiria Panchagan-8 1989 00 02 68 00 02 83
Tigiria Sesagan-7 51 00 04 09 00 02 04
Tigiria Bhiruda-3 7852 00 00 47 00 00 53
7495 00 00 00 00 01 21
Tigiria Gopinathpur Shasan-11 882/1422 00 00 00 00 01 82
882/1596 00 00 00 00 01 61
Patrapur Khamarigan-174 535 00 00 00 00 07 43
Patrapur Gopalpalli-185 516 00 04 54 00 00 32
517 00 00 32 00 04 54
Patrapur Nuagara-172 2950 00 02 59 00 06 68
Patrapur Chudialanji-176 237 00 00 00 00 01 21
447 00 00 00 00 00 61
393 00 00 04 00 05 74
317 00 04 26 00 01 58
22 00 06 36 00 09 59
21 00 04 03 00 05 75
Patrapur Lalkamagan-175 909 00 00 89 00 00 08
911 00 01 92 00 00 81
912 00 00 38 00 02 30
Buguda Gholpur-114 4272 00 05 63 00 04 25
4273 00 03 24 00 03 12
4275 00 06 07 00 07 69
Buguda Kankaturu -113 683 00 00 04 00 00 65
684 00 00 00 00 00 73
679 00 00 32 00 05 38
680 00 02 39 00 01 21
601 00 01 54 00 00 97
602 00 01 98 00 02 63
600 00 00 85 00 00 32
606 00 02 75 00 02 83
605 00 00 40 00 01 21
610 00 00 57 00 00 69
609 00 00 85 00 00 81
Jagannathprasada Kumundi-46 3613/3971 00 11 33 00 09 11
3609/3833 00 03 49 00 05 26
3608 00 02 57 00 00 40
3609 00 06 33 00 09 00
3683 00 03 71 00 04 85
3690/3887 00 04 46 00 07 29
3687 00 00 25 00 01 41
Odagan Nauriagora-208 453 00 05 35 00 05 52
456 00 00 45 00 00 44
454 00 05 40 00 03 05
452 00 05 63 00 06 39
451 00 00 10 00 02 16
162 00 04 46 00 00 28
163 00 06 14 00 10 84
249 00 00 20 00 00 88
164 00 04 33 00 04 08
97 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 98 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

[F. No. L-14014/ 209 / 2022 -GP-II (E- 44587)]

RAMJI LAL MEENA, Under Secy.

शुद्धि-पत्र

नई दिल्ली, 29 दिसम्बर, 2023

का.आ. 14.—पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में प्रयोक्ता के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम 1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा 2 के खंड (क) के अनुसरण में (इसके बाद इसे उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है), भारत सरकार एतदद्वारा पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृ तिक गैस मंत्रालय में भारत सरकार की दिनांक 03.11.2023 की अधिसूचना सां.आ. 1753 जो दिनांक 05.11.2023-11.11.2023 को भारत के राजपत्र में प्रकाशित की गई, में निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है अर्थात:

अधिसूचना का.आ. 1753 जो दिनांक 05.11.2023-11.11.2023 को साप्ताहिक राजपत्र में प्रकाशित हुई थी में "श्री बीर प्रकाश प्रसाद, उप समाहर्ता (सेवानिवृत्त), झारखण्ड राज्य प्रशासनिक सेवा, को प्रतिनियुक्ति के आधार पर सक्षम प्राधिकारी के कार्यो का निर्वहन करने के लिये प्राधिकृ त करती है'' के स्थान पर "श्री बीर प्रकाश प्रसाद, उप समाहर्ता (सेवानिवृत्त), झारखण्ड राज्य प्रशासनिक सेवा को सक्षम प्राधिकारी के कार्यो का निर्वहन करने के लिये प्राधिकृ त करती है'' शब्द प्रतिस्थापित किए गए हैं ।

[फा. सं. एल –14014/77/2018-जी पी–II (ई- 41940)]

रामजीलाल मीना, अवर सचिव

CORRIGENDUM

New Delhi, the 29th December, 2023

S.O. 14.—In pursuance of clause (a) of Section 2 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), (hereinafter called the said Act), the Government of India hereby makes the following amendments in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, S.O. 1753 dated 03.11.2023 published in Gazette of India on 05.11.2023 – 11.11.2023 namely:

In the said notification published in Weekly Gazette vide S.O. No. 1753 dated 5.11.2023 – 11.11.2023 matter published that "Sh. Bir Prakash Prasad, Deputy Collector (Retired), Jharkhand State Administrative Service to perform the functions of Competent Authority on Deputation basis" be substituted as "Sh. Bir Prakash Prasad, Deputy Collector (Retired) Jharkhand State Administrative Service to perform the functions of Competent Authority in the State of Jharkhand".

[F. No. L-14014/77/2018-GP-II (E-41940)]

RAMJI LAL MEENA, Under Secy.

99 [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945

नई दिल्ली, 29 दिसम्बर, 2023

का.आ. 15.—भारत सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम,1962(1962 का 50 )(जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है) की धारा 3 की उपधारा )1 ( के अधीन जारी भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृ तिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 5340 (अ) तारीख अक्टूबर 15, 2018 जो क्रमशः भारत के असाधारण राजपत्र तारीख अक्टूबर 18, 2018 मे प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड द्वारा पश्चिम बंगाल राज्य में बरौनी – गुवाहाटी पाइप लाइन (बी जी पी एल) के माध्यम से प्राकृ तिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

और उक्त राजपत्रित अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी;

और, सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (1) के अधीन भारत सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है;

और भारत सरकार ने, उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात और यह संतुष्ट हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइनें बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है, उस में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है;

अतः अब, भारत सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुये, यह घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइनें बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है;

और भारत सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम कि धारा 6 कि उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुये, निर्देश देती है कि पाइपलाइनें बिछाने के लिए भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार, इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को, भारत सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए, पाइपलाइनें बिछाने का प्रस्ताव करने वाली गेल (इण्डिया)लिमिटेड में निहित होगा और तदुपरि, भूमि में ऐसे उपयोग काअधिकार, इस प्रकार अधिरोपित निबंधनों और शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुये, सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, गेल (इण्डिया)लिमिटेड में निहित होगा।

बरौनी - गुवाहाटी पाइपलाइन परियोजना
अनुसूची
राज्य: पश्चिम बंगाल
जिला थाना मौजा थाना नं सर्वे नं क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेअर -आर- वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6
दार्जिलिंग फांसीदेउया महिपाल ८८ 677 00 07 02
710 00 10 28
1628 00 02 08
706 00 06 20
1629 00 03 51
217 00 05 37
दार्जिलिंग फांसीदेउया कदमी ९० 1037 00 11 49
1035 00 01 53
1034 00 09 39
1032 00 09 36
1030 00 02 20
1098 00 03 18
997 00 06 53
996 00 07 79
995 00 17 47
994 00 00 37
991 00 00 64
929 00 00 52
934 00 10 09
935 00 08 43
दार्जिलिंग फांसीदेउया साहानन्द ९१ 691 00 03 68
100 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

[फा. सं. एल –14014-78-2022-जी. पी.-II (ई-42405)]

रामजीलाल मीना, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 29th December, 2023

S.O. 15.—Whereas by notification of Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas numbers S. 0. 5340 (E) dated 15-10-2018 issued under sub- section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline (Acquisition of Right of User in Land ) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), published in the Extra ordinary Gazette of India dated 18-10-2018, the Government of India declared its intention to acquire the Right of User in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of natural gas through Barauni — Guwahati Pipeline (BGPL.) in the State of WEST BENGAL by GAIL (India) Limited;

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public;

And, whereas the Competent Authority has, under sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the said Act, submitted its report to Government of India;

And whereas Government of India after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipelines, has decided to acquire the Right of User therein ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act, Government of India hereby declares that the Right of User in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

And, further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act, Government of India hereby directs that the Right of User in the land for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in Government of India, vest, on this date of the publication of the declaration, in the GAIL (India) Limited, free from all encumbrances.

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 101
BARAUNI - GUWAHATI PIPELINE PROJECT
SCHEDULE
State: West Bengal
District Thana Village JL No. Survey No. Area
Hect. - Are - Sq. mtr.
1 2 3 4 5 6
Darjeeling Phansideoya Mahipal 88 677 00 07 02
710 00 10 28
1628 00 02 08
706 00 06 20
1629 00 03 51
217 00 05 37
Darjeeling Phansideoya Kadmi 90 1037 00 11 49
1035 00 01 53
1034 00 09 39
1032 00 09 36
1030 00 02 20
1098 00 03 18
997 00 06 53
996 00 07 79
995 00 17 47
994 00 00 37
991 00 00 64
929 00 00 52
934 00 10 09
935 00 08 43
Darjeeling Phansideoya Sahananda 91 691 00 03 68

[F. No. L-14014-78-2022-GP-II (E-42405)]

RAMJI LAL MEENA, Under Secy.

102 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 29 दिसम्बर, 2023

का.आ. 16.—भारत सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि मे उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) जिसे इसमे इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है) की धारा 3 कि उपधारा (1) के अधीन जारी भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृ तिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 4095(अ) तारीख 13.09.2023 जो भारत के असाधारण राजपत्र तारीख 18.09.2023 मे प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मैसर्स इंद्रधनुष गैस ग्रिड लिमिटेड द्वारा असम राज्य में देरगाँव – दीमापुर प्रकृ तिक गैस पाइपलाइन के मधायम से प्रकृ तिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

और उक्त राजपत्रित अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी;

और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने जनता से प्राप्त आक्षेपों को परीक्षण के उपरांत निपटान कर दिया है;

और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा (1) के अधीन भारत सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है;

और भारत सरकार ने, उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात और यह संतुष्ट हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है, उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है;

अतः अब, भारत सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 कि उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुये, यह घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है;

और भारत सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम कि धारा 6 कि उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुये, यह निर्देश देती है कि पाइपलाइने बिछाने के लिए भूमि मे उपयोग के अधिकार, इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को, भारत सरकार में निहित होने के बजाय, पाइपलाइन बिछाने का प्रस्ताव करने वाली मैसर्स इंद्रधनुष गैस ग्रिड लिमिटेड में निहित होगा और तदुपरि, भूमि में ऐसे उपयोग का अधिकार, इस प्रकार अधिरोपित निबंधनों और शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुये, सभी विलंगमों से मुक्त, मैसर्स इंद्रधनुष गैस ग्रिड लिमिटेड में निहित होगा।

अनुसूची

जिला : गोलाघाट राज्य : असम
सर्क ल मौज़ा गाँव दाग नं क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेअर आर वर्ग मीटर
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
- - दोयांग आर एफ NC 05 37 89
- - र ेंगामा आर एफ NC 00 06 24

[फा. सं. एल –14014/196/2022-जीपी-II (ई-44469)]

रामजीलाल मीना, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 29th December, 2023

S.O. 16.—Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas S.O. No. 4095(E) dated 13.09.2023, issued under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), published in the Extra Ordinary Gazette of India dated the 18.09.2023, the Government of India declared its intention to acquire the Right of User in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of Natural Gas through Dergaon-Dimapur Gas Pipeline in the state of Assam by Indradhanush Gas Grid Limited (IGGL).

And whereas copies of the said Extraordinary Gazette notification were made available to the public.

And whereas the objections received from the public to the laying of the pipeline have been considered and disposed by the Competent Authority.

And whereas the Competent Authority has, under sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act submitted its report to the Government of India.

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 103

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

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of the section 6 of the said Act, the Government of India hereby declares that the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of section 6 of the said Act, the Government of India hereby directs that the Right of User in the land for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in Government of India, vest, on this date of the publication of the declaration, in the Indradhanush Gas Grid Limited (IGGL), free from all encumbrances.

District : Golaghat State: Assam
Circle Mouza Gaon Dag No. Area
Hectare Are Square Metre
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
- - Doyang RF NC 05 37 89
- - Rengma RF NC 00 06 24

[F. No. L-14014/196/2022-GP-II (E-44469)]

RAMJI LAL MEENA, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 29 दिसम्बर, 2023

का.आ. 17.—भारत सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि महाराष्ट्र राज्य में मुम्बई – नागपुर – झारसुगुडा (अनुभाग: मुम्बई - नागपुर) पाईप लाईन, प्राकृ तिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड (भारत सरकार का उपक्रम) द्वारा, एक पाइपलाईन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

और भारत सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाईन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में, जिसके नीचे उक्त पाइपलाईन बिछाए जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित है, उपयोग का अधिकार का अर्जित किया जाना चाहिए।

अत: अब, भारत सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाईन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकर का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उस भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है;

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियॉं साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध कराये जाने की तारीख के , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर, भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाईन बिछाने, उसमे उपयोग के अधिकार के , उपजिलाधिकारी एवं सक्षम प्राधिकारी (महाराष्ट्र राज्य) गेल (इण्डिया) लिमिटेड, गेल भवन, प्लॉट नं. 73, सैक्टर 15 सी।बी।डी। बेलापुर नवीमु ंबई 400614 को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सके गा।

मुम्बई – नागपुर – झारसुगुड़ा नैचुरल गैस पाईप लाईन

अनुभाग :- मुम्बई – नागपुर

अनुसूची

राज्य: महाराष्ट्र

जिला तहसील गाँव सर्वे नं./ दाग नं. क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेअर आर वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5
ठाणे शहापूर शिरोळ 1018 00 09 70
1020 00 07 00
1021 00 03 50
1023 00 05 00

[फा. सं. एल –14014/38/2023-जीपी-II (ई-48582)]

रामजीलाल मीना, अवर सचिव104 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi, the 29th December, 2023

S.O. 17.—Whereas it appears to Government of India that it is necessary in public interest that for transportation of natural gas through Mumbai - Nagpur – Jharsuguda Natural Gas Pipe line. (Section: - Mumbai – Nagpur), in the State of Maharashtra, a pipeline should be laid by GAIL (India) Limited;

And, whereas it appears to Government of India that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the Right of User in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;

Now, therefore, in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962, (50 of 1962) Government of India hereby declares its intention to acquire the Right of User therein;

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date of which the copies of the notification issued, under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of Right of User therein for laying of the pipeline under the land to Dy. Collector & Competent Authority, (Maharashtra State) GAIL (India) Limited. GAIL Bhawan, Plot No. 73, Sector 15, CBD Belapur, Navi Mumbai 400614.

MUMBAI – NAGPUR – JHARSUGUDA NATURAL GAS PIPE LINE

SECTION: - MUMBAI – NAGPUR

SCHEDULE

State : Maharashtra

District Tehsil Village Survey No. Area
Hect. Are Sq. Mtr.
1 2 3 4 5
Thane Shahapur Shirol 1018 00 09 70
1020 00 07 00
1021 00 03 50
1023 00 05 00

[F. No. L-14014/38/2023-GP-II (E-48582)]

RAMJI LAL MEENA, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 29 दिसम्बर, 2023

का.आ. 18.—जबकि भारत सरकार को प्रतीत होता है कि जनहित में यह आवश्यक है कि पश्चिम बंगाल राज्य में कनाई चट्टा-पानीतार प्राकृ तिक गैस पाइपलाइन परियोजना (के पीपीएल) के माध्यम से प्राकृ तिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए हुगली पाइप लाइन प्राइवेट लिमिटेड (एचपीपीएल) द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई चाहिये ।

और, जबकि भारत सरकार को ऐसा प्रतीत होता है कि उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए, उस भूमि में उपयोगकर्ता का अधिकार प्राप्त करना आवश्यक है जिसके अंतर्गत उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित है इस अधिसूचना के लिए;

इसलिए, अब, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोगकर्ता के अधिकार का अधिग्रहण) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा (3) की उप-धारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, भारत सरकार एतद्द्वारा घोषणा करती है इसका इरादा उसमें उपयोगकर्ता का अधिकार प्राप्त करने का है;

उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में रुचि रखने वाला कोई भी व्यक्ति, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1) के तहत जारी अधिसूचना की प्रतियां, भारत के राजपत्र में प्रकाशित होने की तारीख से इक्कीस दिनों के भीतर प्राप्त कर सकता है। आम जनता के लिए उपलब्ध कराए गए हैं, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, हुगली जिला, पश्चिम बंगाल राज्य, हुगली पाइप लाइन प्राइवेट लिमिटेड (एचपीपीएल) की भूमि के तहत पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उसमें उपयोगकर्ता के अधिकार के अधिग्रहण पर लिखित में आपत्ति है[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 105 अनुसूची

कनाई चट्टा-पानीतर प्राकृ तिक गैस पाईपलाइन
राज्य : पश्चिम बंगाल
जिला थाना मौजा थाना नं नक्शा प्लाट क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेअर आर वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
हूगली बालागढ़ साधु बंगाली ७९ LR
1243 0 0 12
1242 0 0 14
1244 0 3 8
1246 0 9 57
1247 0 7 9
1260 0 1 33
1261 0 1 86
1259 0 2 83
1263 0 1 4
1258 0 0 10
1264 0 2 94
1267 0 3 15
1266 0 0 21
1268 0 5 0
1269 0 1 53
1287 0 10 13
1286 0 4 83
1218 0 3 46
1288 0 0 97
1289 0 7 13
1290 0 4 22
744 0 4 13
745 0 4 78
741 0 9 34
699 0 8 53
701 0 1 59
705 0 11 76
704 0 2 35
706 0 1 1
707 0 8 65
708 0 2 94
709 0 4 24
481 0 9 64
483 0 8 61
492 0 4 12
493 0 2 87
494 0 14 56
490 0 0 60
496 0 2 63
497 0 0 10
463 0 7 9
462 0 5 30
464 0 1 66
461 0 0 10
कनाई चट्टा-पानीतर प्राकृ तिक गैस पाईपलाइन
राज्य : पश्चिम बंगाल
जिला थाना मौजा थाना नं नक्शा प्लाट क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेअर आर वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
हूगली बालागढ़ बागा ८१ LR
1231 0 7 19
1243 0 8 62
1244 0 5 81
1245 0 0 13
1261 0 5 37
1262 0 3 73
1263 0 2 74
1264 0 0 72
1267 0 3 89
1268 0 9 14
1271 0 3 54
1272 0 1 17
1273 0 10 19
1274 0 2 88
1276 0 0 65
1278 0 4 50
1482 0 0 28
1484 0 4 43
1485 0 9 99
1486 0 8 15
1497 0 4 62
1498 0 9 35
1500 0 0 10
1534 0 5 49
1535 0 4 97
1536 0 2 45
1537 0 4 13
1539 0 9 78
1540 0 4 4
1541 0 2 29
1543 0 0 10
1684 0 0 28
1806 0 5 10
1807 0 9 13
1808 0 0 40
1809 0 6 12
1810 0 3 66
1811 0 4 72
1814 0 10 37
1815 0 2 32
1830 0 4 94
1833 0 7 44
1834 0 2 77
1835 0 3 15
1837 0 0 10
1839 0 0 17
1840 0 5 26
1841 0 4 19
1869 0 1 32
925 0 2 23
926 0 6 4
927 0 4 86
928 0 0 15
934 0 10 21
935 0 1 67
938 0 5 83
939 0 0 10
955 0 1 44
955/2243 0 0 10
956 0 9 3
959 0 1 54
959/2244 0 4 35
960 0 6 11
962 0 3 76
965 0 0 10
965/2246 0 1 1
969 0 8 13
969/2247 0 7 72
970 0 4 37
1810/2306 0 0 92
1840/2346 0 4 62
कनाई चट्टा-पानीतर प्राकृ तिक गैस पाइपलाइन
राज्य : पश्चिम बंगाल
जिला थाना मौजा थाना नं नक्शा प्लाट क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेअर आर वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
हूगली बालागढ़ अराज़ी अस्चितपुर १२१ LR
1 0 3 88
15 0 0 10
2 0 0 82
3 0 1 57
5 0 1 36
6 0 5 52
हूगली बालागढ़ गौरनै १२० LR
870 0 4 87
963 0 0 10
964 0 16 26
965 0 0 32
966 0 13 42
967 0 8 35
968 0 0 10
हूगली बालागढ़ कमालपुर ११९ LR
1231 0 0 10
1236 0 12 44
1237 0 7 54
1238 0 5 82
1254 0 2 11
1258 0 5 74
1259/2165 0 0 15
1262 0 0 10
1263 0 1 37
1264 0 8 14
1265 0 0 10
1266 0 6 11
1269 0 0 34
1270 0 2 63
1271 0 4 87
1284 0 8 11
1287 0 4 91
1288 0 2 32
1289 0 0 10
1290 0 1 9
1291 0 2 83
1292 0 3 11
1293 0 4 68
1294 0 0 19
1308 0 7 68
145 0 2 72
146 0 4 81
147 0 2 13
148 0 0 88
149 0 1 55
150 0 1 82
151 0 0 22
152 0 0 64
153 0 5 16
161 0 0 29
162 0 4 39
162/2121 0 0 96
163 0 1 95
164 0 0 81
165 0 1 79
166 0 0 55
167 0 3 65
168/2122 0 0 10
199 0 1 84
202 0 6 43
203 0 1 9
220 0 2 40
221 0 3 32
222 0 2 38
223 0 4 24
224 0 0 10
229 0 0 10
232 0 7 16
233 0 0 78
251 0 3 39
252 0 6 26
298 0 1 87
299 0 2 38
300 0 5 62
301 0 0 89
302 0 3 59
303 0 1 12
307 0 4 16
308 0 6 56
309 0 0 86
314 0 1 1
315 0 0 20
316 0 7 71
317 0 0 14
359 0 1 38
360 0 1 7
373 0 5 92
374 0 1 90
375 0 3 98
376 0 3 14
377 0 0 10
387 0 0 14
391 0 13 99
392 0 3 55
394 0 0 10
395 0 6 98
398 0 0 10
399 0 3 53
कनाई चट्टा-पानीतर प्राकृ तिक गैस पाइपलाइन
राज्य : पश्चिम बंगाल
जिला थाना मौजा थाना नं नक्शा प्लाट क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेअर आर वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
हूगली बालागढ़ खमरगाछी ११७ LR
153 0 2 82
154 0 9 86
162 0 1 64
163 0 1 27
164 0 5 6
165 0 6 56
198 0 0 10
199 0 0 92
219 0 0 41
220 0 10 31
221 0 5 89
222 0 1 46
223 0 6 5
224 0 0 48
228 0 1 52
229 0 9 25
232 0 1 76
233 0 5 77
234 0 7 90
239 0 11 21
241 0 2 56
274 0 1 38
275 0 2 43
277 0 10 14
278 0 8 45
280 0 0 17
235 0 0 10
कनाई चट्टा-पानीतर प्राकृ तिक गैस पाईपलाइन
राज्य : पश्चिम बंगाल
जिला थाना मौजा थाना नं नक्शा प्लाट क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेअर आर वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
हूगली बालागढ़ बानेश्वरपुर ११४ LR
80 0 0 10
82 0 1 11
81 0 0 73
259 0 3 47
83 0 6 91
87 0 7 49
88 0 1 96
89 0 5 3
90 0 3 31
91 0 3 41
92 0 0 10
176 0 6 31
190 0 4 80
191 0 3 26
198 0 0 10
206 0 0 36
217 0 0 92
230 0 4 0
238 0 4 77
239 0 3 33
249 0 0 56
251 0 3 79
252 0 0 85
253 0 4 41
258 0 3 40
260 0 1 56
263 0 0 52
265 0 0 89
168 0 1 12
170 0 1 59
169 0 4 25
95 0 2 68
94 0 1 13
93 0 0 62
86 0 2 19
85 0 2 93
250 0 4 15
247 0 2 15
240 0 2 83
231 0 3 20
220 0 6 74
218 0 0 32
219 0 0 49
207 0 5 70
208 0 0 10
196 0 0 97
197 0 1 98
177 0 3 30
178 0 0 39
कनाई चट्टा-पानीतर प्राकृ तिक गैस पाईपलाइन
राज्य : पश्चिम बंगाल
जिला थाना मौजा थाना नं नक्शा प्लाट क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेअर आर वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
हूगली बालागढ़ मोकतापुर ११६ LR
40 0 2 73
41 0 0 32
42 0 0 60
64 0 0 38
43 0 7 78
57 0 9 77
63 0 0 10
58 0 2 90
59 0 6 43
82 0 7 82
81 0 2 44
83 0 0 10
84 0 7 53
86 0 4 1
87 0 5 7
88 0 1 9
118 0 7 80
130 0 3 98
131 0 0 13
132 0 2 26
141 0 1 18
205 0 2 96
207 0 4 89
208 0 0 12
210 0 5 20
211 0 2 3
213 0 0 73
212 0 1 56
214 0 0 55
218 0 3 26
217 0 1 70
219 0 2 42
220 0 1 93
223 0 6 14
222 0 3 42
234 0 1 84
355 0 5 44
357 0 7 37
358 0 4 11
335 0 1 16
334 0 1 39
333 0 1 23
332 0 2 3
372 0 46 91
556 0 13 99
106 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 107 108 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 109 110 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 111 112 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 113 114 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 115

[फा. सं. एल –14014/38/2023-जीपी-II (ई-48582)]

रामजीलाल मीना, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 29th December, 2023

S.O. 18.—Whereas is appears to Government of India that it is necessary in public interest that for transportation of natural gas through Kanai Chatta-Panitar Natural Gas Pipeline Project (KPPL) , in the State of West Bengal, a pipeline should be laid by Hooghly Pipe Line Private Limited (HPPL).

And, whereas it appears to Government of India that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the Right of the User in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;

Now, therefore, in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section(1) of Section (3) of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right to User in Land) Act, 1962,(50 of 1962) Government of India hereby declares its intention to acquire the Right of User therein;

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date of which the copies of the notification issued under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land of the Competent Authority, Hooghly District, State of West Bengal, Hooghly Pipe Line Private Limited (HPPL).

116 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

SCHEDULE

KANAI CHATTA - PANITAR NATURAL GAS PIPELINE PROJECT(KPPL)
State : West Bengal
District Block Mouza Jl.No. Map Plot Area
Hect Are Sq. Mt.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Hooghly BALAGARH SADHU BANGALI 79 LR
1243 0 0 12
1242 0 0 14
1244 0 3 8
1246 0 9 57
1247 0 7 9
1260 0 1 33
1261 0 1 86
1259 0 2 83
1263 0 1 4
1258 0 0 10
1264 0 2 94
1267 0 3 15
1266 0 0 21
1268 0 5 0
1269 0 1 53
1287 0 10 13
1286 0 4 83
1218 0 3 46
1288 0 0 97
1289 0 7 13
1290 0 4 22
744 0 4 13
745 0 4 78
741 0 9 34
699 0 8 53
701 0 1 59
705 0 11 76
704 0 2 35
706 0 1 1
707 0 8 65
708 0 2 94
709 0 4 24
481 0 9 64
483 0 8 61
492 0 4 12
493 0 2 87
494 0 14 56
490 0 0 60
496 0 2 63
497 0 0 10
463 0 7 9
462 0 5 30
464 0 1 66
461 0 0 10
KANAI CHATTA - PANITAR NATURAL GAS PIPELINE PROJECT(KPPL)
State : West Bengal
District Block Mouza Jl.No. Map Plot Area
Hect Are Sq. Mt.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Hooghly BALAGARH BAGA 81 LR
1231 0 7 19
1243 0 8 62
1244 0 5 81
1245 0 0 13
1261 0 5 37
1262 0 3 73
1263 0 2 74
1264 0 0 72
1267 0 3 89
1268 0 9 14
1271 0 3 54
1272 0 1 17
1273 0 10 19
1274 0 2 88
1276 0 0 65
1278 0 4 50
1482 0 0 28
1484 0 4 43
1485 0 9 99
1486 0 8 15
1497 0 4 62
1498 0 9 35
1500 0 0 10
1534 0 5 49
1535 0 4 97
1536 0 2 45
1537 0 4 13
1539 0 9 78
1540 0 4 4
1541 0 2 29
1543 0 0 10
1684 0 0 28
1806 0 5 10
1807 0 9 13
1808 0 0 40
1809 0 6 12
1810 0 3 66
1811 0 4 72
1814 0 10 37
1815 0 2 32
1830 0 4 94
1833 0 7 44
1834 0 2 77
1835 0 3 15
1837 0 0 10
1839 0 0 17
1840 0 5 26
1841 0 4 19
1869 0 1 32
925 0 2 23
926 0 6 4
927 0 4 86
928 0 0 15
934 0 10 21
935 0 1 67
938 0 5 83
939 0 0 10
955 0 1 44
955/2243 0 0 10
956 0 9 3
959 0 1 54
959/2244 0 4 35
960 0 6 11
962 0 3 76
965 0 0 10
965/2246 0 1 1
969 0 8 13
969/2247 0 7 72
970 0 4 37
1810/2306 0 0 92
1840/2346 0 4 62
KANAI CHATTA - PANITAR NATURAL GAS PIPELINE PROJECT(KPPL)
State : West Bengal
District Block Mouza Jl.No. Map Plot Area
Hect Are Sq. Mt.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Hooghly BALAGARH ARAZI ACHITPUR 121 LR
1 0 3 88
15 0 0 10
2 0 0 82
3 0 1 57
5 0 1 36
6 0 5 52
Hooghly BALAGARH GAURNAI 120 LR
870 0 4 87
963 0 0 10
964 0 16 26
965 0 0 32
966 0 13 42
967 0 8 35
968 0 0 10
Hooghly BALAGARH KAMALPUR 119 LR
1231 0 0 10
1236 0 12 44
1237 0 7 54
1238 0 5 82
1254 0 2 11
1258 0 5 74
1259/2165 0 0 15
1262 0 0 10
1263 0 1 37
1264 0 8 14
1265 0 0 10
1266 0 6 11
1269 0 0 34
1270 0 2 63
1271 0 4 87
1284 0 8 11
1287 0 4 91
1288 0 2 32
1289 0 0 10
1290 0 1 9
1291 0 2 83
1292 0 3 11
1293 0 4 68
1294 0 0 19
1308 0 7 68
145 0 2 72
146 0 4 81
147 0 2 13
148 0 0 88
149 0 1 55
150 0 1 82
151 0 0 22
152 0 0 64
153 0 5 16
161 0 0 29
162 0 4 39
162/2121 0 0 96
163 0 1 95
164 0 0 81
165 0 1 79
166 0 0 55
167 0 3 65
168/2122 0 0 10
199 0 1 84
202 0 6 43
203 0 1 9
220 0 2 40
221 0 3 32
222 0 2 38
223 0 4 24
224 0 0 10
229 0 0 10
232 0 7 16
233 0 0 78
251 0 3 39
252 0 6 26
298 0 1 87
299 0 2 38
300 0 5 62
301 0 0 89
302 0 3 59
303 0 1 12
307 0 4 16
308 0 6 56
309 0 0 86
314 0 1 1
315 0 0 20
316 0 7 71
317 0 0 14
359 0 1 38
360 0 1 7
373 0 5 92
374 0 1 90
375 0 3 98
376 0 3 14
377 0 0 10
387 0 0 14
391 0 13 99
392 0 3 55
394 0 0 10
395 0 6 98
398 0 0 10
399 0 3 53
KANAI CHATTA - PANITAR NATURAL GAS PIPELINE PROJECT(KPPL)
State : West Bengal
District Block Mouza Jl.No. Map Plot Area
Hect Are Sq. Mt.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Hooghly BALAGARH KHAMARGACHHI 117 LR
153 0 2 82
154 0 9 86
162 0 1 64
163 0 1 27
164 0 5 6
165 0 6 56
198 0 0 10
199 0 0 92
219 0 0 41
220 0 10 31
221 0 5 89
222 0 1 46
223 0 6 5
224 0 0 48
228 0 1 52
229 0 9 25
232 0 1 76
233 0 5 77
234 0 7 90
239 0 11 21
241 0 2 56
274 0 1 38
275 0 2 43
277 0 10 14
278 0 8 45
280 0 0 17
235 0 0 10
KANAI CHATTA - PANITAR NATURAL GAS PIPELINE PROJECT(KPPL)
State : West Bengal
District Block Mouza Jl.No. Map Plot Area
Hect Are Sq. Mt.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Hooghly BALAGARH BANESWARPUR 114 LR
80 0 0 10
82 0 1 11
81 0 0 73
259 0 3 47
83 0 6 91
87 0 7 49
88 0 1 96
89 0 5 3
90 0 3 31
91 0 3 41
92 0 0 10
176 0 6 31
190 0 4 80
191 0 3 26
198 0 0 10
206 0 0 36
217 0 0 92
230 0 4 0
238 0 4 77
239 0 3 33
249 0 0 56
251 0 3 79
252 0 0 85
253 0 4 41
258 0 3 40
260 0 1 56
263 0 0 52
265 0 0 89
168 0 1 12
170 0 1 59
169 0 4 25
95 0 2 68
94 0 1 13
93 0 0 62
86 0 2 19
85 0 2 93
250 0 4 15
247 0 2 15
240 0 2 83
231 0 3 20
220 0 6 74
218 0 0 32
219 0 0 49
207 0 5 70
208 0 0 10
196 0 0 97
197 0 1 98
177 0 3 30
178 0 0 39
KANAI CHATTA - PANITAR NATURAL GAS PIPELINE PROJECT(KPPL)
State : West Bengal
District Block Mouza Jl.No. Map Plot Area
Hect Are Sq. Mt.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Hooghly BALAGARH MOKTARPUR 116 LR
40 0 2 73
41 0 0 32
42 0 0 60
64 0 0 38
43 0 7 78
57 0 9 77
63 0 0 10
58 0 2 90
59 0 6 43
82 0 7 82
81 0 2 44
83 0 0 10
84 0 7 53
86 0 4 1
87 0 5 7
88 0 1 9
118 0 7 80
130 0 3 98
131 0 0 13
132 0 2 26
141 0 1 18
205 0 2 96
207 0 4 89
208 0 0 12
210 0 5 20
211 0 2 3
213 0 0 73
212 0 1 56
214 0 0 55
218 0 3 26
217 0 1 70
219 0 2 42
220 0 1 93
223 0 6 14
222 0 3 42
234 0 1 84
355 0 5 44
357 0 7 37
358 0 4 11
335 0 1 16
334 0 1 39
333 0 1 23
332 0 2 3
372 0 46 91
556 0 13 99
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 117 118 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 119 120 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 121 122 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] [भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 123 124 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

[F. No. L-14014/38/2023-GP-II (E-48582)]

RAMJI LAL MEENA, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 29 दिसम्बर, 2023

का.आ. 19.—पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में प्रयोक्ता के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) (इसमें इसके बाद उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है) की धारा 2 के खंड (क) के अनुसरण में भारत सरकार एतदद्वारा, तमिल नाडु राज्य में मैसर्स इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड की एन्नोर-तिरुवल्लूर-बंगलुरू-पुदुच्चेरी-[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 125 नागापट्टिनम-मदुरई-तूतीकोरीन प्राकृ तिक गैस पाइपलाइन परियोजना के लिये पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में प्रयोक्ता के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 के तहत श्री डी. सुरेश, उप समाहर्ता, तमिलनाडु सरकार को श्री जे.

कन्नन, उप समाहर्ता, तमिलनाडु सरकार के स्थान पर सक्षम प्राधिकारी के कार्यो का निर्वहन करने के लिये प्राधिकृ त करती है I

2. यह अधिसूचना इसके जारी होने की तिथि से प्रभावी होगी।

[फा. सं. एल –14014/77/2018-जीपी-II (ई-41940)]

रामजीलाल मीना, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 29th December, 2023

S.O. 19.—In pursuance of clause (a) of Section 2 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), (hereinafter called the said Act), the Government of India hereby authorizes Shri D. Suresh, Deputy Collector, Government of Tamil Nadu vice Shri J. Kannan, Deputy Collector, Government of Tamil Nadu to perform the functions of Competent Authority under the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 for Ennore – Thiruvallur – Bengaluru – Puducherry – Nagapattinam – Madurai – Tuticorin Natural Gas P ipeline Project of M/s. Indian Oil Corporaton Limited in the State of Tamil Nadu.

2. This notification will be effective from the date of its issue.

[F. No. L-14014/77/2018-GP-II (E-41940)]

RAMJI LAL MEENA, Under Secy.

.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (ं1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार के प्रशासन. कमांडर, स्टेशन हेड क्वार्टर, सैन्य क्षेत्र, पटियाला; श्री पवन कु मार बजाज ठेके दार निवासी एल.आई.जी. 175, अर्बन एस्टेट, फे ज़-I, पटियाला, संबद्ध नियोजको और गुरमेल कौर, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय नं 1 चण्डीगड के पंचाट (57/2016) प्रकाशित करती है।

[सं. एल -12025/01/2024- आई आर (बी-I)-01]

सलोनी, उप निदेशक

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

New Delhi, the 12th January, 2024

S.O. 20.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref.57/2016) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court –I Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala; Shri Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala, and Gurmail Kaur.Worker.

[No. L-12025/01/2024- IR(B-I)-01]

SALONI, Dy. Director126 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Offier, Chandigarh.

ID No.57/2016

Registered On:-11/11/2016

Gurmail Kaur W/o Sh. Jarnail Singh C/o Harpreet Singh Resi-cum-Office of Street No.12, Rishi Colony, Patiala (Punjab) .

...........Workman Versus

1. The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala.

2. Sh. Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala.

........Respondents

Award

Passed On:-07.12.2023

1. The workman Gurmail Kaur has directly filed statement of claim under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(hereinafter called the Act), with a prayer to reinstate the workman with back wages.

2. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal the case was fixed for evidence of workman but none is responding on its behalf. Several opportunities have already been given to the workman for evidence but of no use which denotes that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the matter on merits.

3. Since the workman has neither put his appearance since long nor he has led any evidence to prove his cause against the management as such, this Tribunal is left with no choice except to pass a 'No Claim Award'. Accordingly, no claim award is passed in the present case for non-prosecution of workman. File after completion be consigned in the record room.

4. Let copy of this award be sent to Central Government for publication as required under Section 17 of the ID Act, 1947.

KAMAL KANT, PO-cum-Link Officer

नई दिल्ली, 12 जनवरी, 2024

.—औद्यौगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (ं1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार के प्रशासन. कमांडर, स्टेशन हेड क्वार्टर, सैन्य क्षेत्र, पटियाला; श्री पवन कु मार बजाज ठेके दार निवासी एल.आई.जी. 175, अर्बन एस्टेट, फे ज़-I, पटियाला, संबद्ध नियोजको और शैली,कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय नं 1 चण्डीगड के पंचाट (58/2016) प्रकाशित करती है।

[सं. एल -12025/01/2024- आई आर (बी-I)-02]

सलोनी, उप निदेशक

New Delhi, the 12th January, 2024

S.O. 21.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref.58/2016) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court –I Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala; Shri Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala, and Shelly.Worker.

[No. L-12025/01/2024- IR(B-I)-02]

SALONI, Dy. Director[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 127

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Offier, Chandigarh.

ID No.58/2016

Registered On:-11/11/2016

Shelly S/o Kamlesh Kumar C/oHarpreet Singh Resident-cum-Office of Street No.12, Rishi Colony, Patiala (Punjab).

...........Workman

Versus

1. The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala.

2. Sh. Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala.

........Respondents

Award

Passed On:-07.12.2023

1. The workman Shelly has directly filed statement of claim under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(hereinafter called the Act), with a prayer to reinstate the workman with back wages.

2. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal the case was fixed for evidence of workman but none is responding on its behalf. Several opportunities have already been given to the workman for evidence but of no use which denotes that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the matter on merits.

3. Since the workman has neither put his appearance since long nor he has led any evidence to prove his cause against the management as such, this Tribunal is left with no choice except to pass a 'No Claim Award'. Accordingly, no claim award is passed in the present case for non-prosecution of workman.File after completion be consigned in the record room.

4. Let copy of this award be sent to Central Government for publication as required under Section 17 of the ID Act, 1947.

KAMAL KANT, PO-cum-Link Officer .—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (ं1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार के प्रशासन. कमांडर, स्टेशन हेड क्वार्टर, सैन्य क्षेत्र, पटियाला; श्री पवन कु मार बजाज ठेके दार निवासी एल.आई.जी. 175, अर्बन एस्टेट, फे ज़-I, पटियाला, संबद्ध नियोजको और करण, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय नं 1 चण्डीगड के पंचाट (59/2016) प्रकाशित करती है।

[एल -12025/01/2024-आई आर (बी-I)-03]

सलोनी, उप निदेशक

New Delhi, the 12th January, 2024

S.O. 22.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 59/2016) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court –I Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala; Shri Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala, and Karan.Worker.

[No. L-12025/01/2024- IR(B-I)-03]

SALONI, Dy. Director128 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Offier, Chandigarh.

ID No.59/2016

Registered On:-11/11/2016

Karan S/o Sh. Babu Ram C/o Harpreet Singh Resident-cum-Office of Street No.12, Rishi Colony, Patiala (Punjab).

...........Workman

Versus

1. The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala.

2. Sh. Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala.

........Respondents

Award

Passed On:-07.12.2023

1. The workman Karam has directly filed statement of claim under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(hereinafter called the Act), with a prayer to reinstate the workman with back wages.

2. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal the case was fixed for evidence of workman but none is responding on its behalf. Several opportunities have already been given to the workman for evidence but of no use which denotes that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the matter on merits.

3. Since the workman has neither put his appearance since long nor he has led any evidence to prove his cause against the management as such, this Tribunal is left with no choice except to pass a 'No Claim Award'. Accordingly, no claim award is passed in the present case for non-prosecution of workman. File after completion be consigned in the record room.

4. Let copy of this award be sent to Central Government for publication as required under Section 17 of the ID Act, 1947.

KAMAL KANT, PO-cum-Link Officer

नई दिल्ली, 12 जनवरी, 2024

.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (ं1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार के प्रशासन. कमांडर, स्टेशन हेड क्वार्टर, सैन्य क्षेत्र, पटियाला; श्री पवन कु मार बजाज ठेके दार निवासी एल.आई.जी. 175, अर्बन एस्टेट, फे ज़-I, पटियाला, संबद्ध नियोजको और सुखविंदर कौर, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय नं 1 चण्डीगड के पंचाट (60/2016) प्रकाशित करती है।

[सं. एल -12025/01/2024- आई आर (बी-I)-04]

सलोनी, उप निदेशक

New Delhi, the 12th January, 2024

S.O. 23.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 60/2016) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court –I Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala; Shri Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala, and Sukhwinder Kaur.Worker.

[F. No. L-12025/01/2024- IR(B-I)-04]

SALONI, Dy. Director[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 129

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Offier, Chandigarh.

ID No. 60/2016

Registered On:-11/11/2016

Sukhwinder Kaur W/o Som Nath C/oHarpreet Singh Resident-cum-Office of Street No.12, Rishi Colony, Patiala (Punjab).

...........Workman Versus

1. The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala.

2. Sh. Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala.

........Respondents

Award

Passed On:-07.12.2023

1. The workman Sukhwinder Kaur has directly filed statement of claim under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(hereinafter called the Act), with a prayer to reinstate the workman with back wages.

2. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal the case was fixed for evidence of workman but none is responding on its behalf. Several opportunities have already been given to the workman for evidence but of no use which denotes that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the matter on merits.

3. Since the workman has neither put his appearance since long nor he has led any evidence to prove his cause against the management as such, this Tribunal is left with no choice except to pass a 'No Claim Award'. Accordingly, no claim award is passed in the present case for non-prosecution of workman. File after completion be consigned in the record room.

4. Let copy of this award be sent to Central Government for publication as required under Section 17 of the ID Act, 1947.

KAMAL KANT, PO-cum-Link Officer

नई दिल्ली, 12 जनवरी, 2024

.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (ं1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार के प्रशासन. कमांडर, स्टेशन हेड क्वार्टर, सैन्य क्षेत्र, पटियाला; श्री पवन कु मार बजाज ठेके दार निवासी एल.आई.जी. 175, अर्बन एस्टेट, फे ज़-I, पटियाला, संबद्ध नियोजको और जगतार सिंह, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय नं 1 चण्डीगड के पंचाट (61/2016) प्रकाशित करती है।

[सं. एल -12025/01/2024- आई आर (बी-I)-05]

सलोनी, उप निदेशक

New Delhi, the 12th January, 2024

S.O. 24.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref.61/2016) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court –I Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala; Shri Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala, and Jagtar Singh.Worker.

[No. L-12025/01/2024- IR(B-I)-05]

SALONI, Dy. Director130 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Offier, Chandigarh.

ID No.61/2016

Registered On:-11/11/2016

Jagtar Singh S/o Sh. Gurdev Singh R/o H.No.123, Swajpur, Distt. Patiala C/o Harpreet Singh Resident-cum-Office of Street No.12, Rishi Colony, Patiala (Punjab).

...........Workman Versus

1. The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala.

2. Sh. Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala.

........Respondents

Award

Passed On:-07.12.2023

1. The workman Jagtar Singh has directly filed statement of claim under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(hereinafter called the Act), with a prayer to reinstate the workman with back wages.

2. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal the case was fixed for evidence of workman but none is responding on its behalf. Several opportunities have already been given to the workman for evidence but of no use which denotes that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the matter on merits.

3. Since the workman has neither put his appearance since long nor he has led any evidence to prove his cause against the management as such, this Tribunal is left with no choice except to pass a 'No Claim Award'. Accordingly, no claim award is passed in the present case for non-prosecution of workman. File after completion be consigned in the record room.

4. Let copy of this award be sent to Central Government for publication as required under Section 17 of the ID Act, 1947.

KAMAL KANT, PO-cum-Link Officer

नई दिल्ली, 15 जनवरी, 2024

.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (ं1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार कांडला पोर्ट ट्रस्ट के प्रबंधतत्र, संबद्ध नियोजको और उनके कर्मकारो के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय, अहमदाबाद के पंचाट (34/2017) प्रकाशित करती है।

[सं. एल -37011/05/2017- आई आर (बी-II)]

सलोनी, उप निदेशक

New Delhi, the 15th January, 2024

S.O. 25.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref.34/2017) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Ahmedabad as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Kandla Port Trust and their workmen.

[No. L-37011/05/2017- IR(B.II)]

SALONI, Dy. Director[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 131

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

AHMEDABAD

Present….

Sunil Kumar Singh-I,

Presiding Officer, CGIT cum Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated 26th September, 2023

Reference: (CGITA) No- 34/2017

1. The Chairman,

Kandla Port Trust, A. O. Building,

P.O.Box No.50, Gandhidham,

KUTCH-370201. ….…….First Party

V

The General Secretary,

Kandla Port & Dock SC/ST Employees Union,

SGX-36&37, Ward No.2-B,

Adipur(Kutch),

KUTCH-370205. ..….….Second Party

Adv. for the First Party : Shri K. V. Ghadia

Adv. for the Second Party : None

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-37011/05/2017– IR(B-II) dated 19.04.2017 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) in respect of the matter specified in the Schedule:

SCHEDULE "Whether the action of the Chairman, Kandla Port Trust, Gandhidham by not granting 3rd financial up-gradation under MACP Scheme to Smt. Vishni P. Thadani, Assistant is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to?"

1. Case was called out. First Party/employer is represented through Ld. Counsel Shri K. V. Gadhia. None responds for SP/Workman despite repeated calls. The case is fixed for hearing on application Ex.9 for withdrawal of vakalatnama. Ex.9 is allowed Shri N. H. Rathod, Adv. is permitted to withdraw his vakalatnama.

2. Perusal of record shows that this court observed on 21.08.2023 that the applicant union mentioned in the earlier withdrawal application (Ex.8) did not match with the nomenclature of the union mentioned in the reference. The order is still required to be passed on Ex.8. The withdrawal application Ex.8 is accordingly rejected as it does not match the applicant/union with one, mentioned in the reference.

3. Perusal of the record further shows that the reference was received in this court on 11.05.2017. Photo copy of the postal receipt Ex.3 dtd.03.01.2018 addressed to the General Secretary, Kandla Port & Dock SC/ST Employees Union mentioned in the reference is on record. The workmen's union / the General Secretary, Kandla Port & Dock SC/ST Employees Union did neither turn up nor filed any statement of claim till now. Five years have already elapsed from the date of receipt of this reference. In the circumstances, the claim under reference has not been substantiated by any piece of evidence. Hence the reference is answered in positive in favour of the employer and against the SP/workmen's union. The award is passed accordingly.

Let two copies of the Award be sent to the Appropriate Government for the needful and for publication U/s 17(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

SUNIL KUMAR SINGH-I, Presiding Officer132 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 15 जनवरी, 2024

.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (ं1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार पश्चिम रेलवे के प्रबंधतत्र, संबद्ध नियोजको और उनके कर्मकारो के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय, अहमदाबाद के पंचाट (25/2010) प्रकाशित करती है।

[सं. एल -41011/58/2008- आई आर (बी-I)]

सलोनी, उप निदेशक

New Delhi, the 15th January, 2024

S.O. 26.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 25/2010) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Ahmedabad as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Western Railway and their workmen.

[No. L-41011/58/2008- IR(B.I)]

SALONI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

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

AHMEDABAD

Present - Sunil Kumar Singh - I,

Presiding Officer, CGIT-cum-Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Date: 29th September, 2023

Reference (CGITA) No. : 25/2010

1. The Secretary,

Railway Board, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan,

New Delhi

2. The Engineer (C),

Western Railway, Plat Form 01, Kalupur,

Ahmedabad (Gujarat)

3. The General Manager,

Western Railway, Churchgate,

Mumbai ….…….First Party / Employer

V

The General Secretary,

P. R. K. P.,

28/B, Narain Park, B/h Chandkheda Railway Station,

Sabarmati, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) ..….…Second Party / Workmen

Advocate for the First Party / Employer : Shri H. R. Raval

Representative for the Second Party / Workmen : Shri R. S. Sisodiya

AWARD

The Government of India / Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L- 41011/58/2008-IR(B-I) dated 27.04.2009 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabd in respect of the matter specified in the Schedule.

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 133

SCHEDULE

"Whether the demand of General Secretary, Paschim Railway Karmachari Parishad, Ahmedabad for reinstatement of 25 casual labours (as per list) who were not appointed while their juniors were absorbed with all consequential benefits, from the management of the Chief Engineer (C), Western Railway, Plat No. 01, Kalupur, Ahmedabad, is justified? If so, what relief the workmen concerned are entitled to and from which date?"

1. The second party / workmen / union submitted the consolidated statement of claim at Ex. 7 along with an additional statement at Ex. 19, stating therein that the concerned 25 workmen were initially appointed in the year 1979 on the post of Khalasi as permanent employees and had continuously worked on a vacant permanent sanctioned post without any break from the year 1979 to 1981 for more than 240 days in each calendar year. Thereafter, the first party / employer had illegally terminated their services without any reason in the year 1981 and after their termination, appointed fresh group of 18 workmen named in the statement of claim, at the same place for the same work. An industrial dispute was raised by the union for regularisation of services of the similarly situated workmen on the permanent post. The tribunal in Reference (ITC) No. 13/1981 passed an award dated 14.03.1996, allowing the reference by directing the first party to regularise the services of 33 other workmen on permanent establishment. The said award has been complied by the employer. The second party / union has further stated that the names of present concerned workmen were not included in the list at the time of raising dispute by mistake and could not be granted the said benefit. After termination of services by the first party, the workmen approached the Hon'ble CAT by filing O. A. No. 202/99 which was disposed of on 10.01.2003. Thereafter, the workmen approached Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat vide SCA No. 8459/05 and the petition was withdrawn with a view to approach the appropriate authority, hence the said dispute. The employer has violated the provisions of Section 25 (F), 25 (G) and 25 (H) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The second party / workmen has prayed for reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages.

2. The first party / employer has submitted its written statement at Ex. 9 r/w Ex. 19/A and generally denied the claim of the workmen stating that the concerned workmen were not initially appointed or engaged as Khalasi on permanent post and also not worked continuously without any break since the year 1979 to 1981. The workmen had not completed 240 days continuous service in any calendar year. Fresh recruits had not been appointed by the first party. The termination of engagement is an individual dispute and not a collective dispute, therefore, the union have no right to raise such dispute. The O.A. No. 202/99 was filed before the Hon'ble CAT after a long time of 18 years and was dismissed on merits. The claim is belated. 18 employees were regularised as implementation of award passed in Reference (ITC) No. 13/81. The concerned present workmen were not the parties to the said reference. The present workmen were daily rated casual labours and their services were governed by day to day affair basis. It is further stated that no concerned workman has completed 240 days continuous service in any calendar year. Therefore, question of compliance of the provisions mentioned under Section 25 (F), 25 (G) and 25 (H) does not arise. It is prayed that the reference be dismissed as the workmen are not entitled to the claimed relief.

3. The second party / workmen have filed documentary evidence detailed as under:

Sl. No. Name / Details of the document Date of Document Seriatim of Document Type / Remarks
1 Memorandum issued by Dy. CE(C&S), O/o Chief Engineer (Const. & Survey), Ahmedabad along with list of workers from Sl. No. 1 to 184 27.01.1999 Ex. 8 / 1 Xerox
2 A letter from XEN (C)'s Office, Jamnagar to ADI (C) I, II and 3 others on the subject 'Shifting of casual labour to RJT Division' along with a statement showing the list of 215 casual labours diverted to RJT Division with w.e.f. 21.09.1984 13.09.1984 Ex. 8 / 2 Xerox
3 An office order no. 20 issued by the o/o CKM, EW, Sabarmati 12.02.1999 Ex. 8 / 3 Xerox
4 An award passed by the Tribunal in Reference (ITC) No. 13/1981 14.03.1996 Ex. 8 / 4 Xerox
5 An order passed by the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad in O.A. No. 202/1999 10.01.2003 Ex. 8 / 5 Xerox
6 An order passed by Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in SCA No. 8459/05 14.06.2005 Ex. 8 / 6 Xerox
7 Memorandum issued by the o/o AEN, Western Railway 18.09.1995 Ex. 8 / 7 Xerox
8 Representation made by 25 workers C/o Shri Ashish Joshi, Advocate, Sabarmati to the Commissioner, Ahmedabad 22.03.2006 Ex. 8 / 8 Xerox
9 A statement showing list of 142 workers working in Rajkot Division Not mentioned Ex. 8 / 9 Xerox
10 Service cards issued by the employer to Shri Syamlal Nandlal, Shri P. Silavraj, Shri Khodaji Mangaji, Shri Gagaji Talaji, Shri Vishwambar M., Shri Prahladji Chhanaji, Shri Shitlaprasad Indrajit, Shri Navdhari R., Shri G. Subrmeriyam, Shri Rajgam, Shri Anant Rao D. Patil, Shri Kondusing B. Girase, Shri Kalaji Manaji, Shri Jethabhai Motibhai Solanki, Shri Malappa Kadappa, Shri Ramaji Gabhaji, Shri Hemraj Odhar, Shri Anuruddh Pande, Shri Malaji Talaji, Shri Govind Vajaji, Shri Babubhai S., Shri G. Sundermurthy, Shri K. Ganpati, Shri Manu Jaswant and Shri Ashok Mistry (concerned present workmen ) Not mentioned Annexed with Ex. 16 Xerox
11 A letter no. E (NG)II/2005/CL/WR/31/CAT from Director Establishment (N) II, Railway Board, New Delhi to the General Manager (P), Western Railway, Mumbai 04.07.2006 Annexed with Ex. 16 Xerox
12 Letter from the General Manager (E), Western Railway, Headquarter Office, Mumbai to DRM (E) BCT and others on the subject 'Policy of staff matters 30.12.2008 Ex. 54 / 1 Xerox
13 A office letter / circular from Sr. DEN (E) – BVB, Western Railway on the subject 'Re-engagement of Ex.- casual labours / substitutes from the supplementary live register, as substitute gangman' 04.09.1995 Ex. 54 / 2 Xerox
14 A letter from DRM (E) – BVP, Western Railway to All Supervisory staff – BVP Divn. on the subject 'Inclusion of the names of Ex. Casual labours / substitutes in the supplementary live register' along with list 369 workers 27.04.1994 Ex. 54 / 3 Xerox
15 A circular / letter from Western Railway, Vadodara to all Subordinates of BRC Divn. 21.07.1987 Annexed with Ex. 56 Xerox
16 A letter from DRM (E) – BVP, Western Railway to All Supervisory staff – BVP Divn. on the subject 'Inclusion of the names of Ex. Casual labours / substitutes in the supplementary live register' along with list 369 workers 27.04.1994 Annexed with Ex. 56 (Replica of Ex. 54 / 3) Xerox
17 A office letter / circular from Sr. DEN (E) – BVB, Western Railway on the subject 'Re-engagement of Ex.- casual labours / substitutes from the supplementary live register, as substitute gangman' 04.09.1995 Annexed with Ex. 56 (Replica of Ex. 54 / 2) Xerox
134 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

4. The second party / workmen have filed the affidavits of their witnesses S / Shri Kondusing B. Girase at Ex. 11, Anant Rao Digember Patil at Ex. 15, Jethabhai Motibhai Solanki at Ex. 18, G. Sundar Murthy at Ex. 20 & Ex. 35, Ramanji Gabhaji at Ex. 21 & Ex. 36, K. Ganpati at Ex. 22 & Ex. 41, P. Silavraj at Ex. 23 & Ex. 34, Gagaji Talaji at Ex. 24 & Ex. 38, Malaji Talaji at Ex. 25 & Ex. 39, Kalaji Manaji at Ex. 26 & Ex. 37, Sitala Prasad Indrajit at Ex. 27 & Ex. 40, Prahladji at Ex. 28 & Ex. 33, Khodaji Mangaji at Ex. 29 & Ex. 32, Manu Jaswant at Ex. 30 & Ex. 44, Rajgam at Ex. 43, Anurudh Pande at Ex. 45 & Ex. 49, Mallappa Kadappa at Ex. 47 and Babubhai at Ex. 48 in their examination-in-chief. These workmen / witnesses were cross-examined except S / Shri G. Sundar Murthy at Ex. 20 & Ex. 35, Gagaji Talaji Thakor at Ex. 24 & Ex. 38, Anurudh Pande at Ex. 45 & Ex. 49, Malappa Kandapa at Ex. 47, Babubhai at Ex. 48.

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 135

5. The first party / employer has filed documentary evidence detailed as under:

Sl. No. Name / Details of the document Date of Document Seriatim of Document Type / Remarks
1 An order passed by the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad in O.A. No. 202/1999 10.01.2003 Ex. 14 / 1 Xerox
2 Letter from CE (S&C) CCG to CE (C) ADI / JP on the subject 'Draft para for C & Ag's Report 1988-89 – Continued employment of casual labours on construction project after completion of work due to delay in their absorption in open-line / retrenchment' 16.08.1990 Annexed with Ex. 14 as Ex. 14 / 2 Xerox
3 Letter from General Manager, HQ, Bombay to DRM- BCT and others on the subject 'Labour casual - employment of – information in regard to the seniority list of project casual labours' 19.09.1986 Annexed with Ex. 14 as Ex. 14 / 3 Xerox
4 Letter from Department of Railway, New Delhi to Chief Personnel Officer, Western Railway, Bombay on the subject 'Project casual labour – terms of employment of' 12.09.1986 Annexed with Ex. 14 and printed at the back of Ex. 14 / 3 Xerox
5 Letter from Department of Railway, New Delhi to The General Manager, All Indian Railways on the subject 'Project casual labour – terms of employment of' 11.09.1986 Annexed with Ex. 14 as Ex. 14 / 4 Xerox
6 Letter by General Manager (E), Western Railway to the General Secretary, WR EU-GTR on the subject 'Labours – Casual Employment of Policy – Project Casual Labour – Terms of employment of' June 1984 Annexed with Ex. 14 as Ex. 14 / 5 Xerox

6. The first party / employer has examined Shri M. L. Jain, Senior Personnel Officer, Western Railway, Ahmedabad, in examination-in-chief at Ex. 52 who has been cross-examined by the second party / workmen. This witness also filed his affidavit at Ex. 13.

7. I have perused the records and heard Ld. Counsel for first party / employer Shri H. R. Raval in addition to his written arguments at Ex. 56, Ex. 57 & Ex. 58 and representative for second party / workmen Shri R. S. Sisodiya in addition to his written arguments at Ex. 55.

8. Ld. Counsel for the first party / employer has argued in accordance with the averments made in written statement at Ex. 9 and written submissions made vide Ex. 56, 57 and Ex. 58. He has drawn the attention of this Tribunal specifically towards the order dated 10.01.2003 passed by Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad in O.A. No. 202/1999 related to the all present twenty five workmen and has forcely argued that the present workmen challenged their said termination order before Hon'ble CAT, which has decided the case on merit dismissing the said O.A.. He has further argued that the parties, subject matter, cause of action and the question involved in the present case is similar to one involved before the Hon'ble CAT, Ahmedabad, hence, this Tribunal cannot readjudicate the same claim as barred by the principle of 'resjudicata'.

9. Ld. Counsel for the second party / workmen has argued in accordance with the averments made in the statement of claim at Ex. 7 r/w Ex. 19 and written submissions filed at Ex. 55. He has argued that this Tribunal has jurisdiction to decide the case of the present workmen as an industrial dispute.

10. In view of the arguments raised by the Ld. Counsels for the first party / employer in respect of the bar of 'res judicata' to the present proceedings, it deems just and proper to firstly give finding as to whether this reference is barred by the principle of 'res judicata'?

11. The question of applicability of the principle of 'res judicata' before this Tribunal is no more 'res integra'. The Apex Court in Chairman and Managing Director, the Fertilizers and Chemicals Tranvancore Ltd. V General Secretary, Fact Employees Association, 2019 (o) AIJEL-SC 63977, has clarified this situation. The relevant Paras 23 to 27 of the judgement read as under.

136 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

"23. In our considered view, the question, as to whether the principle of res judicata defined in Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") applies to the labour proceedings or not, remains no more res integra and stands answered by three decisions of this Court.

24. The first case is R. C. Tiwari V MP State Co operative Marketing Federation Ltd. & Ors. (1997) 5 SCC 125. In this case, an employee of a cooperative society was dismissed from the services. He, therefore, referred the dispute of his termination to the Registrar under Sections 55 and 64 of the M.P. Cooperative Society Act. The Deputy Registrar upheld the finding of the misconduct recorded in the domestic inquiry against the employee and upheld the termination as being legal and proper. The State then made a reference to the Labour Court under Section 10 of the ID Act for deciding the legality of the termination by the Labour Court. The Labour Court, however, declared the domestic inquiry invalid and, in consequence, held the termination as bad in law. The employer, therefore, filed a writ petition in the High Court of MP. The High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the award of the Labour Court. The employee then carried the matter to this Court in appeal. This Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the view taken by the High Court.

25. This Court ruled that the reference to the Labour Court made by the State under Section 10 of ID Act was hit by the principle of res judicata defined under Section 11 of the Code and, therefore, the reference made to the Labour Court was barred. It was held that the issue of termination of the employee was earlier gone into by the Deputy Registrar on its merits and the same once answered against the employee, it could not be again gone into in the reference proceedings by the Labour Court. This is what is held in Para 4:

"4. Admittedly, there is a finding recorded by the Deputy Registrar upholding the misconduct of the petitioner. That constitutes res judicata. No doubt, Section 11 CPC does not in terms apply because it is not a court, but a tribunal, constituted under the Societies Act is given special jurisdiction. So, the principle laid down there under mutatis mutandis squarely applies to the procedure provided under the Act. It operates as res judicata. Thus, we find that the High Court is well justified in holding that the Labour Court has no jurisdiction to decide the dispute once over and the reference itself is bad in law."

26. The second case is Pondicherry Khadi & Village Industries Board vs. P. Kulothangan & Anr., (2004) 1 SCC 68. In this case also, this Court again examined the question as to whether the principle of res judicata including the principles of constructive res judicata applies to the industrial adjudication or not. Though this Court did not notice the law laid down in the case of R.C.Tiwari (supra), yet it took the same view, as is clear from Paras 10 and 11:

"10. In our opinion, the appellant has correctly contended that the industrial dispute pertained to the same subjectmatter dealt with in the earlier writ proceedings and was barred by the principles of res judicata. It is well established that although the entire Civil Procedure Code is not applicable to industrial adjudication, the principles of res judicata laid down under Section 11 of the Code are applicable including the principles of constructive res judicata. Thus in State of U.P. v. Nawab Hussain, 1977(2) S.C.C. 806, it was held that the dismissal of a writ petition challenging disciplinary proceedings on the ground that the charged officer had not been afforded reasonable opportunity to meet the allegations against him, operated as res judicata in respect of the subsequent suit in which the order of dismissal was challenged on the ground that it was incompetently passed. This Court also held: (SCC p. 808)

It may be that the same set of facts may give rise to two or more causes of action. If in such a case a person is allowed to choose and sue upon one cause of action at one time and to reserve the other for subsequent litigation, that would aggravate the burden of litigation. Courts have therefore treated such a course of action as an abuse of its process.

11. The principle of res judicata operates on the court. It is the courts which are prohibited from trying the issue which was directly and substantially in issue in the earlier proceedings between the same parties, provided the court trying the subsequent proceeding is satisfied that the earlier court was competent to dispose of the earlier proceedings and that the matter had been heard and finally decided by such court. Here the parties to the writ petition filed by the respondent in the Madras High Court and the industrial dispute were the same. The cause of action in both was the refusal of the appellant to allow the respondent to rejoin service. The Madras High Court was competent to decide the issue which it did with a reasoned order on merits and after a contested hearing. This was not a case where the earlier proceedings had been disposed of on any technical ground as was the case in Workmen v. Board of Trustees of the Cochin Port Trust, 1978(3) S.C.C. 119 and Pujari Bai v. Madan Gopal, 1989(2) R.R.R. 106. The "lesser relief" of reinstatement which was the subject matter of the industrial dispute had already been claimed by[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 137 the respondent in the writ petition. This was refused by the High Court. The correctness of the decision in the writ proceedings has not been challenged by the respondent. The decision was, therefore, final. Having got an adverse order in the writ petition, it was not open to the respondent to reagitate the issue before the Labour Court and the Labour Court was incompetent to entertain the dispute raised by the respondent and re-decide the matter in the face of the earlier decision of the High Court in the writ proceedings."

27. The third case is Executive Engineer, ZP Engg. Divn. & Anr. V Digambara Rao & Ors., (2004) 8 SCC 262. In this case also, this Court placing reliance on the decision in Kulothangan (supra) reiterated the same view, earlier taken by this Court in the case of R.C. Tiwari (supra) with these words:

"15………..It is now well settled that the general principle of res judicata applies to an industrial adjudication."

12. Now coming to the facts of the case in hand, this Tribunal is required to answer the reference as to whether the demand of the General Secretary of the union on behalf of concerned twenty five workmen for their reinstatement in service, is legal, proper and just?

13. This is an undisputed fact that the present workmen raised the dispute before Hon'ble CAT, Ahmedabad through O.A. No. 202/1999. Hon'ble CAT, vide its order dated 10.01.2003 has dismissed the claim of reinstatement of these workmen raised in indirect form. Section 2 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 does not speak of exclusion of the jurisdiction of Hon'ble CAT in respect of a person holding civil post in the Union of India or under 'railway department' under the Indian Union. Section 28 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 also does not oust the jurisdiction of its creature. Hence, Hon'ble CAT also has inbuilt jurisdiction in respect of such service matters.

14. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Telecom District Manager and others V Keshab Deb, 2008 (8) SCC 402, has held that Section 28 does not bar the jurisdiction of the Central Administrative Tribunal. It saves the jurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal. An employee who claims himself to be a workman, therefore, will have a right of election in the matter of choice of forum. It is therefore clear that the Central Administrative Tribunal is a competent Court to entertain such industrial dispute. The law laid down by Apex Court in Keshab Deb (supra), squarely applies to the facts of the present reference, hence it is held that Hon'ble CAT at Ahmedabad was a competent Court to decide the said dispute in question.

15. Present reference is in respect of the same parties with respect to the same subject matter in respect of the same relief i.e. to quash the said termination order and for reinstatement of all twenty five concerned workmen. The name of the one of the twenty five workmen i.e. Shri Manu Jaswant, does not specifically find mention in the Hon'ble CAT's order dated 10.01.2003. Hon'ble CAT has observed that there is no name mentioned against serial number 24. However, Shri Manu Jaswant has clarified in his affidavit submitted in his examination-in- chief at Ex. 44 that he approached Hon'ble CAT and Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. The name of this workman is however found at serial number 25 mentioned in the order dated 14.06.2005 passed by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in SCA No. 8495/2005. The own admission of this workman in his cross-examination at Ex. 44 also shows that he also approached the Hon'ble CAT along with twenty four other workmen. This apart, even if it is presumed that he was not the party before Hon'ble CAT, on examining his case independently on merit, he has stated in his cross-examination that he raised the dispute in the year 2009 i.e. after 28 years from his termination in the year 1981. It is true that there is no limitation period provided for raising industrial disputes, however, the action is certainly expected to be initiated in a reasonable time as the delay defeats equity. The legal maxim 'vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt' means that the law will not help those who sleep on their rights. The workman Shri Manu Jaswant has admitted in his cross-examination at Ex. 44 that he also did not make any application for the enrolment of his name till 1987 which was the cut off date for submission of such applications before the department / Railway (employer). It is clear that according to his own admissions, he has raised this dispute for the very first time in the year 2009 after the said termination order of the year 1981. The totality of facts thus do not make him entitled for any relief.

16. In view of aforesaid discussions and law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Fertilizers and Chemicals Tranvancore Ltd. (supra) and Keshab Deb (supra), the reference in respect of twenty four workmen cannot be adjudicated as the same is barred by the principle of 'res judicata'. As far as the belated claim of single workman Shri Manu Jaswant is concerned, cannot be said to be legal, proper and just. The reference is answered as stated above.

17. The award is passed accordingly.

Let two copies of the Award be sent to the appropriate Government for the needful and for publication.

SUNIL KUMAR SINGH-I, Presiding Officer138 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 15 जनवरी, 2024

.—औघोगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (ं1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार कांडला पोर्ट ट्रस्ट के प्रबंधतत्र, संबद्ध नियोजको और उनके कर्मकारो के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औघोगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औघोगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय, अहमदाबाद के पंचाट (31/2015) प्रकाशित करती है।

[सं. एल -37011/03/2015- आई आर (बी-II)]

सलोनी, उप निदेशक

New Delhi, the 15th January, 2024

S.O. 27.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref.31/2015) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Ahmedabad as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Kandla Port Trust and their workmen.

[No. L-37011/03/2015- IR(B-II)]

SALONI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

AHMEDABAD

Present….

Sunil Kumar Singh-I,

Presiding Officer, CGIT cum Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated 26th September, 2023

Reference: (CGITA) No- 31/2015

The Chairman,

Kandla Port Trust,

Administrative Building,

P. B. No.50,

Gandhidham-370201. ….…….First Party

V

The General Secretary,

Transport & Dock Workers Union,

21, Yogesh Building,

Plot No.586/12-C,

Gandhidham-370201. ..….….Second Party

Adv. for the First Party : Shri K. V. Ghadia

Adv. for the Second Party : Shri N. H. Rathod

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L- 37011/03/2015–IR(B-II) dated 10.04.2015 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) in respect of the matter specified in the Schedule:

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Kandla Port Trust is legal and justified in not giving promotion to Smt. Vishni P. Thadani, Sr. Clerk to the post of Assistant w.e.f. 26.03.2014? If not so, to what relief the employee is entitled?"[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 139 1. Today matter was called out. Shri K. V. Gadhia Ld. Advocate is representing First Party/employer and Shri N. H. Rathod, Advocate is representing Second Party/workmen's union. The Second Party workmen has moved withdrawal pursis Ex.9 along with union's letter dated 31.07.2023 M-9/1, wherein it is prayed that the SP / workmen's union wants to withdraw the case. Withdrawal is not opposed by First Party. The Second party is permitted to withdraw the reference as prayed for.

2. Thus the reference stands disposed of as withdrawn.

Let two copies of the Award be sent to the Appropriate Government for the needful and for publication U/s 17(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

SUNIL KUMAR SINGH-I, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 15 जनवरी, 2024

.— औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (ं1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार के प्रशासन. कमांडर, स्टेशन हेड क्वार्टर, सैन्य क्षेत्र, पटियाला; श्री पवन कु मार बजाज ठेके दार निवासी एल.आई.जी. 175, अर्बन एस्टेट, फे ज़-I, पटियाला, संबद्ध नियोजको और अकी, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय नं 1 चण्डीगड के पंचाट (62/2016) प्रकाशित करती है।

[सं. एल-12025/01/2024- आई आर (बी-I) -06]

सलोनी, उप निदेशक

New Delhi, the 15th January, 2024

S.O. 28.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref.62/2016) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court –I Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala; Shri Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala, and Aki.Worker.

[No. L-12025/01/2024- IR(B-I)-06]

SALONI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Offier, Chandigarh.

ID No.62/2016

Registered On:-11/11/2016

Aki W/o Bobby C/o Harpreet Singh Resident-cum-Office of Street No.12, Rishi Colony, Patiala (Punjab).

...........Workman Versus

1. The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala.

2. Sh. Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala.

........Respondents

AWARD

Passed On:-07.12.2023

1. The workman Smt. Aki has directly filed statement of claim under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(hereinafter called the Act), with a prayer to reinstate the workman with back wages.

2. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal the case was fixed for evidence of workman but none is responding on its behalf. Several opportunities have already been given to the workman for evidence but of no use which denotes that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the matter on merits.

3. Since the workman has neither put his appearance since long nor he has led any evidence to prove his cause against the management as such, this Tribunal is left with no choice except to pass a 'No Claim Award'. Accordingly,140 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] no claim award is passed in the present case for non-prosecution of workman. File after completion be consigned in the record room.

KAMAL KANT, PO-cum-Link Officer

नई दिल्ली, 15 जनवरी, 2024

.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (ं1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार के प्रशासन. कमांडर, स्टेशन हेड क्वार्टर, सैन्य क्षेत्र, पटियाला; श्री पवन कु मार बजाज ठेके दार निवासी एल.आई.जी. 175, अर्बन एस्टेट, फे ज़-I, पटियाला, संबद्ध नियोजको और किरना, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय नं 1 चण्डीगड के पंचाट (63/2016) प्रकाशित करती है।

[सं. एल-12025/01/2024- आई आर (बी-I)-07]

सलोनी, उप निदेशक

New Delhi, the 15th January, 2024

S.O. 29.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref.63/2016) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court –I Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala; Shri Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala, and Kirna.Worker.

[No. L-12025/01/2024- IR(B-I)-07]

SALONI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Offier, Chandigarh.

ID No.63/2016

Registered On:-11/11/2016

Kirna W/o Sh. Sohan Lal, C/oHarpreet Singh Resident-cum-Office of Street No.12, Rishi Colony, Patiala (Punjab).

...........Workman Versus

1. The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala.

2. Sh. Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala.

........Respondents

AWARD

Passed On:-07.12.2023

1. The workman Kirna has directly filed statement of claim under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(hereinafter called the Act), with a prayer to reinstate the workman with back wages.

2. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal the case was fixed for evidence of workman but none is responding on its behalf. Several opportunities have already been given to the workman for evidence but of no use which denotes that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the matter on merits.

3. Since the workman has neither put his appearance since long nor he has led any evidence to prove his cause against the management as such, this Tribunal is left with no choice except to pass a 'No Claim Award'. Accordingly, no claim award is passed in the present case for non-prosecution of workman. File after completion be consigned in the record room.

KAMAL KANT, PO-cum-Link Officer[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 141

नई दिल्ली, 15 जनवरी, 2024

.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (ं1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार के प्रशासन. कमांडर, स्टेशन हेड क्वार्टर, सैन्य क्षेत्र, पटियाला; श्री पवन कु मार बजाज ठेके दार निवासी एल.आई.जी. 175, अर्बन एस्टेट, फे ज़-I, पटियाला, संबद्ध नियोजको और बलजीत कौर, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय नं 1 चण्डीगड के पंचाट (64/2016) प्रकाशित करती है।

[सं. एल-12025/01/2024- आई आर (बी-I)-08]

सलोनी, उप निदेशक

New Delhi, the 15th January, 2024

S.O. 30.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref.64/2016) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court –I Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala; Shri Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala, and Baljeet Kaur.Worker.

[No. L-12025/01/2024- IR(B-I)-08]

SALONI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Offier, Chandigarh.

ID No.64/2016

Registered On:-11/11/2016

Baljeet Kaur W/o Nirmal Singh C/o Harpreet Singh Resident-cum-Office of Street No.12, Rishi Colony, Patiala (Punjab).

...........Workman

Versus

1. The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala.

2. Sh. Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala.

........Respondents

AWARD

Passed On:-07.12.2023

1. The workman Baljeet Kaur has directly filed statement of claim under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(hereinafter called the Act), with a prayer to reinstate the workman with back wages.

2. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal the case was fixed for evidence of workman but none is responding on its behalf. Several opportunities have already been given to the workman for evidence but of no use which denotes that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the matter on merits.

3. Since the workman has neither put his appearance since long nor he has led any evidence to prove his cause against the management as such, this Tribunal is left with no choice except to pass a 'No Claim Award'. Accordingly, no claim award is passed in the present case for non-prosecution of workman. File after completion be consigned in the record room.

KAMAL KANT, PO-cum-Link Officer142 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 15 जनवरी, 2024

.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (ं1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार के प्रशासन. कमांडर, स्टेशन हेड क्वार्टर, सैन्य क्षेत्र, पटियाला; श्री पवन कु मार बजाज ठेके दार निवासी एल.आई.जी. 175, अर्बन एस्टेट, फे ज़-I, पटियाला, संबद्ध नियोजको और , कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय नं 1 चण्डीगड के पंचाट (65/2016) प्रकाशित करती है।

[सं. एल -12025/01/2024- आई आर (बी-I)-09]

सलोनी, उप निदेशक

New Delhi, the 15th January, 2024

S.O. 31.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref.65/2016) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court –I Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala; Shri Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala, and Aman.Worker.

[No. L-12025/01/2024- IR(B-I)-09]

SALONI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Offier, Chandigarh.

ID No.65/2016

Registered On:-11/11/2016

Aman W/o Inderjit, C/o Harpreet Singh Resident-cum-Office of Street No.12, Rishi Colony, Patiala (Punjab).

...........Workman

Versus

1. The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala.

2. Sh. Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala.

........Respondents

AWARD

Passed On:-07.12.2023

1. The workman Aman has directly filed statement of claim under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(hereinafter called the Act), with a prayer to reinstate the workman with back wages.

2. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal the case was fixed for evidence of workman but none is responding on its behalf. Several opportunities have already been given to the workman for evidence but of no use which denotes that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the matter on merits.

3. Since the workman has neither put his appearance since long nor he has led any evidence to prove his cause against the management as such, this Tribunal is left with no choice except to pass a 'No Claim Award'. Accordingly, no claim award is passed in the present case for non-prosecution of workman. File after completion be consigned in the record room.

KAMAL KANT, PO-cum-Link Officer

नई दिल्ली, 15 जनवरी, 2024

.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (ं1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार के प्रशासन. कमांडर, स्टेशन हेड क्वार्टर, सैन्य क्षेत्र, पटियाला; श्री पवन कु मार बजाज ठेके दार निवासी एल.आई.जी. 175, अर्बन एस्टेट, फे ज़-I, पटियाला, संबद्ध नियोजको और मीनू, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय नं 1 चण्डीगड के पंचाट (66/2016) प्रकाशित करती है।

[सं. एल-12025/01/2024- आई आर (बी-I)-10]

सलोनी, उप निदेशक[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 143

New Delhi, the 15th January, 2024

S.O. 32.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref.66/2016) of the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court –I Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala; Shri Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala, and Meenu.Worker.

[No. L-12025/01/2024- IR(B-I)-10]

SALONI, Dy. Director

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Offier, Chandigarh.

ID No.66/2016

Registered On:-11/11/2016

Meenu W/o Ram Kumar C/o Harpreet Singh Resident-cum-Office of Street No.12, Rishi Colony, Patiala (Punjab).

...........Workman

Versus

1. The Admn. Commander, Station Head Quarter, Military Area, Patiala.

2. Sh. Pawan Kumar Bajaj Contractor R/o L.I.G. 175, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Patiala.

........Respondents

AWARD

Passed On:-07.12.2023

1. The workman Meenu has directly filed statement of claim under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(hereinafter called the Act), with a prayer to reinstate the workman with back wages.

2. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal the case was fixed for evidence of workman but none is responding on its behalf. Several opportunities have already been given to the workman for evidence but of no use which denotes that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the matter on merits.

3. Since the workman has neither put his appearance since long nor he has led any evidence to prove his cause against the management as such, this Tribunal is left with no choice except to pass a 'No Claim Award'. Accordingly, no claim award is passed in the present case for non-prosecution of workman. File after completion be consigned in the record room.

KAMAL KANT, PO-cum-Link Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 33.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार वरिष्ठ डाकघर अधीक्षक, जबलपुर क्षेत्र, जबलपुर (म.प्र.), के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और श्री किशनलाल मेहरा, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट के न्द्रीय सरकार

जबलपुर पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या CGIT/LC/R/151/2000) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 27/12/2023 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल- 40012/234/2000- आईआर-(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव144 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 33.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.CGIT/LC/R/151/2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour–Jabalpur, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Jabalpur Region, Jabalpur (M.P.),and Shri Kishanlal Mehra, worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 27/12/2023.

[No. L- 40012/234/2000- IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/151/2000

Present: P.K.Srivastava

H.J.S..( Retd)

Shri Kishanlal Mehra,

C/o Deepchand Jharia,

Purana Dhobhighat,

Water Works Road,

PO:BhitaTemer,

Jabalpur(M.P.)-482001

Workman

Versus

The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices,

Jabalpur Region,

Jabalpur (M.P.)-482001

Management

AWARD

(Passed on this 11Th day of December-2023.)

As per letter dated 29/8/2000 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 Notification No.L-40012/234/2000-IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:

"Whether the action of the management of Senior Supdt. Of Post Offices, Jabalpur Sambhag, Jabalpur in

terminating the services of Sh. Kishanlal Mehra, Extra Departmental Delivery Agent w.e.f. 1/6/98 is legal

and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ."

1. After registering the case on the basis of reference, notices were sent to the parties. Both the parties have filed their respect statement of claim/defence.

2. The case of the workman as stated in his statement of claim is that he was employed by Management as Branch Dakpal and posted at Gangai Post Office we.f. 24-4-1992 till 2-6-1998 and had attained the status of permanent employee. He was issued a departmental charge sheet on the allegation of mis-appropriation of Rs.18,100/- which he collected from depositors and was required to deposit in their respective accounts. According to the workman, the inquiry was not conducted as per law. He was not given opportunity to defend himself. Charges were not proved during the inquiry and punishment of dismissal was disproportionate to the charges. The workman sought the relief of his reinstatement with all back wages.The workman was dismissed by way of punishment by Disciplinary Authority acting on the basis of inquiry report dated 2-6-1998. The Departmental appeal against dismissal was also rejected by Appellate Authority vide order dated 22-8-1999. A mercy petition by the workman sent to the Post Master General was also rejected vide order dated 22-8-2000.

3. According to the Management, the workman raised the amount from the account holder and did not deposit the amount in their accounts. During the inquiry, he admitted his guilt and deposited the amount along with interest.

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 145

According to the Management the charges regarding misconduct were serious, hence the punishment imposed is proportionate to the charge. The Management has thus requested that the reference be answered against the workman.

4. The following issues were framed by my learned Predecessor vide his order dated 30-10-2006:-

(1)Whether the departmental inquiry conducted by Management against the workman is

proper and legal. If not, whether the Management is entitled to prove the misconduct of

workman?

(2) To what relief if any, the workman is entitled?

5. Issue No.1 was taken as preliminary issue by my learned Predecessor. Parties were required to lead their respective evidence on preliminary issue. The workman and Management examined their witness and proved the inquiry papers.

6. Vide his order dated 11-11-2013 my learned Predecessor held the departmental inquiry against the workman not legal and proper.

7. The Management preferred a Writ Petition No.8800/2014 which was dismissed by Hon'ble Court vide order dated 5-10-2016.

8. Thereafter the Management was given a chance to prove the charges but no evidence at all was adduced by Management. The workman also did not adduce any evidence.

9. Having heard arguments of learned Counsel Shri UttamMaheshwari for workman and Shri S.K.Mishra for Management and have gone through the record. The following issues came up for determination:-

(1) Whether the Management is an industry as defined in Industrial Disputes Act,1947?

(2) Whether the charges against the workman are proved?

(3) Whether the workman is entitled to any relief?

On the basis of evidence on record, award was passed by this tribunal on 13/07/2022 deciding issue no. 1 against the workman with a finding the management is not an industry. Issue no. 2 was decided against the management holding the charges not prove. Issue no. 3 was also decided against workman on the basisof finding on issue no.1.

A miscellaneous petition 5234/22 was filed by the workman which was allow by Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh wide order dated 04/07/2023 and setting aside the award, the case was remanded back to this tribunal for passing a fresh award.

At the time of argument Ld. Counsel of workman Shri Uttam Maheshwari appeared, his argument was heard none appeared for management I have gone through record.

10. ISSUE NO.1:-

On the basis of a reported judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in State of Karnataka vsH.B.Siwanna W.P.No 34051/2017, referred to from the side of management. It was held that the Department of Post Office is not an industry as defined under section 2 (j) of Industrial Disputes Act. In this case, a judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Sub Divisional Inspector office of post& others Vs Theyyam Joseph & others AIR, 1996SC 1271 was relied upon which held that since the Department of Post Office is engaged in communication and telecommunication, which is sovereign acts of a government, it is not a industry as defined under section 2 (j) of Industrial Disputes Act. Learned Counsel for workmen has referred to a later three judges bench judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of General Manager, Telecom Vs A.Sriniwasa reported in 1998AIR 656SC, which has led around the proposition that the Department of Post Office and telecommunication is industry under section 2(j). This is a judgment by three judges bench which shall prevail over the judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Theyyam Joseph (supra). Hence, in the light of principal of law propounded in the three judges bench decision is referred to above, the management of Post Offices in the case in hand is held and industry as defined under section 2(J) of Industrial Disputes Act. Issue number one is decided accordingly.

11. ISSUE NO.2:-

As established above, the departmental inquiry has been held against law by my learned Predecessor and this order has been up held by Hon'ble High court. Thereafter the burden was on management to prove the charge. The management has not led any evidence. According to the management , since the case is old the records and witnesses are not available as they have retired, dead or untraceable. Learned Counsel for the management has referred to the statement of the workman on oath recorded during the hearing of preliminary issue regarding legality of departmental inquiry, wherein he stated that he could not credit the amount in the account of account holders due to mistake as he was overburdened and thereafter he deposited the entire amount with interest. Accounting the learned Counsel for Management, this confession of the workman is sufficient to prove him guilty for the charge of misconduct. I do not146 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] subscribe to this argument because his statement regarding his admission of his guilt will be taken as a whole. He also says that it was a bonafide mistake on his part. Hence, in these circumstances, the charge against the workman is held not proved.

Issue No.2 is answered accordingly.

ISSUE NO.3:-

In the light of the finding that charges have not been proved against the Workman and that the management is industry as defined under section 2 (j), the issue remains to be decided is whether the Workman is entitled to any relief.

Learned Counsel for workmen has referred to a judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Deepali Gundu Surwase VsKranti Junior Adhyapak Maha Vidyalaya (2014)2SCC(L&S)184 ie MANU/SWC/0942/2013, Hon'ble the Apex Court has summarised the principles with respect to back wages as follows-

33. The propositions which can be culled out from the aforementioned judgments are:

i) In cases of wrongful termination of service, reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages is the normal rule.

ii) The aforesaid rule is subject to the rider that while deciding the issue of back wages, the adjudicating authority or the Court may take into consideration the length of service of the employee/workman, the nature of misconduct, if any, found proved against the employee/workman, the financial condition of the employer and similar other factors.

iii) Ordinarily, an employee or workman whose services are terminated and who is desirous of getting back wages is required to either plead or at least make a statement before the adjudicating authority or the Court of first instance that he/she was not gainfully employed or was employed on lesser wages. If the employer wants to avoid payment of full back wages, then it has to plead and also lead cogent evidence to prove that the employee/workman was gainfully employed and was getting wages equal to the wages he/she was drawing prior to the termination of service. This is so because it is settled law that the burden of proof of the existence of a particular fact lies on the person who makes a positive averments about its existence. It is always easier to prove a positive fact than to prove a negative fact. Therefore, once the employee shows that he was not employed, the onus lies on the employer to specifically plead and prove that the employee was gainfully employed and was getting the same or substantially similar emoluments.

iv) The cases in which the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal exercises power under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and finds that even though the enquiry held against the employee/workman is consistent with the rules of natural justice and / or certified standing orders, if any, but holds that the punishment was disproportionate to the misconduct found proved, then it will have the discretion not to award full back wages. However, if the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal finds that the employee or workman is not at all guilty of any misconduct or that the employer had foisted a false charge, then there will be ample justification for award of full back wages.

v) The cases in which the competent Court or Tribunal finds that the employer has acted in gross violation of the statutory provisions and/or the principles of natural justice or is guilty of victimizing the employee or workman, then the concerned Court or Tribunal will be fully justified in directing payment of full back wages. In such cases, the superior Courts should not exercise power under Article 226 or 136 of the Constitution and interfere with the award passed by the Labour Court, etc., merely because there is a possibility of forming a different opinion on the entitlement of the employee/workman to get full back wages or the employer's obligation to pay the same. The Courts must always be kept in view that in the cases of wrongful / illegal termination of service, the wrongdoer is the employer and sufferer is the employee/workman and there is no justification to give premium to the employer of his wrongdoings by relieving him of the burden to pay to the employee/workman his dues in the form of full back wages.

vi) In a number of cases, the superior Courts have interfered with the award of the primary adjudicatory authority on the premise that finalization of litigation has taken long time ignoring that in majority of cases the parties are not responsible for such delays. Lack of infrastructure and manpower is the principal cause for delay in the disposal of cases. For this the litigants cannot be blamed or penalised. It would amount to grave injustice to an employee or workman if he is denied back wages simply because there is long lapse of time between the termination of his service and finality given to the order of reinstatement. The Courts should bear in mind that in most of these cases, the employer is in an advantageous position vis-à-vis the employee or workman. He can avail the services of best legal brain for prolonging the agony of the sufferer, i.e., the employee or workman, who can ill afford the luxury of spending money on a lawyer with certain amount of fame. Therefore, in such cases it would be prudent to adopt the course suggested in Hindustan Tin Works Private Limited v. Employees of Hindustan Tin Works Private Limited (supra).

In the case in hand, as it has been mentioned earlier that the departmental enquiry against the Workman was found against law and a writ petition filed by Management against this finding was dismissed by Hon'ble High Court of MP details mentioned earlier. It has also been held that since the management could not adduce any evidence before this[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 147 tribunal in support of the charge of misconduct, the charge was held not proved. Hence, in the light of these findings, the workmen deserves reinstatement with all full wages and benefits and issue number three is answered accordingly.

In the light of above discussion and findings, following award is passed.

AWARD

The action of management of senior superintendent of Post Offices Jabalpur Sambhag in terminating the

services of Sri Kishan Lal Mehra w.e.f. From June 1, 1998 is against law and is unjustified. The Workman is

held entitled to be reinstated with back wages and benefits and also entitled to post retirement benefits, if any.

No order as to cost.

12. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment as per rules.

P. K. SRIVASTAVA, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 34.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार

कु लपति, गुरु घासीदास विश्वविद्यालय, कोनी, बिलासपुर-(छ.ग.), के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और श्री किसान मरार,

कामगार ,के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट के न्द्रीय सरकार

जबलपुर पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या CGIT/LC/R/38/2017) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को

सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 08/01/2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल-42012/126/2016 - आईआर-(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 34.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/LC/R/38/2017) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour–Jabalpur, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The Vice Chancellor, Guru Ghasidas University, Koni, Bilashpur, (Chhattisgarh), and Shri Kisan Marar, worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 08/01/2024.

[No. L- 42012/126/2016 - IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/38/2017

Present: P.K.Srivastava

H.J.S..( Retd)

Shri Kisan Marar S/o Sh. Shankar Marar,

Vill-Nirthu, Po- Ghutku, Tah-Takhatpur,

BILASPUR(Chhattisgarh)

Workman

Versus

The Vice Chancellor,

Guru Ghasidas University, Koni,

BILASPUR(Chhattisgarh)

Management

148 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

AWARD

(Passed on this 27Th day of December-2023.)

As per letter dated 11/04/2017 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 L-42012/126/2016 (IR(DU)) dt.11/04/2017 . The dispute under reference related to :-

"Whether the action on the part of management headed by the Vice Chancellor of Guru Ghasidas

Central University, Bilaspur in terminating the services of Sh. Kisan Marar, the daily wage worker

working for a period of 17 years continuously and not giving terminal benefits including not

complying section 25(F) of Id Act is legal and justified and whether the claim put forth by the

retrenched workman in the dispute towards re-engagement and regularization and not being

considered by the management in the entire decision making process is appropriate and justified? If

not, what relief Sh. Kisan Marar, the retrenched daily rated workman in the dispute is entitled to?"

After registering the case on reference received, Notices were sent to the parties and were duly served on them. In Spite of service of notices, the workman never appeared nor did he file any statement of claim, management also did not file any written statement of defense.

Since None of the parties filed any pleading nor did file any evidence, holding the claim of workman not proved the reference deserves to be dismissed and is dismissed accordingly.

P. K. SRIVASTAVA, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 35.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार निदेशक, दूरदर्शन के न्द्र, श्यामला हिल्स, भोपाल (म.प्र.), के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और श्री विनोद बाबू अर्गल, कामगार ,के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट के न्द्रीय सरकार

जबलपुर पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या CGIT/LC/R/97/2017) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 08/01/2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल- 42012/13/2017-आईआर-(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 35.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/LC/R/97/2017) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour–Jabalpur, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The Director, Doordarshan kendra, Shyamla Hills,Bhopal (M.P.), and Shri Vinod Babu Argal, worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 08/01/2024.

[No. L- 42012/13/2017 - IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/97/2017

Present: P.K.Srivastava

H.J.S..( Retd)

Sh. Vinod Babu Argal

S/o Sh. Mánsharam Argal,

S-31, Nehru Nagar, BHOPAL(M.P.)

Workman

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 149

Versus

Director Doordarshan Kendra,

Shyamla Hills,

BHOPAL(M.P.)

Management

AWARD

(Passed on this 22Th day of December-2023.)

As per letter dated 05/07/2017 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 No. L-42012/13/2017 (IR(DU)) dt.05/07/2017 . The dispute under reference related to :-

"Whether the action of the management of Director, Doordarshan Kendra, Bhopal in refusing

employment to Shri Vinod Argal w.e.f December 14 is legal & or justified? If not, to what relief the

workman concerned is entitled to?"

After registering a case on reference, notices were sent to the parties and were duly served on them. In Spite of service of notices, the workman never appeared nor did he file any statement of claim, management also did not file any written statement of defense.

Since none of the parties filed any pleading nor did file any evidence, holding the claim of workman not proved the reference deserves to be answered against the workman and is answered accordingly.

P. K. SRIVASTAVA, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 36.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार संयुक्त निदेशक, पीएसएस सेंट्रल इंस्टीट्यूट ऑफ वोके शनल एजुके शन (पीएसएससीआईवी ई)एनसीईआरटी, भोपाल (एमपी), के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और श्री महेंद्र कु मार ठाकु र, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट के न्द्रीय सरकार जबलपुर पंचाट(संदर्भ संख्या CGIT/LC/R/69/2020) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 08/01/2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल- 42025/07/2024-09-आईआर-(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 36.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/LC/R/69/2020) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour–Jabalpur, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The Joint Director, PSS Central Institute of Vocational Education (PSSCIVE) NCERT, Bhopal (MP), and Shri Mahendra Kumar Thakur, worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 08/01/2024.

[No. L- 42025/07/2024-09- IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

150 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/69/2020

Present: P.K.Srivastava

H.J.S..( Retd)

Shri Mahendra Kumar Thakur,

House No.198, Airport Road,

Data Colony, Bhopal (MP)-462 030.

Workman

Versus

The Joint Director,

PSS Central Institute of Vocational Education

(PSSCIVE) NCERT, Bhopal (MP)

Management

AWARD

(Passed on this 22Th day of December-2023.)

As per letter dated 22/10/2020 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 No. J-1(1-43)/2020-IR dt.22/10/2020 . The dispute under reference related to :-

"Whether the action of the management of PSSCIVE, NCERT, Bhopal in terminating the services of

Shri Mahendra Kumar Thakur S/o Shri Ram Singh Thakur, Junior Project Fellow w.e.f. 01.04.2020 is

legal and just ? If not, then what relief the above said workman is entitled and from which date?"

After registering a case on reference, notices were sent to the parties and were duly served on them. In Spite of service of notices, the workman never appeared nor did he file any statement of claim, management also did not file any written statement of defense.

Since none of the parties filed any pleading nor did file any evidence, holding the claim of workman not proved the reference deserves to be answered against the workman and is answered accordingly.

P. K. SRIVASTAVA, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 37.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार महाप्रबंधक. नेशनल टेक्सटाइल कॉर्पोरेशन, मध्य प्रदेश इकाई, न्यू भोपाल टेक्सटाइल्स मिल, चांदबड़, भोपाल (मध्य प्रदेश), के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और श्री रामेश्वर प्रसाद नायक, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट के न्द्रीय सरकार

जबलपुर पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या CGIT/LC/R/36/2021) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 08/01/2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल- 42025/07/2024-10-आईआर-(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 151

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 37.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/LC/R/36/2021) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour–Jabalpur, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The General Manager. National Textile Corporation, Madhya Pradesh Unit, New Bhopal Textiles Mill, Chandbad, Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh ), and Shri Rameshwar Prasad Nayak, worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 08/01/2024.

[No. L- 42025/07/2024-10- IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/36/2021

Present: P.K.Srivastava

H.J.S..( Retd)

Shri Rameshwar Prasad Nayak,

S/o. Late Shri Thakurdas Nayak,

House Number 291, Ekta Nagar, Chhola Road,

Phoota Maqbara, Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh )

Workman

Versus

The General Manager.

National Textile Corporation, Madhya Pradesh Unit,

New Bhopal Textiles Mill, Chandbad,

Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh ) - 462 010.

Management

AWARD

(Passed on this 27Th day of December-2023.)

As per letter dated 24/08/2021 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 J-1(1-8)/2021-IR dt.24/08/2021 . The dispute under reference related to :-

"क्या कर्मकार श्री रामेश्वर प्रसाद नायक, दैनिक वेतन भोगी को महाप्रबन्धक, न्यू भोपाल टेक्सटाइल्स मिल, चॉदबड, भोपाल ( मध्य

प्रदेश) व्दारा काम से निकाला जाना न्यायोचित है? यदि नहीं, तो उक्त कर्मकार को कब से और किन लाभों के साथ नौकरी पर पुनः

बहाल किया जाना चाहिए ? "

After registering the case on reference received, Notices were sent to the parties and were duly served on them. In Spite of service of notices, the workman never appeared nor did he file any statement of claim, management also did not file any written statement of defense.

Since None of the parties filed any pleading nor did file any evidence, holding the claim of workman not proved the reference deserves to be dismissed and is dismissed accordingly.

P. K. SRIVASTAVA, Presiding Officer152 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 38.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार मुख्य महाप्रबंधक, दूरसंचार, भारत संचार निगम लिमिटेड, भोपाल द्वारा - जिला प्रबंधक, दूरसंचार, गुना (म.प्र.), के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और श्री रामभरोसे, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट के न्द्रीय सरकार जबलपुर पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या CGIT/LC/R/133/2012) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 27/12/2023 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल- 40012/32/2012-आईआर-(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 38.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/LC/R/133/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour–Jabalpur, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The Chief General Manager,Telecommunications, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Bhopal through - The District Manager, Telecommunication, Guna-(M.P), and Shri Rambharosa, worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 27/12/2023.

[No. L- 40012/32/2012- IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/133/2012

Present: P.K.Srivastava

H.J.S..( Retd)

Shri Rambharosa,

S/o Shri Bhanwarlal

R/o House No. 132, Karmakhedi

Ruthiyai, Near Budhelaji Mandir,

Teh. Raghogarh, Guna (M.P)

Workman

Versus

The Chief General Manager,

Telecommunications,

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.

Bhopal through District Manager,

Telecommunication, Guna (M.P)

Management

AWARD

(Passed on this 12Th day of December-2023.)

As per letter dated 22/11/2012 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 Notification No. L- 40012/32/2012-(IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:

"Whether the claim of Shri Ram Bharosa that he had worked for more than 240 days in a year before

alledged termination from 08/09/2009 is justified? If yes, whether the action of the management in

terminating his services from 08/09/2009 is legal and just? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?."

13. After registering the case on the basis of reference, notices were sent to the parties. Both the parties have filed their respect statement of claim/defence.

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 153

14. The case of the workman as stated in his statement of claim is that he was engaged by Management since march 1991 to 2000 and was disengaged without notice of compensation this is against law.

15. According to management, the workman was a daily wager worker he never worked continuously for 240 days in any year.

16. The workmen side hasnot filed any documents,nor did he file any affidavit in support of his claim. Management has filed affidavitofit's witness. Supporting case of management.

17. At the time of argument also, none appeared for parties. I have gone through the record.

18. The initial burden to prove his claim is on workman. He has not filed any evidence, nor has proved any document in photocopy filed by him. Hence holding his claim, not proved, the reference deserves to be answered against the workman and is answered accordingly.

19. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment as per rules.

P.K.SRIVASTAVA, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 39.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार

निदेशक, दूरदर्शन के न्द्र, श्यामला हिल्स, भोपाल (म.प्र.), के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और श्री शैलेन्द्र कु मार नौरिया,

कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट के न्द्रीय सरकार

जबलपुर पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या CGIT/LC/R/100/2017) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को

सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 27/12/2023 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल- 42012/24/2017-आईआर-(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 39.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/LC/R/100/2017) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour–Jabalpur, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The Director, Doordarshan kendra, Shyamla Hills,Bhopal (M.P.), and Shri Shailendra Kumar Nouriya, worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 27/12/2023.

[No. L- 42012/24/2017 - IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

JABALPUR

NO. CGIT/LC/R/100/2017

Present: P.K.Srivastava

H.J.S..( Retd)

Sh. Shailendra Kumar Nouriya

S/o Sh. R.K. Nouriya, M-197,

Near Chetak Bridge, Gautam Nagar,

BHOPAL(M.P.)

Workman

154 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Versus

Director Doordarshan kendra,

Shyamla Hills,

BHOPAL(M.P.)

Management

AWARD

(Passed on this 22Th day of December-2023.)

As per letter dated 24/07/2017 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 No. L-42012/24/2017 (IR(DU)) dt.24/07/2017 . The dispute under reference related to :-

"Whether the action of the management of Director, Doordarshan Kendra, Bhopal in terminating

employment to Shri Shailendra Kumar Nouriyu w.e.f 08.04.2015 is legal & or justified? If not, to what

relief the workman concerned is entitled to?"

After registering a case on reference, notices were sent to the parties and were duly served on them. In Spite of service of notices, the workman never appeared nor did he file any statement of claim, management also did not file any written statement of defense.

Since none of the parties filed any pleading nor did file any evidence, holding the claim of workman not proved the reference deserves to be answered against the workman and is answered accordingly.

P. K. SRIVASTAVA,Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 40.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार जिला अभियंता, टेलीग्राफ, दूरसंचार विभाग, जामनगर ; उपमंडल अधिकारी, तार, दूरसंचार विभाग, जामनगर, के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और अध्यक्ष, सौराष्ट्र कर्मचारी संघ, राजकोट, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में के न्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय- अहमदाबाद पंचाट(संदर्भ संख्या 596/2004) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 12/01/2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल-40012/151/94- आईआर-डीयू]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 40.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 596/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court - Ahmedabad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The District Engineer, Telegraphs, Department of Telecommunication, Jamnagar ; The Sub Divisional Officer, Telegraphs, Department of Telecommunication, Jamnagar, and The President, Saurashtra Employees Union, Rajkot, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 12/01/2024.

[No. - 40012/151/94- IR DU]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 155

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

AHMEDABAD

Present….

Sunil Kumar Singh-I,

Presiding Officer,

CGIT cum Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated : 07.12.2023

Reference: (CGITA) No- 596/2004

1. The District Engineer, Telegraphs,

Department of Telecommunication,

Jamnagar.

2. The Sub Divisional Officer, Telegraphs,

Department of Telecommunication,

Jamnagar. …...…….First Party

V

The President,

Saurashtra Employees Union,

Baba Ama, 10/5, Junction Plot,

Swami Tehiliram Marg,

Rajkot-360001. ………….Second Party

For the First Party : Shri B. D. Thakkar

For the Second Party : None.

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-40012/151/94-IR(DU) dated 16.12.94 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Rajkot (Gujarat) in respect of the matter specified in the Schedule. The matter was later received by transfer on creation of this Tribunal at Ahmedabad in the year 2004.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the erst while department of Telegraphs and now department of Telecom. Through the Telecom Dist. Manager, Jamnagar, in discontinuing/terminating or not taking on duties, Shri Trivedi Jayantilal Shamji Valid, just and legal? If no, to what benefits the workman is entitled for and which directions are necessary in the matter?"

1. The reference dates back to 16.12.94 in respect of the termination of workman and retrenchment compensation. The second party submitted the statement of claim Ex. 4 and also submitted the copy of the documents vide list Ex.7 on 30.03.1998. The affidavits of deposition by the SP/workman was submitted vide Ex.16 on 01.12.2011 and the affidavit by FP/employer was submitted vide Ex.17 on 16.02.2012. The case is fixed for the cross examination of SP/workman at his affidavit at Ex.16. The second party/workman was afforded last opportunity on 03.10.2022 along with additional opportunities on 27.03.2023 and 27.07.2023. The affidavit of workman submitted in his examination in chief at Ex.16 is of no avail for want of cross examination by FP employer. The workman has given the account of his working days from 01.12.1986 to 01.12.1987 but no account of his working days for the calendar year preceding his oral termination dt.30.11.1988 as mentioned in his statement of claim is given to show that he worked for more than 240 days in the year preceding his termination.. Hence the claim of the workman is not substantiated with evidence on record. It further give an impression that the workman/union is not interested to proceed further in the matter.

156 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Thus, in view of above, the claim under in favour of the FP/employer and against the SP/workman. The award is passed accordingly.

Let two copies of the Award be sent to the Appropriate Government for the needful and for publication U/s 17(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

SUNIL KUMAR SINGH-I, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 41.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार जिला

अभियंता, टेलीग्राफ, दूरसंचार विभाग, जामनगर ; उपमंडल अधिकारी, तार, दूरसंचार विभाग, जामनगर, के प्रबंधतंत्र के

संबद्ध नियोजकों और अध्यक्ष, सौराष्ट्र कर्मचारी संघ, राजकोट, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में के न्द्रीय

सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय- अहमदाबाद पंचाट(संदर्भ संख्या 598/2004) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में

दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 12/01/2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल-40012/188/93- आईआर-डीयू]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 41.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 598/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court - Ahmedabad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The District Engineer, Telegraphs, Department of Telecommunication, Jamnagar ; The Sub Divisional Officer, Telegraphs, Department of Telecommunication, Jamnagar, and The President, Saurashtra Employees Union, Rajkot, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 12/01/2024.

[No. 40012/188/93- IR DU]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

AHMEDABAD

Present….

Sunil Kumar Singh-I,

Presiding Officer,

CGIT cum Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated : 07.12.2023

Reference: (CGITA) No- 598/2004

1. The District Engineer Telephones,

Indian Post and Telegraphs Department,

Jamnagar.

2. The Sub Divisional Officer (Phones),

Indian Post and Telegraphs Department,

Jamnagar. …...…….First Party

V

The President,

Saurashtra Employees Union,

Baba Ama, 10/5, Junction Plot,

Swami Tehiliyaram Marg,

Rajkot-360001. ………….Second Party

For the First Party : Shri B. D. Thakkar

For the Second Party : None[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 157

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L- 40012/188/93-IR(DU) dated 20.01.95 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Rajkot (Gujarat) in respect of the matter specified in the Schedule The matter was received by transfer on creation of this Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Ahmedabad in the year 2004.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Sub-Divisional Officer (Phones) Jamnagar and Telecom District Engineer Jamnagar in terminating the services of Shri R. K. Omprakash Bajpai is proper, legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"

1. The case was called out. FP/employer is represented through Ld. Counsel Shri B. D. Thakkar. None responds for SP/workman. Perusal of record shows that the case is fixed for arguments. However it transpires from the perusal of record that the SP/workman has been absenting since 21.06.2021. The second party/workman was afforded last opportunity on 23.12.2022 along with additional opportunities on 30.03.2023 and 27.07.2023. It appears that the SP/workman has either settled his dispute with the FP/employer out of court or is not interested to proceed further in the matter. Thus, in the circumstances, the claim of the workman is declined and the reference is answered in positive in favour of the FP/employer and against the SP/workman. The award is passed accordingly.

Let two copies of the Award be sent to the Appropriate Government for the needful and for publication U/s 17(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 42.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार जिला अभियंता, टेलीग्राफ, दूरसंचार विभाग, जामनगर ; उप मंडल अधिकारी, तार, दूरसंचार विभाग, जामनगर, के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और अध्यक्ष, सौराष्ट्र कर्मचारी संघ, राजकोट, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में के न्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय- अहमदाबाद पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 600/2004) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 12/01/2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल-40012/186/93-आईआर-डीयू]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 42.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 600/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court - Ahmedabad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The District Engineer, Telegraphs, Department of Telecommunication, Jamnagar ; The Sub Divisional Officer, Telegraphs, Department of Telecommunication, Jamnagar, and The President, Saurashtra Employees Union, Rajkot, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 12/01/2024.

[No. L-40012/186/93- IR DU]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

AHMEDABAD

Present….

Sunil Kumar Singh-I,

Presiding Officer,

CGIT cum Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated : 07.12.2023158 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

Reference: (CGITA) No- 600/2004

1. The District Engineer Telephones,

Indian Post and Telegraphs Department,

Jamnagar.

2. The Sub Divisional Officer (Phones),

Indian Post and Telegraphs Department,

Jamnagar. …...…….First Party

V

The President,

Saurashtra Employees Union,

Baba Ama, 10/5, Junction Plot,

Swami Tehiliyaram Marg,

Rajkot-360001. ………….Second Party

For the First Party : Shri B. D. Thakkar

For the Second Party : None

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L- 40012/186/93-IR(DU) dated 20.03.1995 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Rajkot (Gujarat) in respect of the matter specified in the Schedule. The matter was later received by transfer on creation of this Tribunal at Ahmedabad in the year 2004.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Sub-Divisional Officer (Phones) Jamnagar and Telecom District Engineer Jamnagar in terminating the services of Shri Rajeshwar Bhagat is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"

1. The case was called out. FP/employer is represented through Ld. Counsel Shri B. D. Thakkar. None responds for SP/workman. Perusal of record shows that the case is fixed for arguments. However it transpires from the perusal of record that the SP/workman has been absenting since 21.06.2021. The second party/workman was afforded last opportunity on 23.12.2022 along with additional opportunities on 30.03.2023 and 27.07.2023. It appears that the SP/workman has either settled his dispute with the FP/employer out of court or is not interested to proceed further in the matter. Thus, in the circumstances, the claim of the workman is declined and the reference is answered in positive in favour of the FP/employer and against the SP/workman. The award is passed accordingly.

Let two copies of the Award be sent to the Appropriate Government for the needful and for publication U/s 17(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

SUNIL KUMAR SINGH-I, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 43.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार जिला अभियंता, टेलीग्राफ, दूरसंचार विभाग, जामनगर ; उपमंडल अधिकारी, तार, दूरसंचार विभाग, जामनगर, के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और अध्यक्ष, सौराष्ट्र कर्मचारी संघ, राजकोट, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में के न्द्रीय[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 159 सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय- अहमदाबाद पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 629/2004) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक

में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 12/01/2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल-40012/22/93-आईआर-डीयू]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 43.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 629/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court - Ahmedabad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The District Engineer, Telegraphs, Department of Telecommunication, Jamnagar ; The Sub Divisional Officer, Telegraphs, Department of Telecommunication, Jamnagar, and The President, Saurashtra Employees Union, Rajkot, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 12/01/2024.

[No. L-40012/22/93- IR DU]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

AHMEDABAD

Present….

Sunil Kumar Singh-I,

Presiding Officer,

CGIT cum Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated : 07.12.2023

Reference: (CGITA) No- 629/2004

1. The District Engineer, Telegraphs,

Engineering Division,

Surendranagar-363001.

2. The Sub Divisional Officer, Phones,

Engineering Division,

Surendranagar-363001. …...…….First Party

V

The President,

Saurashtra Employees' Union,

Umesh Commercial Complex, 213-214,

2nd Floor, Near Chaudhary high school,

Rajkot-360001. ………….Second Party

For the First Party : Shri H. R. Raval

For the Second Party : None.

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L-40012/22/93- IR(DU) dated 06.06.1995 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Rajkot (Gujarat) in respect of the matter specified in the Schedule. The matter was later received by transfer on creation of this Tribunal at Ahmedabad in the year 2004.

160 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of SDO Phones in terminating the services of Shri Arvindkumar K. Mali ex-casual labour is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to?"

1. The case was called out. FP/employer is represented through Ld. Counsel Shri H. R. Raval. None responds for SP/workman. Perusal of record shows that the case is fixed for arguments. However it transpires from the perusal of record that the SP/workman has been absenting since 25.06.2021. The second party/workman was afforded last opportunity on 23.12.2022 along with additional opportunities on 30.03.2023 and 27.07.2023. It appears that the SP/workman has either settled his dispute with the FP/employer out of court or is not interested to proceed further in the matter. Thus, in the circumstances, the claim of the workman is declined and the reference is answered in positive in favour of the FP/employer and against the SP/workman. The award is passed accordingly.

Let two copies of the Award be sent to the Appropriate Government for the needful and for publication U/s 17(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

SUNIL KUMAR SINGH-I, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 44.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार कमांडिंग ऑफिसर, 36, विंग एयरफोर्स, मकरपुरा, वडोदरा (गुजरात), के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और श्री संतोष कु मार उपाध्याय, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में के न्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय- अहमदाबाद पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 123/2006) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 12/01/2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल-14012/13/2005-आईआर-डीयू]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 44.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 123/2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court - Ahmedabad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The Commanding Officer,36, Wing Airforce, Makarpura, Vadodara- (Gujarat), and Shri Santosh Kumar Upadhyay, Worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 12/01/2024.

[No. L-14012/13/2005- IR DU]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,

AHMEDABAD

Present….

Sunil Kumar Singh-I,

Presiding Officer, CGIT cum Labour Court,

Ahmedabad,

Dated 18th December, 2023

Reference: (CGITA) No- 123/2006

The Commanding Officer,

36, Wing Airforce,

Makarpura,

Vadodara(Gujarat)-390014. .……….First Party/Employer[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 161 V

Shri Santosh Kumar Upadhyay,

C/o K. M. Ranjan, A-26,

Indraprasth Society, Kamla Nagar,

Ajwa Road,

Vadodara(Gujarat)-390010. .……….Second Party/Workman Adv. for the First Party/employer : None

Adv. for the Second Party workman : None

AWARD

The Government of India/Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by reference adjudication Order No. L- 14012/13/2005-IR(DU) dated 17.05.2006 referred the dispute for adjudication to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) in respect of the matter specified in the Schedule:

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Airforce Station, Baroda in terminating the services of Shri Santosh Kumar Upadhyay, School Bus Care Taker w.e.f. 18.01.2005 is legal, proper and just? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to?"

1. The case was taken up today. It is fixed for the exparte evidence since 22.10.2018. Perusal of the record shows that workman has been absenting after the case was proceeded exparte on 22.10.2018 except appearing only on one occasion i.e. on 19.01.2023. There is no evidence on record to substantiate the claim of the workman. In the circumstances, the claim under reference is answered against the workman and in favour of First party/employer for the want of evidence to the effect that the action of the management of Airforce Station, Baroda in terminating the services of Shri Santosh Kumar Upadhyay, School Bus Care Taker w.e.f. 18.01.2005 is legal, proper and just. The award is passed accordingly.

Let two copies of the Award be sent to the Appropriate Government for the needful and for publication U/s 17(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

SUNIL KUMAR SINGH-I, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 45.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार दिल्ली छावनी बोर्ड, दिल्ली, के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और सुश्री रीना कु मारी गौड़ और 7 अन्य, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट के न्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय-1 नई दिल्ली पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 258/2022) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 12.01.2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल -42025-07-2024-12-आईआर(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 45.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 258/2022) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court - I New Delhi as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The Delhi Cantonment Board, Delhi, and Ms. Reena Kumari Gaur And 7 others, Worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 12.01.2024.

[No. L-42025-07-2024-12-IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, DELHI -1

ID No. 258/2022

Ms. Reena Kumari Gaur And 7 other V. The Delhi Cantonment Board

Misc. Application no. 1 of 2022 (praying for direction to comply the Hon'ble High Court's ad interim directions

to maintain status quo till the pendency of dispute before the tribunal.

162 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

&

Misc. Application no. 5 of 2023

Complaint moved by workmen under section 33 read with section 33A of the Industrial Dispute Act,1947.

Shri Rajiv Agarwal, A/R for the claimant

Shri Ankur Mishra, A/R for the Management

Justice Vikas Kunvar Srivastava

(Presiding Officer)

(Former Judge, Alld. High Court)

Prologue

1. The instant applications in hand are moved by the claimant workmen in the above captioned industrial dispute case, purportedly seeking issuance of several directions to the management viz, to comply with the directions of Hon'ble High court of Delhi in W.P (C) 10290 of 2022 dated 07.07.2022 to maintain the status quo in respect of the service conditions of the workmen, and to allow the workmen to continue their duties, to pay them their earned wages. Another application is an complaint against the management under section 33 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. It is alleged that the management, despite the order of the conciliation officer, the directions of the Delhi high court and the pendency of the industrial dispute before this tribunal, has terminated the services of the claimant workmen by refusing them duty since 29.07.2022.

2. Since the facts, constituting the accrual of cause of action for moving both the above applications entitling the claimant workmen to seek reliefs sought there in, are inseparably interwoven, therefore they are being decided simultaneously.

3. In its present form the section 33 in the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (for the brevity shall be referred herein after as the Act only) exists after substitution of subsections in the then existing section 33 vide Act No. 36 of 1956 w.e.f. 10.03.1957. It runs as under- (relevant to the present matter only is reproduced)

"33. Conditions of service, etc., to remain unchanged under certain circumstances during pendency of

proceedings.—(1) During the pendency of any conciliation proceeding before a conciliation officer or a Board or of

any proceeding before 1[an arbitrator or] a Labour Court or Tribunal or National Tribunal in respect of an industrial

dispute, no employer shall,—

(a) in regard to any matter connected with the dispute, alter, to the prejudice of the workmen concerned in such

dispute, the conditions of service applicable to them immediately before the commencement of such proceeding; or

(b) for any misconduct connected with the dispute, discharge or punish, whether by dismissal or otherwise, any

workmen concerned in such dispute,

save with the express permission in writing of the authority before which the proceeding is pending.

(2) During the pendency of any such proceeding in respect of an industrial dispute, the employer may, in accordance

with the standing orders applicable to a workman concerned in such dispute 2[or, where there are no such standing

orders, in accordance with the terms of the contract, whether express or implied, between him and the workman],—

(a) alter, in regard to any matter not connected with the dispute, the conditions of service applicable to that

workman immediately before the commencement of such proceeding; or

(b) for any misconduct not connected with the dispute, or discharge or punish, whether by dismissal or

otherwise, that workman:

Provided that no such workman shall be discharged or dismissed, unless he has been paid wages for one month and

an application has been made by the employer to the authority before which the proceeding is pending for approval of

the action taken by the employer."

4. When a complaint is made u/s 33 before the tribunal complaining alteration in service conditions by the employer to the prejudice of the workman and if the employer is found contravening the mandatory prohibition of section 33, section 33 A provides that the dispute under the complaint is to be adjudicated on merit and to pass an award. For the purpose of easy reference section 33 A of the Act is reproduced here under-

"33A. Special provision for adjudication as to whether conditions of service, etc., changed during pendency of

proceedings.—Where an employer contravenes the provisions of section 33 during the pendency of proceedings

3[before a conciliation officer, Board, an arbitrator, a Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal], any employee

aggrieved by such contravention, may make a complaint in writing, 5[in the prescribed manner,—

(a) to such conciliation officer or Board, and the conciliation officer or Board shall take such complaint into account

in mediating in, and promoting the settlement of, such industrial dispute; and

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 163

(b) to such arbitrator, Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal and on receipt of such complaint, the arbitrator,

Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal, as the case may be, shall adjudicate upon the complaint as if it were a

dispute referred to or pending before it, in accordance with the provisions of this Act and shall submit his or its award

to the appropriate Government and the provisions of this Act shall apply accordingly

Factual matrix

5. Before considering the workmen's complaint made in the above application and their prayer to maintain the status quo in terms of the directions of the Hon'ble high court during the pendency of dispute before this tribunal it would be relevant and pertinent to apprise what the dispute exists between the workmen and the management. Pursuant to the reference, at the behest of Reena kumari 'Gaur' and 7 others, made under the sub section (1) & (2A) of the section 10 of the Act by the central government through the Ministry of Labour & Employment dated 14.09.2022, the present industrial dispute is registered by this tribunal as ID No. 258/2022. The industrial dispute existing between the claimants workmen and their employer the 'Delhi Cantonment Board' (which herein after shall be addressed as 'the management' only) runs in the following terms-

"whether demands of Smt. Reena Kumari Gaur & 7 others through Hospital Employees' Union Delhi vide

letter dated 27.06.2022 to the management of the Delhi Cantonment Board, Delhi for regularization of their

services with effect from their initial date of joining,payment of the entire difference of salary o the principle of

'equal pay for equal work' and all consequential benefits w.e.f. their initial date of joining are proper, legal and

justified ? If yes, to what reliefs are the disputants entitled and what directions, if any, are necessary in the matter?

It is complained that the management has clearly violated the directions of the Hon'ble High Court by disturbing the services of the workmen and not paying salaries to them. The directions of the High Court contained in the para 9 of the order in aforementioned writ petition is reproduced herein below with due regard-

"It is an admitted fact that the petitioners have already raised an industrial dispute. It is made clear that the service

of the petitioners shall not be disturbed during the pendency of the dispute before the tribunal without compliance

of the section 33 of the Industrial Dispute Act. Status quo shall be maintained in respect of the service condition of

the petitioners"

6. Despite the above directions the management refused to allow duties to the workmen from 30. 07.2022 though they were in continuous working in the service of the management for a considerable period of about 10 years, since the date of their initial date of joining till 29.07.2022.

7. The industrial dispute before the tribunal may summarily be apprised on the basis of the statement of the claim submitted on 01.07.2022 by the claimant workmen along with relevant documents relating to their continuous employment in the management's hospital since a long and how the present dispute arisen. The claimant workmen got their initial appointment on contract basis for year to year contract of services directly entered into with the present industrial employer, the management, pursuant to a general and widely circulated advertisement published in the year 2012. The management selected and offered appointment to the claimant workmen after passing through an open recruitment procedure. They began to impart their services in the hospital premises of the management since the respective dates of their joining in the year 2012. The competent officer of the management, namely the Chief Executive Officer of the Delhi Cantonment Board in recording satisfactions to the performance on their respective posts, recurrently used to issue letter of extensions of the contract period every year till 01.07.2022. As such the claimant workmen, working on their respective posts under the direct supervision, control and instructions of the management continued to receive remuneration being on the pay roll and attendance sheet of the management. The practice of the management of employing the present claimants workmen to work against the substantively vacant posts as contractual workers continued in usual course even for a considerably long period of more than 240 days. The workmen are performing work of the same nature, expending the same working hours and bearing the responsibilities in same manner, as their regular counterparts who are getting their salary in regular pay scale along with all allowances.

8. The claimant workmen in proof of pleading to the above facts in the present industrial dispute and in the instant complaint against the management, have submitted their personal affidavits annexing there with photostat copies of all the relevant documents, like the advertisement in the year 2012 by the management intending direct recruitment of workers who fulfills the prescribed eligibility criteria, age and the terms conditions of the para medical and pharmaceutical services in the hospital of the management. The Photostat copies of appointment letter and that of initial joining, year to year extension till the year 2022, the letter of engagement recording satisfaction as to the work and performance of duties, extracts from the attendance sheet showing their continuous service much more than 240 days with the present management till 29.07.2022 etc. All the documentary evidence so filed on affidavit stand un rebutted and not denied.

9. In written statement of defense to the claim statement and also in the reply to both of the instant application for the above ad interim reliefs and the complaint under section 33 of the Act, the management pleaded and deposed164 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] in supporting affidavits that, the workmen who were in service of the management under a contract of service with the management itself for a period of three months only from the date of appointment, which expired by the efflux of stipulated time respectively on 22.06.2022 (of Ms. Reena Gaur and Rinki Gaur), 10.07.2022 (of Ms Ritu Arora), 15.11.2022 (of Mr Mahendra Singh), 19.08.2022 (of Ms.Priyanka), 01.07.2022 (of Ms Ajimol Jestine), 15.07.2022 (of Ms Sheebamol) and 23.08.2022 (of Ms Kavita). In the context of the above timeline the management has further pleaded that on 01.07.2022 an independent contractor namely M/S Raider Security Services Pvt. Ltd. took over the work of providing paramedical service in the hospital of the management. Thereby the existing contract of claimant workmen's contract came to an end on 01.07.2022. The management put vehemence on the present status of the contract of service. It impressed upon the expiry of the contact of service of Ms Reena Kumar Gaur and that of Ms Pinki kumari Gaur before 01.07.2022. The management in their reply to the instant application, has further asserted Nd reiterated the factual statement of its learned counsel recorded in response to the writ petition 10290/2022 before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi which found place in para 7 of the order dated 07.07.2022.The said statement of learned counsel amounts to admissions as to (1) that petitioners had already been placed under the contractor wherein an agreement was signed on 01.07.2022, (2) there is no change in their salary or any service conditions and (3) the petitioners i.e, the claimant workmen are not being replaced with the contract employees as they have directed the contractor not to change their service conditions. Management further clarified that the workmen were placed under the outsourcing agency on 01.07.2022.

10. The management has also filed photo copies of the documents relevant to their defense with affidavit in evidence. There is none of the documents in contradiction with the documents filed by the claimant. The documents filed by the management tend to show that except 21 out of the 55 existing paramedical staff have accepted the fresh contract of service as to a short term appointment of three months designed to come at an end before the expiry of the usual term of yearly contract of service for the year 2021-22 and near to the date of enforcing the outsourcing agreement between the independent contractor and the management. The print out from gem portal is placed on record to show the exercise of entering into contract for service of providing contract Labour as para medical and Pharma staff in the CG Hospital between the management and the independent contractor. though outsourcing. Contract for service of outsourcing entered between the independent contractor and management is not brought on record. Even any letter of instructions if any issued to the independent contractor to preserve and maintain the terms and conditions of service like wages, emoluments and status in employment is also not brought on record. Any proposed contract of service between the independent contractor and the contract labour intended to be outsourced to the management is also not brought on record, though relevant to the issues involved in the matter in hand.

Arguments

11. Heard the learned counsel Sh. Rajiv Agarwal Advocate (the authorized representative of the workmen claimants) at a considerable length of the time. He has also filed written note of the arguments with the compilation of the case laws relied by him. The counsel for the management also has filed his arguments in writing but did not appear to argue orally, though was called on repeatedly deferring the hearing on several dates till the next adjourned date of hearing. However, the written arguments with the compilation of case laws relied on by the management is taken into consideration by the tribunal.

The learned counsel Sh. Rajiv Agarwal for the claimant workmen put vehemence on the fact, the management has the permanent nature of work of the para medical staff having been performed by the concerned workmen in the hospital owned, controlled and supervised by the officers of the management, the Delhi Cantonment Board in its own premises. The concerned workmen were directly recruited by the management itself in due course of open selection pursuant to an advertisement. The requirement of the post and work in issue still exist in the hospital. They despite working continuously for mor than 10 years to the entire satisfaction of the authorities were kept in temporary status of contact based workmen, without regularizing in service. When demand raised before the management they threatened to ward off the. From the employment and began to plan to get rid of them. In this connection they though extended their services for the year 2021- 2022 also, as usual since the initial entrance in the contract based service, directed such workmen to come afresh through an independent contractor of their choice as outsourced employees. This occurred during the pendency of proceeding after raising the dispute relating to the continuation of service and consequent claim of regularization before the assistant labor commissioner. This is why the claimant approached the High Court which on the basis of admission of the respondents management relating to existing industrial dispute enjoined them vide order dated 07.07.2022, not to disturb the service of the claimant workmen during the pendency of the Industrial dispute and rather to maintain status quo in respect of the service conditions. this is why the management to defy the claim of regularization broken the continued chain of service tenure under the contract of service entered directly between the management and the concerned workmen. Learned counsel Sh. Rajiv Agarwal argued, the circumstances as created by the management effect prejudicially the claimant workmen in respect of their claim and the cessation of work, stoppage of the payment of wages cumulatively amount clear violation of the mandatory prohibition of the section 33 of the Act and also the contemptuous breach of the order of the High Court by disturbing the services of the concerned workmen and also by altering their service conditions. This compelled the Claimants to move the instant applications. The action of the management is quite illegal and ineffective by reason of being opposed to the prohibition mandated by the Act under section 33 and also in breach of the high court's restraining order in the matter.

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 165

The prayers made in the applications deserves to be allowed.

He relied on the case law propounded by the apex court in Jaipur Zola Sahkari Bhoomi Vikas Bank v. Ram Gopal Sharma and others (2002) 2 SCC 244. and M.D.T.N. State Transport Corporation V. Nithivilangan Kumbakonam and others (2001) Lab. I. C. 1801 Reliance is further placed on the decision of the High Court of Delhi in the case, titled as Tops Security Ltd. V. Subhash Chander jha ( 2013 ) 136 FLR 17 ) which covers the impugned order Order of dismissal covered under section 33 (2) (b) of the Act. Anther case of the same high court is a decision bench judgement titled as Jitendra Kumar V. Director of Health Services, Govt of NCT of Delhi (L P A 79/2014 with LPA 731/2014 yogendra Kumar and others v. Director Health Services Govt of NCT Delhi decided on 22 October 2019) The facts considered in the above judgement of the Division Bench are some how akin to the facts of the pre matter in hand.

12. The management also on the basis of it's evidence in the form of affidavit with annexed documentary evidence put written argument. Though the learned counsel desisted himself from oral arguments but whatever resonates from his written argument and documents in evidence is apprised further as follows-

The management has neither changed or altered any of the conditions of service of the claimant workmen concerned in the present industrial dispute on or after the order of the high court dated 07.07.2022, as they had already been placed by the management under the independent contractor, "M/s Raider Security Services Pvt. Ltd." w.e.f. 01.07.20022. He impressed on the date 01.07.2022 being a date prior to the initiation of proceeding under section 33 of the Act when the workmen had been placed under the independent contractor aforesaid and since the workmen themselves have refused to join the independent contractor, the management neither can be held responsible for violation of the prohibition of section 33 of the Act nor for the alleged breach of the restraining order of the high court dated 07.07.2022.

It is further argued that the concerned workmen were working under a time bound contract of service and their employment automatically ceased off by reason of the efflux of time stipulated in their contract with the management. Management did not change the conditions of service of the claimant workmen. He relied in this regard on the case law propounded by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case titled as B.A. Security Agents Employees Union v. Regional Labour Commissioner W.P. No.8372/2003 decided on 08.03.2010. and on the case law of the judgement of the apex court in The Bhavhagar Municipality V. Alibhai Karimbhai and Ors. (Manu/ SC /0162/1977 )

The jurisdiction of the tribunal is also challenged to entertain and decide the instant application seeking directions to maintain status quo in terms of the order dated 07.07.2022 of the high court passed in the writ petition no.WP (C) 10290/2022, and impressed that the aggrieved claimant workmen has the only remedy to resort, approaching the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in contempt petition. It is contended that one of the concerned claimant namely Ajimol Jestin has filed the contempt petition which still remain on board in the high court.

After going through the oral argument and that submitted in writings as well as perusing the documentary evidences adduced by the parties to the present industrial dispute I, proceeded further to consider the application under section 33 in accordance with the provisions of section 33 A of the Act. The Application complaining the breach of restraining order dated 07.07.2022 (sopra) is also taken into consideration simultaneously and jointly.

Discussions

13. What is the mandate, as legislated by the parliament in the Act under it's section 33, must be kept in to the mind by an industrial adjudicator while considering the complaint made therein by the employee against the employer of disturbances caused by him without compliance of the pre requisite permission from the tribunal. In nut shell, section 33 (1) (a) of the Act mandatorily envisages a material prohibition to the employers that "During the pendency of any proceeding before a.......tribunal.........in respect of an industrial dispute, no employer shall

(a) in regard to any matter connected with the dispute, alter, to the prejudice of the workmen concerned in such

dispute, the conditions of service applicable to them immediately before the commencement of such proceeding. xxx

Save with the express permission in writing of the authority before which the proceeding is pending. (relevant portion

carved out from the text of sec.33 of the Act, Supra)

This would not be out of relevance to highlight the circumstances envisaged in section 33 under which the mandatory prohibition clinches an employer not to alter the conditions of the service of a workman without prior permission of the authority of the tribunal before which the concerned dispute is pending. They are as under-

(1) There is a proceeding in respect of an industrial dispute before the tribunal or an authority under the Act.

(2) Conditions of service of the concerned workman(s) applicable immediately before the commencement of the proceeding as to the dispute before the tribunal.

(3). The workmen whose conditions of service are altered must be concerned in the pending industrial dispute.

166 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

(4) The alteration of the conditions of service must be in regard to the matter connected with service.

(5) The complained alteration in the conditions of service is to the prejudice of the workmen.

14. The first feature admittedly exist in the present matter in hand. The pending industrial dispute of which the proceeding is running before this tribunal is contested by the management. The foremost question for consideration of both the above misc. applications would be

"When from the Industrial Dispute shall be treated pending before authorities constituted under the Act "

a. The high court has recorded in its order (Supra) on dated 07.07.2022 itself, that admittedly the petitioners (the claimant workmen) have already raised an industrial dispute. The reference is evidencing itself the pendency of the industrial dispute since 27.06.2022. when the claimant workmen's Labour Union raised the dispute relating to the regularization of the claimants in services of the management raised before the authorities under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947. The records show that the said industrial dispute raised on 27.06.2022 before the Labour conciliation officer Which in continuation thereto was sent through the reference dated 14.09.2022 to the tribunal by the government u/s 10 of the Act and iis pending for adjudication.

b. Coming back to the application in the hand, it further would be necessary and expedient to look into the defense, if any, against the complaint of violation of the direction of the court. It would also be equally important to see, if they actually caused disturbance in the service conditions despite the pendency of dispute before the tribunal in utter violation of the statutory mandate incorporated in the section 33 of the Act, what shall be the consequences and legal impacts ?

c. The dispute pending before the tribunal referred for adjudication is with regard to the demand of the workmen for regularization of their services and none else as it is very much clear fro the wordings of the 'reference' cited in preceding para 5 of this order. On perusal of the letter of reference dated 14 09.2022, it reveals that the said dispute was raised by the Labour union namely the Hospital Employees Union vide it's letter dated 27.06.2022. Therefore, I, reached at the conclusion that, the present industrial dispute came into existence before the conciliation officer appointed authority under the Act since 27.06 .2022 and is pending presently before the tribunal through the reference of dispute by the appropriate government dated 14.09.2022. The management remained mandatorily abide not only under the provisions of section 33 of the Act but also restrained by Hon'ble high court's order Dated 07.07.2022 (Supra) from disturbing the service conditions of the claimant workmen and not to terminate any how their services during the pendency of the present industrial dispute case before the tribunal.

Terms and conditions of service

d. A contract of employment is a kind of contract used in Labour law to attribute rights and responsibilities between Parties to a bargain. The contract is in between an employer and an employe. Undoubtedly, the dispute relating to a workman's regularization in services of the management comes within the scope of the phrase 'terms of employment' and 'connected with the employment', hence covered under the definition of 'Industrial Dispute' as given in section 2 (k) of the Act. More over length of continuous service satisfactorily also ensues some Like wise the term 'Regularization in service' presupposes the continuation in employment and service of an employer for a considerable long period. The continuation in service envisages several legal rights and benefits to the workman in the Act against the termination, removal or discharge from service, change in terms and conditions of service etc. unless the employer strictly complies with the provisions of the Act. The Act further prohibits the employer to adopt unfair Labour practices in employment and service under their establishment. The contract of service is entered in the present case directly between the workmen and employer the present management individually. In the absence of any service rule governing the terms and conditions of service such contract of service is regulated, beside the terms stipulated between the parties to the contract, also by the standing orders applicable in the establishment or in the absence of such standing orders from the general provisions of the Standing Orders Act. Like other contract a contract of service too is subject to the relevant provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. In short, a contract of service not only abides the employee but equally abides the employer also, both of them at par in relation to the terms of contract.

e. In the contract of service the employer is in the shoes of master, but subject to the law applicable over such contract. In the above context the rights and protection flowing from the acceptance of the offer of employment by the employee as to the identity of employer also becomes one of the terms/conditions of service. It amounts the parity of mind between the parties under the contract of service, which means the employee must certainly know who is his master and like wise the employer must also know certainly, who is his servant under the contract, The consented assumption of inter se status of parties to the contract of service is therefore comes under the terms and conditions of service, longevity of uninterrupted satisfactory service in the same employment would be substantially considered for the claimants' regularization The terms and conditions of service therefore include the status of employer as master in relation to the status[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 167

of workman as servant under the contract of service which can not be abruptly altered, substituted or

alienated with another person.

f. Beside the said term and conditions of service the workmen were entitled to wages at a fixed rate and other facilities and incidental right and benefits there to which were applicable on and since before the date of industrial dispute came in to existence. I, according to my considered opinion,d hold that, The alteration in terms of the services are undoubtedly connected with the industrial dispute with which the claimant are concerned which is pending before the tribunal for adjudication,

Prejudice to the claimant workmen

15. In the present case one of the party to the contract of service, say the employer management altered the term and condition of service with regard to their known and accepted mastership by alienating the same to some other independent contractor during the continuance of the service contract with the workmen concerned. The management treated the employees as their slaves alienable like in slavery as prevailed in ancient days. They admittedly directed to the workmen to come through the outsourcing under the contractor of their choice.

16. So far as the alteration in terms of service is concerned, The management in their reply to the instant application, has further assentingly reiterated the factual statement of its learned counsel in response to the writ petition 10290 / 2022 before the Hon'ble high court of Delhi which is recorded in para 7 of the order dated 07.07.2022. (Supra) The said statement of learned counsel amounts to admissions (1) that petitioners had already been placed under the independent contractor wherein an agreement was signed on 01.07.2022, (2) there is no change in their salary or any service conditions and (3) the petitioners i.e, the claimant workmen are not being replaced with the other contract employees as they have directed the contractor not to change their service conditions. Management further clarified that the workmen were placed under the outsourcing agency on 01.07.2022 Considering the above admissions of the management the Hon'ble court passed the order dated 07.07.2022 issuing direction that the management shall not disturb the services of the present claimant workmen during the pendency of the dispute before the tribunal without compliance of the provisions as contained in section 33 of the Act. The para 9 of the order of the high court containing the said direction is quoted in preceding para 3 of this order. Para 8 of the high court's order refers the communication dated 01.7.2022 made by the Assistant Labour Commissioner, U.O.I., who had advised the management to adhere to the provisions as contained in section 33 of the Act in letter and spirit and not to terminate the services in order to avoid any untoward incident.

17. The tribunal has already reached at the conclusion that the dispute is pending since the stage of the competent authority under the Act the assistant Labour commissioner/ the conciliation officer even on 27.06.2022

18. The tribunal is amazed of the fact, nothing could have prevented the management, neither restraining order of the high court nor the strict statutory prohibition contained in section 33 of the Act from disturbing daringly the services of the workman concerned with the industrial dispute pending in the tribunal. The management seemed to have designed the outsourcing of it's own workmen to defy their claim of regularization and to ward off them from attending their duties without formal order of termination or cancellation of the contract of service.

19. In the absence of the documentary evidences as to the terms of contract for service of outsourcing entered between the management and the independent contractor, it can not be believed as pleaded and argued by the management that continuity of employment in the hospital and wages shall not be disturbed by the outsourcing contractor.

20. The evidence brought on record of the case by the management shows also that the they were in hurry and haste to get rid of the claimants workmen pursuant to their raising claim of regularization in services. The print out of gem portal contents show that the management did not bother to search any independent contractor for outsourcing having experience in the field of medical, paramedics or pharmaceutical staff to meet the requirements in the hospital of the management. They have given the above services to an independent contractor in the field of outsourcing the security staff, therefore it can not be said that they disturbed the existing services of the claimant workmen concerned with a view to improve their paramedical and pharmaceuticals staffs in the hospital.

21. In the already existing contract of service between the management and the claimant the terms stipulated therein are enforceable under law by the claimant, but in case of the employment under the outsourcing contractor the claimant would not be entitled to seek enforcement of the terms against him at par with that were available in earlier appointment in the management. It would be fit in the circumstance of the present case to quote observation of the apex court in the case of the "Workmen of the Food Corporation of India v. Food Corporation of India 1985 (50) FLR 142 (SC) –

"15….When workmen working under an employer are told that they have ceased to be workmen of that employer, and have become work men of another employer namely, the contractor in this case, in legal parlance such an act of the first employer constitutes discharge, termination of service or retrenchment by whatsoever name called and a fresh employment by another employer namely, the contractor. If the termination of service by the first employer is contrary168 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] to the well established legal position the effect of the employment by the second employer is wholly irrelevant…"

22. The evidence placed on the record by the management does not show the employment of claimant workmen in the hospital short term temporary job. It is also neither pleaded nor shown that recruitment of the claimant was under any scheme or short term project work incidental to the core business of the management which was bound to come at end automatically with the completion of work or efflux of the stipulated time. The tribunal does not agree with the argument of the management that the prohibition of the section 33 (1) (b) not applicable in the cessation of work of the claimant workmen concerned with the dispute. The case laws cited by the management are not applicable in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case

23. consequent upon the above observations I, find myself of the opinion that alteration and disturbance in

the services of the claimants are in prejudice to them.

24. I further conclusively hold that the status of the workmen concerned as on and prior to 27.06.2022 as

the employee of the present management working under the direct contract with it shall stand continued on the

date 01.07.2022 and also on the date of the order of the high court on 07.07.2022. It shall be treated continued

even on the date of reference on 14.09. 2022 to the tribunal. Even today the same status of the claimant

workmen exists during the pendency of the industrial dispute before the tribunal.

25. I further hold that the management in utter violation of the prohibition as mandated in the section 33

of the Act not only changed the status of employment of the workmen concerned abruptly but also designed to

ward of them to join their duty without any order of termination, removal or discharge from their service

continued under the contract of service with the management. The present complaint therefore is covered with

the provision of section 33()1(a) of the Act and the protection of the prohibition is available to the claimants.

26. There is quite an admitted fact, the management, throughout for a considerable long spawn of more than 10 years of the service period of present workmen, have no complaint against them with regard to any misconduct. To the contrary the contract based services of the workmen were remained extended year to year by the competent authorities of the management recording their satisfaction as to the works assigned to them by express orders in writing. The workmen were confidently discharging their services under the direct control, supervision and pay rolls of the management. They were under the legitimate expectations of their continuation with the management. The services of the claimant workmen were abruptly ceased off. There is no order of the termination, dismissal or discharge from the services by the management for the reason of any misconduct not connected with the service, hence the case in hand is constructively covered with the provision of section 33(2) (b). The claimant workmen are not being paid their salary from July 2022, they are refused from attending their duties since 30.07.2022 by the management on the pretext automatic termination of service consequent upon the anbrupt alteration of terms and conditions of service illegally. As such the age of the claimants workmen are covered with section 33 (1)(a) of the Act. The tribunal has already reached at the conclusion that the dispute is pending since the stage of the competent authority under the Act before the assistant Labour commissioner/ the conciliation officer even on 27.06.20222.

27. The management still delve under misconception of law that section 33 will not apply to it's action of shifting the claimant workmen from it's direct employment to an independent contractor to outsourcing. for the reason it happened prior to the dispute under section 33 is brought before the tribunal. The argument is baseless and not agreeable. Much has been discussed in the preceding paras in this regard.

28. Consequent upon the above observations, I further conclusively hold that the status of the workmen

concerned as on and prior to 27.06.2022 as the employee of the present management working under the direct

contract with it shall stand continued on the date 01.07.2022 and also on the date of the order of the high court

on 07.07.2022. It shall be treated continued even on the date of reference on 14.09. 2022 to the tribunal. Even

today the same status of the claimant workmen exists during the pendency of the industrial dispute before the

tribunal

29. The above finding finds support from the judgement of the apex court in the case of Jaipur Zola Sahaai Bank (Supra) where it is held that in case of non approval of the dismissal etc. from service under the circumstances envisaged in section 33(2) (b) the employee continues to be in service as if the order of discharge or dismissal has never been passed. In the present case where the alteration in terms and conditions exulted into the oral termination of service the above quoted case law will apply principally as the require permission was not sought by the management.

30. The another misc. application of the claimant workmen for issuing direction to the management shall stand disposed off. The order dated 07.07.2022 of the Delhi high court (Supra) putting restraint over the management to maintain status quo is intended to secure the concerned workmen from any untoward incident resulting from alleged apprehension of possible disturbance in service with regard to which the management admitted pendency of industrial dispute and any contravention of the prohibitions contained in section 33 of the Act would be amenable before the tribunal concerned. The tribunal in spirit to follow the judicial order of the Hon'ble High Court and the statutory mandate as legislated in the Act by the parliament, the tribunal has exercised it's power and discretion vested in it by virtue of the section 33 r/w 33A of the Act and eager to decide the complaint by means of an ad interim award.The instant application for direction to maintain the status quo therefore stand disposed off.

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 169

31. In deciding the instant application under section 33 of the Act the tribunal has confined itself to the merit

of the complained contravention of the mandatory prohibition by the management only. The possible issues which

might arise in adjudicating the concerned workmen's claim of regularization in service of management is left

untouched. That shall be decided in proceeding with the I.D.258/22.

32. The office is directed to list the I.D.258//22 for framing of issues in the third week of November.

Parting with the discussion over the complained matte in the instant misc. application under section 33 of the Act I, conclude as follows -

(a) The management though contesting the present workmen's claim of 'regularization in services' in pending dispute since the stage before the conciliation officer on 27.06.2022 then also disturbed their services, refused them from attending duties, stopped wages and designed to cause cessation of services since 30.07.20022, despite the restraining order of the Hon'ble High Court dated 07.07.2022

(b) In utter violation of the prohibition contained in section 33 of the Act, the management altered the terms and conditions of service of the workmen concerned and also caused cessation of their service abruptly to their prejudice.

(c) Services of the workmen concerned ceased off since 30.07.2022 without passing any formal order of termination of service illegally and opposed to the provision of section 33 of the Act as required prior permission was not sought from the competent authority/ tribunal where the industrial dispute with regard to the regularization remained pending.

(d) The work having been performed by the claimant workmen in the hospital of management is neither time bound project work nor short term job under any scheme which deserves to come to an end automatically or with the completion of work. The work and services assinge to the claimant workmen is of permanent nature, though contract based employment but subject to extensions.

(e) The contract of service entered between the management and the claimant workmen was illegally alienated to a third party to the contract who is an independent contractor for providing service through outsourcing. This was done only to get rid of the pending industrial dispute as to the claim of the claimant workmen of regularization.

(f) The provisions of section 33 is violated in prejudice to the claimant workmen concerned in the industrial dispute presently pending in the tribunal. The action of stopping the payment of wages since July 2022, refusal from allowing the workmen to attend duties since 30.07.2022 and thereby causing cessation of services is in effective and the services of the workmen concerned shall be treated to remain continued as was on and before the date of dispute i.e., 27.06.2022.

Consequent upon the above conclusions the application of the workmen under section 33 is allowed. An ad interim award till the final adjudication of the Industrial Dispute case no. 258/2022 is passed in following terms-

Ad interim award

The misc. application under section 33 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, moved by the claimant workmen concerned in the industrial dispute pending in this tribunal against the management is allowed on finding the management have committed contravention of the prohibitive provisions mandated therein. The tribunal in accordance with the section 33 A of the Act draws an ad interim award in the following terms-

(i) The Workmen concerned, in the industrial dispute pending in this tribunal registered as I.D.258/2022, "Reena Kumari Gaur and 7 other v. Delhi Cantonment Board" shall be allowed by the management to attend duties on their respective posts in the hospital of the management forthwith without unreasonable delay and to pay them their wages uninterrupted till the adjudication of the concerned Industrial Dispute case under the reference dated 14.09.2022, to this tribunal by the central government under section, 10 of the Act.

(ii) The management shall pay the arrears of wages kept unpaid to the claimant workmen since July 2022 till date forth with without unreasonable delay within a maximum period of one month from the date of award, otherwise penal interest at the rate of 18% per annum shall be chargeable till the date of actual payment.

(iii) The cost of litigation and compensation on vexations is awarded to the workmen against the management to the tune of Rs.10,000/= (ten thousands only) payable to each one of the eight claimants workmen individually within a period of 30 days, otherwise the same shall be recoverable with interest at the rate of 18% per annum as land revenue.

The office is directed to communicate and submit the ad interim award to the Government in due course of procedure for implementation and necessary action.

JUSTICE VIKAS KUNVAR SIRVASTAVA, Presiding Officer170 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 46.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार दिल्ली

छावनी बोर्ड, दिल्ली, के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और श्री कमलेश पंवार और 7 अन्य, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में

निर्दिष्ट के न्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय-1 नई दिल्ली पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 116/2023) को जैसा

कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 12.01.2024 को प्राप्त

हुआ था l

[सं. एल -42025-07-2024-11-आईआर(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 46.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 116/2023) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court - I New Delhi as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The Delhi Cantonment Board, Delhi, and Shri Kamlesh Panwar And 7 others, Worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 12.01.2024.

[No. L-42025-07-2024-11-IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, DELHI -1

ID No. 116/2023

Mr. Kamlesh Panwar And 7 others V. The Delhi Cantonment Board

Misc. Application no. 159 of 2023, under section 33 of the Industrial Dispute Act,1947.

Shri Rajiv Agrawal, A/R for the claimant Shri Ankur Mishra, A/R for the management

Justice Vikas Kunvar Srivastava (Presiding Officer)

(Former Judge, Alld. High Court)

Prologue

1. The instant applications in hand are moved by the claimant workmen in the above captioned industrial dispute case, purportedly seeking issuance of several directions to the management viz, to comply with the directions of Hon'ble High court of Delhi in W.P (C) 9645 of 2022 dated 29.06.2022 to maintain the status quo in respect of the service conditions of the workmen, and to allow the workmen to continue their duties, to pay them their earned wages. Another application is a complaint against the management under section 33 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. It is alleged that the management, despite the order of the conciliation officer, the directions of the Delhi high court and the pendency of the industrial dispute before this tribunal, has terminated the services of some of the claimant workmen by refusing them duty since 15.07.2022 and others since August 2022.

2. Since the facts, constituting the accrual of cause of action for moving both the above applications entitling the claimant workmen to seek reliefs sought there in, are inseparably interwoven, therefore they are being decided simultaneously.

3. In its present form the section 33 in the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (for the brevity shall be referred herein after as the Act only) exists after substitution of subsections in the then existing section 33 vide Act No. 36 of 1956 w.e.f. 10.03.1957. It runs as under- (relevant to the present matter only is reproduced)

"33. Conditions of service, etc., to remain unchanged under certain circumstances during pendency of

proceedings.—(1) During the pendency of any conciliation proceeding before a conciliation officer or a Board or

of any proceeding before 1[an arbitrator or] a Labour Court or Tribunal or National Tribunal in respect of an

industrial dispute, no employer shall,—

(a) in regard to any matter connected with the dispute, alter, to the prejudice of the workmen concerned in

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 171

such dispute, the conditions of service applicable to them immediately before the commencement of such

proceeding; or

(b) for any misconduct connected with the dispute, discharge or punish, whether by dismissal or otherwise,

any workmen concerned in such dispute,

save with the express permission in writing of the authority before which the proceeding is pending.

(2) During the pendency of any such proceeding in respect of an industrial dispute, the employer may, in

accordance with the standing orders applicable to a workman concerned in such dispute 2[or, where there are

no such standing orders, in accordance with the terms of the contract, whether express or implied, between him

and the workman],—

(a) alter, in regard to any matter not connected with the dispute, the conditions of service applicable to that

workman immediately before the commencement of such proceeding; or

(b) for any misconduct not connected with the dispute, or discharge or punish, whether by dismissal or

otherwise, that workman:

Provided that no such workman shall be discharged or dismissed, unless he has been paid wages for one month and

an application has been made by the employer to the authority before which the proceeding is pending for approval

of the action taken by the employer."

4. When a complaint is made u/s 33 before the tribunal complaining alteration in service conditions by the employer to the prejudice of the workman and if the employer is found contravening the mandatory prohibition of section 33, section 33 A provides that the dispute under the complaint is to be adjudicated on merit and to pass an award. For the purpose of easy reference section 33 A of the Act is reproduced here under-

"33A. Special provision for adjudication as to whether conditions of service, etc., changed during pendency of

proceedings.—Where an employer contravenes the provisions of section 33 during the pendency of proceedings

3[before a conciliation officer, Board, an arbitrator, a Labour Court, Tribunal or

National Tribunal], any employee aggrieved by such contravention, may make a complaint in writing, 5[in the

prescribed manner,—

(a) to such conciliation officer or Board, and the conciliation officer or Board shall take such complaint into

account in mediating in, and promoting the settlement of, such industrial dispute; and

(b) to such arbitrator, Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal and on receipt of such complaint, the

arbitrator, Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal, as the case may be, shall adjudicate upon the

complaint as if it were a dispute referred to or pending before it, in accordance with the provisions of this Act

and shall submit his or its award to the appropriate Government and the provisions of this Act shall apply

accordingly

Factual matrix

5. Before considering the workmen's complaint made in the above application and their prayer to maintain the status quo in terms of the directions of the Hon'ble High Court during the pendency of dispute before this tribunal, it would be relevant and pertinent to apprise what the dispute exists between the workmen and the management. Pursuant to the reference, at the behest of Kamlesh Panwar and 7 others, made under the sub section (1) & (2A) of the section 10 of the Act by the Central Government through the Ministry of Labour & Employment dated 2704.2023 the present industrial dispute is registered by this tribunal as ID No. 116/ 2023 . The industrial dispute existing between the claimants workmen and their employer the 'Delhi Cantonment Board' (which herein after shall be addressed as 'the management' only) runs in the following terms-

"1. Whether the demand raised by Hospital Employees' Union vide letter dated 27.06.2022 against the

management of the Delhi Cantonment Board for regularization of Shri Kamlesh Panwar & 7 others workmen

(details at Annexure-A) in service from the initial date of joining along with arrears of difference in salary paid

and salary on the post of Senior Nurses/ Nurse Grade- A on the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' is legal,

proper and justified? If yes, to what relief Sh. Kamlesh Panwar & 7 others workers are entitled to and what other

directions, if any, are necessary in this respect?

2. Whether the services of the workmen have been dispensed in violation of section 33 of the industrial Disputes

Act, 1947? If yes, what relief Sh. Kamlesh Panwar & 7 others workers are entitled to and what other directions, if

any, are necessary in this regard?"

It is complained that the management has clearly violated the directions of the Hon'ble High Court by disturbing the services of the workmen and not paying

salaries to them. The directions of the High Court contained in the para 10 of the order dated 29.06.2022 passed in aforementioned writ petition is reproduced herein below with due regard –172 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

"In light of the above, since the petitioners have already raised an industrial dispute, it is made clear that the

services of the petitioners shall not be disturbed during the pendency of the dispute before the tribunal, without

compliance of the section 33 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947."

6. Despite the above directions the management refused to allow duties to the workmen from 15.07.2022 though they were in continuous working in the service of the management for a considerable period of about 10 years, since the date of their initial date of joining.

7. The industrial dispute before the tribunal may summarily be apprised on the basis of the statement of the claim submitted on 25.09.2023 by the claimant workmen along with relevant documents relating to their continuous employment in the management's hospital since long and how the present dispute arose. The claimant workmen got their initial appointment on contract basis for year to year contract of services directly entered into with the present industrial employer, the management, pursuant to a general and widely circulated advertisement published. The management selected and offered appointment to the claimant workmen after passing through an open recruitment procedure. They began to impart their services in the hospital premises of the management since the respective dates of their joining. The competent officer of the management, namely the Chief Executive Officer of the Delhi Cantonment Board in recording satisfactions to the performance on their respective posts, recurrently used to issue letter of extensions of the contract period every year till 01.07.2022. As such the claimant workmen, working on their respective posts under the direct supervision, control and instructions of the management continued to receive remuneration being on the pay roll and attendance sheet of the management. The practice of the management of employing the present claimants workmen to work against the substantively vacant posts as contractual workers continued in usual course even for a considerably long period of more than 240 days. The workmen are performing work of the same nature, expending the same working hours and bearing the responsibilities in same manner, as their regular counterparts who are getting their salary in regular pay scale along with all allowances.

8. The claimant workmen in proof of pleading to the above facts in the present industrial dispute and in the instant complaint against the management, have submitted their personal affidavits annexing there with photostat copies of all the relevant documents, like the advertisement published by the management intending direct recruitment of workers who fulfills the prescribed eligibility criteria, age and

the terms conditions of the para medical and pharmaceutical services in the hospital of the management. The Photostat copies of appointment letter of initial joining, and that of year to year extension till the year 2022, the letter of engagement recording satisfaction as to the work and performance of duties, extracts from the attendance sheet showing their continuous service much more than 240 days with the present management till July 2022. All the documentary evidence so filed on affidavit stand un-rebutted and not denied.

9. In written statement of defense to the claim statement and also in the reply to both of the instant application for the above ad interim reliefs and the complaint under section 33 of the Act, the management pleaded and deposed in supporting affidavits that, the workmen who were in service of the management under a contract of service with the management itself for a period of three months only from the date of appointment, which expired by the efflux of stipulated time respectively on 10.07.2022 (of Mr. Kamlesh Panwar and Mr. Ramesh Chand Chaudhary), 14.06.2022 (of Mr. Rajesh Kumar), 15.06.2022 (of Mr. Gangesh), 03.07.2022 (of Mr. Gaurav Panwar), 04.08.2022 (of Ms. Manisha Bhatt), 10.08.2022 (of Ms. Archana Kumari), 19.08.2022 (of Ms. Ankita Pundir). In the context of the above timeline the management has further pleaded that on 01.07.2022 an independent contractor namely M/S Raider Security Services Pvt. Ltd. took over the work of providing paramedical service in the hospital of the management. Thereby the existing contract of claimant workmen's contract came to an end on 01.07.2022. The management in their reply to the instant application, has further asserted and reiterated that the services of the claimants workmen have come to an end by efflux of time.

10. The management has also filed photo copies of the documents relevant to their defense with affidavit in evidence. There is none of the documents in contradiction with the documents filed by the claimant. The documents filed by the management tend to show that except 21 out of the 55 existing paramedical staff have accepted the fresh contract of service as to a short term appointment of three months designed to come at an end before the expiry of the usual term of yearly contract of service for the year 2021-22 and near to the date of enforcing the outsourcing agreement between the independent contractor and the management. The print out from gem portal is placed on record to show the exercise of entering into contract for service of providing contract Labour as para medical and Pharma staff in the CG Hospital between the management and the independent contractor. though outsourcing. Contract for service of outsourcing entered between the independent contractor and management is not brought on record. Even any letter of instructions if any issued to the independent contractor to preserve and maintain the terms and conditions of service like wages, emoluments and status in employment is also not brought on record. Any proposed contract of service between the independent contractor and the contract labour

intended to be outsourced to the management is also not brought on record, though relevant to the issues involved in the matter in hand.

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 173

Arguments

11. Heard the learned counsel Sh. Rajiv Agarwal Advocate (the authorized representative of the workmen claimants) at a considerable length of the time. He has also filed written note of the arguments with the compilation of the case laws relied by him. The counsel for the management also has filed his arguments in writing but did not appear to argue orally, though was called upon repeatedly deferring the hearing on several dates till the next adjourned date of hearing. However, the written arguments with the compilation of case laws relied on by the management is taken into consideration by the tribunal.

The learned counsel Sh. Rajiv Agarwal for the claimant workmen put vehemence on the fact, the management has the permanent nature of work of the para medical staff having been performed by the concerned workmen in the hospital owned, controlled and supervised by the officers of the management, the Delhi Cantonment Board in its own premises. The concerned workmen were directly recruited by the management itself in due course of open selection pursuant to an advertisement. The requirement of the post and work in issue still exist in the hospital. They despite working continuously for mor than 10 years to the entire satisfaction of the authorities were kept in temporary status of contact based workmen, without regularizing in service. When demand raised before the management they threatened to ward off the. From the employment and began to plan to get rid of them. In this connection they though extended their services for the year 2021- 2022 also, as usual since the initial entrance in the contract based service, directed such workmen to come afresh through an independent contractor of their choice as outsourced employees. This occurred during the pendency of proceeding after raising the dispute relating to the continuation of service and consequent claim of regularization before the assistant labor commissioner. This is why the claimant approached the High Court which on the basis of admission of the respondents management relating to existing industrial dispute enjoined them vide order dated 07.07.2022, not to disturb the service of the claimant workmen during the pendency of the Industrial dispute and rather to maintain status quo in respect of the service conditions. this is why the management to defy the claim of regularization broken the continued chain of service tenure under the contract of service entered directly between the management and the concerned workmen. Learned counsel Sh. Rajiv Agarwal argued, the circumstances as created by the management effect prejudicially the claimant workmen in respect of their claim and the cessation of work, stoppage of the payment of wages cumulatively amount clear violation of the mandatory prohibition of the section 33 of the Act and also the contemptuous breach of the order of the High Court by disturbing the services of the concerned workmen and also by altering their service conditions. This compelled the Claimants to move the instant applications. The action of the management is quite illegal and ineffective by reason of being opposed to the prohibition mandated by the Act under section 33 and also in breach of the high court's restraining order in the matter. The prayers made in the applications deserves to be allowed.

He relied on the case law propounded by the apex court in Jaipur Zola Sahkari Bhoomi Vikas Bank v. Ram Gopal Sharma and others (2002) 2 SCC 244. And M.D.T.N. State Transport Corporation V. Nithivilangan Kumbakonam and others (2001) Lab. I. C. 1801 Reliance is further placed on the decision of the High Court of Delhi in the case, titled as Tops Security Ltd. V. Subhash Chander jha ( 2013 ) 136 FLR 17 ) which covers the impugned order Order of dismissal covered under section 33 (2) (b) of the Act. Another case of the same high court is a decision bench judgement titled as Jitendra Kumar V. Director of Health Services, Govt of NCT of Delhi (L P A 79/2014 with LPA 731/2014 yogendra Kumar and others v. Director Health Services Govt of NCT Delhi decided on 22 October 2019) The facts considered in the above judgement of the Division Bench are somehow akin to the facts of the present matter in hand.

12. The management also on the basis of it's evidence in the form of affidavit with annexed documentary evidence put written argument. Though the learned counsel desisted himself from oral arguments but whatever resonates from his written argument and documents in evidence is apprised further as follows-

The management has neither changed or altered any of the conditions of service of the claimant workmen concerned in the present industrial dispute on or after the order of the high court dated 07.07.2022, as they had already been placed by the management under the independent contractor, "M/s Raider Security Services Pvt. Ltd." w.e.f. 01.07.20022. He impressed on the date 01.07.2022 being a date prior to the initiation of proceeding under section 33 of the Act when the workmen had been placed under the independent contractor aforesaid and since the workmen themselves have refused to join the independent contractor, the management neither can be held responsible for violation of the prohibition of section 33 of the Act nor for the alleged breach of the restraining order of the high court dated 07.07.2022.

It is further argued that the concerned workmen were working under a time bound contract of service and their employment automatically ceased off by reason of the efflux of time stipulated in their contract with the management. Management did not change the conditions of service of the claimant workmen. He relied in this regard on the case law propounded by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case titled as B.A. Security Agents Employees Union v. Regional Labour Commissioner W.P. No.8372/2003 decided on 08.03.2010. and on the case law of the judgement of the apex court in The Bhavhagar Municipality V. Alibhai Karimbhai and Ors. (Manu/ SC /0162/1977 )174 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] The jurisdiction of the tribunal is also challenged to entertain and decide the instant application seeking directions to maintain status quo in terms of the order dated 29.06.2022 of the Hon'ble High Court passed in the writ petition no. WP (C) 9645/2022, and impressed that the aggrieved claimant workmen has the only remedy to resort, approaching the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in contempt petition. It is contended that the concerned claimants have filed the contempt petitions which still remain on board before the Hon'ble High Court.

After going through the oral argument and that submitted in writings as well as perusing the documentary evidences adduced by the parties to the present industrial dispute I, proceeded further to consider the application under section 33 in accordance with the provisions of section 33 A of the Act. The Application complaining the breach of restraining order dated 29.06.2022 (supra) is also taken into consideration simultaneously and jointly.

Discussions

13. What is the mandate, as legislated by the parliament in the Act under it's section 33, must be kept in to the mind by an industrial adjudicator while considering the complaint made therein by the employee against the employer of disturbances caused by him without compliance of the pre requisite permission from the tribunal. In nut shell, section 33 (1) (a) of the Act mandatorily envisages a material prohibition to the employers that "During the pendency of any proceeding before a.......tribunal in respect of an industrial dispute, no employer shall

(a) in regard to any matter connected with the dispute, alter, to the prejudice of the workmen concerned in

such dispute, the conditions of service applicable to them immediately before the commencement of such

proceeding.xxx Save with the express permission in writing of the authority before which the proceeding is

pending. (relevant portion carved out from the text of sec.33 of the Act, Supra)

This would not be out of relevance to highlight the circumstances envisaged in section 33 under which the mandatory prohibition clinches an employer not to alter the conditions of the service of a workman without prior permission of the authority of the tribunal before which the concerned dispute is pending. They are as under-

(1) There is a proceeding in respect of an industrial dispute before the tribunal or an authority under the Act.

(2) Conditions of service of the concerned workman(s) applicable immediately before the commencement of the proceeding as to the dispute before the tribunal.

(3). The workmen whose conditions of service are altered must be concerned in the pending industrial dispute.

(4) The alteration of the conditions of service must be in regard to the matter connected with service.

(5) The complained alteration in the conditions of service is to the prejudice of the workmen.

14. The first feature admittedly exists in the present matter in hand. The pending industrial dispute of which the proceeding is running before this tribunal is contested by the management. The foremost question for consideration of both the above misc. applications would be

"When from the Industrial Dispute shall be treated pending before authorities constituted under the Act "

a. The high court has recorded in its order (Supra) on dated 29.06.2022 itself, that admittedly the petitioners (the claimant workmen) have already raised an industrial dispute. The reference is evidencing itself the pendency of the industrial dispute since 27.06.2022. when the claimant workmen's Labour Union raised the dispute relating to the regularization of the claimants in services of the management raised before the authorities under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947. The records show that the said industrial dispute raised on 27.06.2022 before the Labour conciliation officer Which in continuation thereto was sent through the reference dated 27.04.2023 to the tribunal by the government u/s 10 of the Act and is pending for adjudication.

b. Coming back to the application in the hand, it further would be necessary and expedient to look into the defense, if any, against the complaint of violation of the direction of the court. It would also be equally important to see, if they actually caused disturbance in the service conditions despite the pendency of dispute before the tribunal in utter violation of the statutory mandate incorporated in the section 33 of the Act, what shall be the consequences and legal impacts?

c. The dispute pending before the tribunal referred for adjudication is with regard to the demand of the workmen for regularization of their services and none else as it is very much clear from the wordings of the 'reference' cited in preceding para 5 of this order. On perusal of the letter of reference dated 27.04.2023, it reveals that the said dispute was raised by the Labour union namely the Hospital Employees Union vide it's letter dated 27.06.2022. Therefore, I, reached at the conclusion that, the present industrial dispute came into existence before the Conciliation Officer appointed authority under the Act since 27.06.2022 and is pending presently before the Tribunal through the reference of dispute by the appropriate government[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 175

dated 27.04.2023. The management remained mandatorily abide not only under the provisions of

section 33 of the Act but also restrained by Hon'ble High Court's order Dated 29.06.2022 (Supra) from

disturbing the service conditions of the claimant workmen and not to terminate any how their services

during the pendency of the present industrial dispute case before the tribunal.

Terms and conditions of service

d. A contract of employment is a kind of contract used in Labour law to attribute rights and responsibilities between Parties to a bargain. The contract is in between an employer and an employee. Undoubtedly, the dispute relating to a workman's regularization in services of the management comes within the scope of the phrase 'terms of employment' and 'connected with the employment', hence covered under the definition of 'Industrial Dispute' as given in section 2 (k) of the Act. Moreover length of continuous service satisfactorily also ensues some likewise the term 'Regularization in service' presupposes the continuation in employment and service of an employer for a considerable long period. The continuation in service envisages several legal rights and benefits to the workman in the Act against the termination, removal or discharge from service, change in terms and conditions of service etc. unless the employer strictly complies with the provisions of the Act. The Act further prohibits the employer to adopt unfair Labour practices in employment and service under their establishment. The contract of service is entered in the present case directly between the workmen and employer the present management individually. In the absence of any service rule governing the terms and conditions of service such contract of service is regulated, beside the terms stipulated between the parties to the contract, also by the standing orders applicable in the establishment or in the absence of such standing orders from the general provisions of the Standing Orders Act. Like other contract a contract of service too is subject to the relevant provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. In short, a contract of service not only abides the employee but equally abides the employer also, both of them at par in relation to the terms of contract.

e. In the contract of service the employer is in the shoes of master, but subject to the law applicable over such contract. In the above context the rights and protection flowing from the acceptance of the offer of employment by the employee as to the identity of employer also becomes one of the terms/conditions of service. It amounts the parity of mind between the parties under the contract of service, which means the employee must certainly know who is his master and likewise the employer must also know certainly, who is his servant under the contract, The consented assumption of inter se status of parties to the contract of service is therefore comes under the terms and conditions of service, longevity of uninterrupted satisfactory service in the same employment would be substantially considered for the claimants' regularization The terms and conditions of service therefore include the status of employer as master in relation to the status of workman as servant under the contract of service which cannot be abruptly altered, substituted or alienated with another person.

f. Beside the said term and conditions of service the workmen were entitled to wages at a fixed rate and other facilities and incidental right and benefits there to which were applicable on and since before the date of industrial dispute came in to existence. I, according to my considered opinion hold that, The alteration in terms of the services are undoubtedly connected with the industrial dispute with which the claimant are concerned which is pending before this Tribunal for adjudication.

Prejudice to the claimant workmen

15. In the present case, one of the party to the contract of service, say the employer management altered the term and condition of service with regard to their known and accepted mastership by alienating the same to some other independent contractor during the continuance of the service contract with the workmen concerned. The management treated the employees as their slaves alienable like in slavery as prevailed in ancient days. They admittedly directed to the workmen to come through the outsourcing under the contractor of their choice.

16. So far as the alteration in terms of service is concerned, the Hon'ble High Court passed the order dated 29.06.2022 issuing direction that the management shall not disturb the services of the present claimant workmen during the pendency of the dispute before the tribunal without compliance of the provisions as contained in section 33 of the Act. The para 10 of the order of the High Court containing the said direction is quoted in preceding para 5 of this order. Para 6 of the High Court's order refers the communication dated 27.06.2022 made by the Assistant Labour Commissioner, U.O.I., who had advised the management to adhere to the provisions as contained in section 33 of the Act in letter and spirit and not to terminate the services in order to avoid any untoward incident.

17. The tribunal has already reached at the conclusion that the dispute is pending since the stage of the competent authority under the Act the Assistant Labour Commissioner/ the Conciliation Officer even on 27.06.2022

18. The tribunal is amazed of the fact, nothing could have prevented the management, neither restraining order of the Hon'ble High Court nor the strict statutory prohibition contained in section 33 of the Act from176 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] daringly disturbing the services of the workman concerned with the industrial dispute pending in the tribunal. The management seemed to have designed the outsourcing of it's own workmen to defy their claim of regularization and to ward off them from attending their duties without formal order of termination or cancellation of the contract of service.

19. In the absence of the documentary evidences as to the terms of contract for service of outsourcing entered between the management and the independent contractor, it cannot be believed as pleaded and argued by the management that continuity of employment in the hospital and wages shall not be disturbed by the outsourcing contractor.

20. The evidence brought on record of the case by the management shows also that they were in hurry and haste to get rid of the claimants workmen pursuant to their raising claim of regularization in services. The print out of gem portal contents show that the management did not bother to search any independent contractor for outsourcing having experience in the field of medical, paramedics or pharmaceutical staff to meet the requirements in the hospital of the management. They have given the above services to an independent contractor in the field of outsourcing the security staff, therefore it cannot be said that they disturbed the existing services of the claimant workmen concerned with a view to improve their paramedical and pharmaceuticals staffs in the hospital.

21. In the already existing contract of service between the management and the claimant the terms stipulated therein are enforceable under law by the claimant, but in case of the employment under the outsourcing contractor the claimant would not be entitled to seek enforcement of the terms against him at par with that were available in earlier appointment in the management. It would be fit in the circumstance of the present case to quote observation of the apex court in the case of the "Workmen of the Food Corporation of India v. Food Corporation of India 1985 (50) FLR 142 (SC) –

"15….When workmen working under an employer are told that they have ceased to be workmen of that employer, and have become work men of another employer namely, the contractor in this case, in legal parlance such an act of the first employer constitutes discharge, termination of service or retrenchment by whatsoever name called and a fresh employment by another employer namely, the contractor. If the termination of service by the first employer is contrary to the well established legal position the effect of the employment by the second employer is wholly irrelevant…"

22. The management has failed to show the employment of claimant workmen in the hospital short term temporary job. It is also neither pleaded nor shown that recruitment of the claimant was under any scheme or short term project work incidental to the core business of the management which was bound to come at end automatically with the completion of work or efflux of the stipulated time. The tribunal does not agree with the argument of the management that the prohibition of the section 33 (1) (b) not applicable in the cessation of work of the claimant workmen concerned with the dispute. The case laws cited by the management are not applicable in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case.

23. Consequent upon the above observations I, find myself of the opinion that alteration and disturbance

in the services of the claimants are in prejudice to them.

24. I further conclusively hold that the status of the workmen concerned as on and prior to 27.06.2022

as the employee of the present management working under the direct contract with it shall stand continued

on the date of the order of the high court on 29.06.2022 and also on the date 01.07.2022. It shall be treated

continued even on the date of reference on 27.04.2023 to the Tribunal. Even today the same status of the

claimant workmen exists during the pendency of the industrial dispute before the tribunal.

25. I further hold that the management in utter violation of the prohibition as mandated in the section

33 of the Act not only changed the status of employment of the workmen concerned abruptly but also

designed to ward of them to join their duty without any order of termination, removal or discharge from

their service continued under the contract of service with the management. The present complaint therefore

is covered with the provision of section 33(1)(a) of the Act and the protection of the prohibition is available

to the claimants.

26. There is quite an admitted fact, the management, throughout for a considerable long spawn of more than 10 years of the service period of present workmen, have no complaint against them with regard to any misconduct. To the contrary the contract based services of the workmen were remained extended year to year by the competent authorities of the management recording their satisfaction as to the works assigned to them by express orders in writing. The workmen were confidently discharging their services under the direct control, supervision and pay rolls of the management. They were under the legitimate expectations of their continuation with the management. The services of the claimant workmen were abruptly ceased off. There is no order of the termination, dismissal or discharge from the services by the management for the reason of any misconduct not connected with the service, hence the case in hand is constructively covered with the provision of section 33(2) (b). The claimant workmen are not being paid their salary from July 2022, some of them are refused from attending their duties since 15.07.2022 and others since August 2022 by the management on the pretext automatic termination of service consequent upon[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 177 the abrupt alteration of terms and conditions of service illegally. As such the age of the claimants workmen are covered with section 33 (1)(a) of the Act. The tribunal has already reached at the conclusion that the dispute is pending since the stage of the competent authority under the Act before the Assistant Labour Commissioner/ the Conciliation Officer even on 27.06.20222.

27. The management still delve under misconception of law that section 33 will not apply to it's action of shifting the claimant workmen from it's direct employment to an independent contractor to outsourcing. for the reason it happened prior to the dispute under section 33 is brought before the tribunal. The argument is baseless and not agreeable. Much has been discussed in the preceding paras in this regard.

28. Consequent upon the above observations, I further conclusively hold that the status of the workmen

concerned as on and prior to 27.06.2022 as the employee of the present management working under the

direct contract with it shall stand continued on the date of the order of the Hon'ble High Court on

29.06.2022 and also on the date 01.07.2022. It shall be treated continued even on the date of reference on

27.04.2023 to the tribunal. Even today the same status of the claimant workmen exists during the pendency

of the industrial dispute before the tribunal

29. The above finding finds support from the judgement of the apex court in the case of Jaipur Zila Sahaai Bank (Supra) where it is held that in case of non-approval of the dismissal etc. from service under the circumstances envisaged in section 33(2) (b) the employee continues to be in service as if the order of discharge or dismissal has never been passed. In the present case where the alteration in terms and conditions exulted into the oral termination of service the above quoted case law will apply principally as the require permission was not sought by the management.

30. The another misc. application of the claimant workmen for issuing direction to the management shall stand disposed off. The order dated 29.06.2022 of the Delhi High Court (Supra) putting restraint over the management to maintain status quo is intended to secure the concerned workmen from any untoward incident resulting from alleged apprehension of possible disturbance in service with regard to which the management admitted pendency of industrial dispute and any contravention of the prohibitions contained in section 33 of the Act would be amenable before the tribunal concerned. The tribunal in spirit to follow the judicial order of the Hon'ble court and the statutory mandate as legislated in the Act, by the parliament, the tribunal has exercised it's power and discretion vested in it by virtue of the section 33 r/w 33A of the Act has eager to decide the complaint by means of an ad interim award the instant application for direction to maintain the status quo is therefore instantly disposed off.

31. In deciding the instant application under section 33 of the Act the tribunal has confined itself to the

merit of the complained contravention of the mandatory prohibition by the management only. The possible

issues which might arise in adjudicating the concerned workmen's claim of regularization in service of

management is left untouched. That shall be decided in proceeding with the I.D.116/23.XXXX

32. The office is directed to list the I.D.116//23 for framing of issues in the third week of November.

Parting with the discussion over the complained matte in the instant misc. application under section 33 of the Act I, conclude as follows -

(a) The management though contesting the present workmen's claim of 'regularization in services' in pending dispute since the stage before the conciliation officer on 27.06.2022 then also disturbed their services, refused them from attending duties, stopped wages and designed to cause cessation of services since 15.07.2022 and August 2022, despite the restraining order of the Hon'ble High Court dated 29.06.2022

(b) In utter violation of the prohibition contained in section 33 of the Act, the management altered the terms and conditions of service of the workmen concerned and also caused cessation of their service abruptly to their prejudice.

(c) Services of the workmen concerned ceased off since 15.07.2022 and August 2022 without passing any formal order of termination of service illegally and opposed to the provision of section 33 of the Act as required prior permission was not sought from the competent authority/ tribunal where the industrial dispute with regard to the regularization remained pending.

(d) The work having been performed by the claimant workmen in the hospital of management is neither time bound project work nor short term job under any scheme which deserves to come to an end automatically or with the completion of work. The work and services assigned to the claimant workmen is of permanent nature, though contract based employment but subject to extensions.

(e) The contract of service entered between the management and the claimant workmen was illegally alienated to a third party to the contract who is an independent contractor for providing service through outsourcing. This was done only to get rid of the pending industrial dispute as to the claim of the claimant workmen of regularization.

(f) The provisions of section 33 is violated in prejudice to the claimant workmen concerned in the industrial dispute presently pending in the tribunal. The action of stopping the payment of wages since July 2022, refusal from allowing the workmen to attend duties since 15.07.2022 and August 2022 thereby causing178 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] cessation of services is in effective and the services of the workmen concerned shall be treated to remain continued as was on and before the date of dispute i.e., 27.06.2022.

Consequent upon the above conclusions the application of the workmen under section 33 is allowed. An ad interim award till the final adjudication of the Industrial Dispute case no. 116/2023 is passed in following terms-

Ad interim award

The misc. application under section 33 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, moved by the claimant workmen concerned in the industrial dispute pending in this tribunal against the management is allowed on finding the management have committed contravention of the prohibitive provisions mandated therein. The tribunal in accordance with the section 33 A of the Act draws an ad interim award in the following terms-

(i) The Workmen concerned, in the industrial dispute pending in this tribunal registered as I.D.116/2023, "Kamlesh Panwar and 7 other v. Delhi Cantonment Board" shall be allowed by the management to attend duties on their respective posts in the hospital of the management forthwith without unreasonable delay and to pay them their wages uninterrupted till the adjudication of the concerned Industrial Dispute case under the reference dated 27.04.2023, to this tribunal by the Central Government under section, 10 of the Act.

(ii) The management shall pay the arrears of wages kept unpaid to the claimant workmen since July 2022 till date forth with without unreasonable delay within a maximum period of one month from the date of award, otherwise penal interest at the rate of 18% per annum shall be chargeable till the date of actual payment.

(iii) The cost of litigation and compensation on vexations is awarded to the workmen against the management to the tune of Rs.10,000/= (ten thousands only) payable to each one of the eight claimants workmen individually within a period of 30 days, otherwise the same shall be recoverable with interest at the rate of 18% per annum as land revenue.

The office is directed to communicate and submit the ad interim award to the Government in due course of procedure for implementation and necessary action.

Justice VIKAS KUNVAR SIRVASTAVA, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 47.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार

मैसर्स ब्लू शील्ड प्रोटेक्शन नेटवर्क , ग्रीन पार्क एक्सटेंशन, नई दिल्ली; मेसर्स सामा इस्लक्स प्रा. लिमिटेड, अम्बाला,

हरियाणा, के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और श्री सतबीर सिंह, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में

के न्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय-1 चंडीगढ़ पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 51/2016) को जैसा कि

अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 12/01/2024 को प्राप्त हुआ

था l

[सं. एल – 42012/72/2016-आईआर-(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, 16th January, 2024

S.O. 47.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 51/2016) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court –1,Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation M/s Blue Shield Protection Network, Green Park Extension, New Delhi ;M/s Sama Islux Pvt. Ltd. ,Ambala, Haryana, and Shri Satbir Singh, Worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 12/01/2024.

[No. L- 42012/72/2016- IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 179

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Officer, Chandigarh.

ID No. 51/2016

Registered On:-07.10.2016

Satbir Singh S/o Sh. Dharampal Singh R/o Village Raipur Road, Tehsil Nilokheri, Karnal.

...........Workman

Versus

1. M/s Blue Shield Protection Network, B4/45 Safdar Jang Enclave New Delhi now at L-11, Green Park Extension, New Delhi.

2. M/s Sama Islux Pvt. Ltd. Regd Office Model Town New Maruti Car Driving School Ambala, Haryana.

........Respondents

AWARD

Passed On:-23.11.2023

1. Central Government vide Notification No. L-42012/72/2016-IR(DU) dated 21.09.2016, under clause (d) of Sub-Section (1) sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act), has referred the following Industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal

"Whether the Action of the management M/s Blue Shield Protection Network Pvt. Ltd. In terminating

the services of the workman Sh. Satbir Singh S/o Sh. Dharampal Singh, Security Guard w.e.f.

31.03.2015 is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled and form which date?"

2. The brief facts of the case for the present reference are that Workman was engaged as Security Guard at Toll Plaza Karnal by respondent No.1 in November, 2010 at a monthly salary of Rs.3,700/- and worked continuously till 31.03.2015 when his services were terminated without giving one month notice and without paying the retrenchment compensation. The workman was being paid Rs.6,800/- per month when his services were terminated. The workman has completed more than 240 days in each Calendar year. The management has violated Section 25-F, 25-G & 25-H of the ID Act. It is therefore prayed that the termination order be set aside and the management being directed to reinstate the workman in service with full back wages.

3. Respondent No.1 i.e. M/s Blue Shield Protection Network Pvt. Ltd. has filed its written statement, alleging therein that it is the duty of the workman to raise dispute before the respondent/ management, therefore the workman is not legally entitled to raise industrial dispute before this Court. The workman was working under the respondent management at Toll Plaza, Nilokheri, District Karnal which were shifted to Village Barsaat, Tehsil Gharaunda, Karnal. The principal employer i.e. Soma Isolex Pvt. Ltd. was far away from the residence of claimant/ Workman and it was difficult for the workman to report for duties in shifts. The workman has abandoned the job of his own. The workman used to remained absent from duty and has not completed 240 days in preceding 12 Calendar Months. The workman was called many time through letters and telephone messages. The answering respondent has also sent messanger asking the workman to report for duty but the workman did not joined the duty nor he has made any complaint to any authority in this regard. In view of the above it is prayed that the claim of workman may kindly be dismissed.

4. Respondent No.2 i.e. M/s Soma Isolux Pvt. Ltd. has not filed any written statement.

5. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal on 03.07.2023 the Ld. AR of Workman Sh. R.P. Rana has withdrawn his authority on behalf of Workman. Since then none is appearing on behalf of Workman which shows that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the case on merits.

6. The Court issued a fresh notice to the Workman on 29.09.2023 despite service none appeared for the workman, it appears that workman is not interested in adjudication of the case on merits. This Tribunal is left with no option except to pass No Claim Award. Hence, No Claim Award is passed in the present reference for the non- prosecution of the workman. File after completion be consigned to the record room.

KAMAL KANT, P.O.-cum-Link Officer180 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 48.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ब्लू शील्ड प्रोटेक्शन नेटवर्क , ग्रीन पार्क एक्सटेंशन, नई दिल्ली; मेसर्स सामा इस्लक्स प्रा. लिमिटेड, अम्बाला, हरियाणा, के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और श्री सुरेंद्र, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में के न्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय-1 चंडीगढ़ पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 52/2016) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 12/01/2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल – 42012/73/2016-आईआर-(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 48.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 52/2016) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court –1,Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation M/s Blue Shield Protection Network, Green Park Extension, New Delhi; M/s Sama Islux Pvt. Ltd. ,Ambala, Haryana, and Shri Surender, Worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 12/01/2024.

[No. L- 42012/73/2016- IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Officer, Chandigarh.

ID No.52/2016

Registered On:-07.10.2016

Surender S/o Sh. Risal Singh R/o Village Raipur Road, Tehsil Nilokheri, Karnal.

...........Workman

Versus

1. M/s Blue Shield Protection Network, B4/45 Safdar Jang Enclave New Delhi now at L-11, Green Park Extension, New Delhi.

2. M/s Sama Islux Pvt. Ltd. Regd Office Model Town New Maruti Car Driving School Ambala, Haryana.

........Respondent

AWARD

Passed On:-23.11.2023

1. Central Government vide Notification No. L-42012/73/2016-IR(DU) dated 21.09.2016, under clause (d) of Sub-Section (1) sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act), has referred the following Industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal

"Whether the Action of the management M/s Blue Shield Protection Network Pvt. Ltd. In terminating the

services of the workman Sh. Surender S/o Sh. Risal Singh, Security Guard w.e.f. 31.03.2015 is legal and

justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date?"

2. The brief facts of the case for the present reference are that Workman was engaged as Security Guard at Toll Plaza Karnal by respondent No.1 in November, 2009 at a monthly salary of Rs.3,700/- and worked continuously till 31.03.2015 when his services were terminated without giving one month notice and without paying the retrenchment[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 181 compensation. The workman was being paid Rs.6,800/- per month when his services were terminated. The workman has completed more than 240 days in each Calendar year. The management has violated Section 25-F, 25-G & 25-H of the ID Act. It is therefore prayed that the termination order be set aside and the management being directed to reinstate the workman in service with full back wages.

3. Respondent No.1 i.e. M/s Blue Shield Protection Network Pvt. Ltd. has filed its written statement, alleging therein that it is the duty of the workman to raise dispute before the respondent/ management, therefore the workman is not legally entitled to raise industrial dispute before this Court. The workman was working under the respondent management at Toll Plaza, Nilokheri, District Karnal which were shifted to Village Barsaat, Tehsil Gharaunda, Karnal. The principal employer i.e. Soma Isolex Pvt. Ltd. was far away from the residence of claimant/ Workman and it was difficult for the workman to report for duties in shifts. The workman has abandoned the job of his own. The workman used to remained absent from duty and has not completed 240 days in preceding 12 Calendar Months. The workman was called many time through letters and telephone messages. The answering respondent has also sent messenger asking the workman to report for duty but the workman did not joined the duty nor he has made any complaint to any authority in this regard. In view of the above it is prayed that the claim of workman may kindly be dismissed.

4. Respondent No.2 i.e. M/s Soma Isolux Pvt. Ltd. has not filed any written statement.

5. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal on 03.07.2023 the Ld. AR of Workman Sh. R.P. Rana has withdrawn his authority on behalf of Workman. Since then none is appearing on behalf of Workman which shows that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the case on merits.

6. The Court issued a fresh notice to the Workman on 29.09.2023 despite service none appeared for the workman, it appears that workman is not interested in adjudication of the case on merits. This Tribunal is left with no option except to pass No Claim Award. Hence, No Claim Award is passed in the present reference for the non- prosecution of the workman. File after completion be consigned to the record room.

7. Let copy of this award be sent to Central Government for publication as required under Section 17 of the ID Act, 1947.

KAMAL KANT, P.O.-cum-Link Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 49.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार

निदेशक/मुख्य वार्डन, राष्ट्रीय प्रौद्योगिकी संस्थान, कु रूक्षेत्र, के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और श्री राके श कु मार,

कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में के न्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय-1

चंडीगढ़ पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 75/2012) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार

को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 12/01/2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल. 42012/143/2012-आईआर-(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 49.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 75/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court –1,Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation The Director/ chief warden, National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra , and Shri Rakesh Kumar, Worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 12/01/2024.

[No. L- 42012/143/2012- IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

182 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Offier, Chandigarh.

ID No.75/2012

Registered On:-30.01.2013

Rakesh Kumar S/o Sh. Neki Ram R/o V.P.O. Pobnawa, Distt. Kaithal, Haryana.

...........Workman

Versus

National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra though it's director/ chief warden.

........Respondent

AWARD

Passed On:-16.11.2023

1. The Central Government vide Notification No. L-42012/143/2012-IR(DU) dated 16.01.2013/21.01.2013, under clause (d) of Sub-Section (1) sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act), has referred the following Industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:-

"Whether the demand of Sh. Rakesh Kumar for reinstatement and regularization in service with the

management of Director, NIT, Kurukshetra w.e.f. 21.08.2008 as Security Guard is just fair and legal? If

not, what relief the workman is entitled to?"

2. The brief facts relevant for deciding this claim petition as per the claim of the workman is that the workman was appointed as Security Guard on 21.08.2008 by the respondent management at the salary of Rs.2500/- Per Month. The work and conduct of workman remained good and satisfactory during the tenure of his service with management. On 27.05.2010 the services of the workman was dispensed without following the procedure laid down in the ID. Act. No notice has been given to applicant, whereas the workman had completed the more than 240 days of service continuously as required under section 25F of the act. So the workman is entitled to the protection under 25F and other provisions of the Act, which the respondent has not followed at the time of terminating the service of applicant. The respondent has also not followed the principle of the act at the time of terminating the services of workman Viz, notice no enquiry; no charge sheet was given to the applicant, which is clear violation of Section 25F and other provisions of the Act. The management has retain in service juniors to the applicant, which is the violation of section 25-G of I.D. act. Workman has also sent the 15 days notice to respondent for taking him back in service, but the management had not sent any reply.

3. Respondent has filed written statement alleging therein the present claim statement is an abuse of process of law and the claimant has not come with clean hands before this Court and toe-twisted the true facts. The true facts of the case are that the claimant was engaged by the Mess Committee in the Hostel at its own level and the respondent Institute only guide to the students and just help them to maintain the services. There is no sanctioned post in the Institute against which the claimant alleged to work and same has never been advertised. No interviews was conducted and no appointment letter was issued to the claimant. The claimant had never been paid from the consolidated/budget funds of the Institute nor there is any provision for the same in the budget for the payment of such type of engagement. The management /Institute has adopted the outsourcing policy laid down by the Government of India and has outsourced the work of security, maintenance and sanitation in the Institute by calling the tenders w.e.f. 1.4.2010. The allotted/selected Service Provider(s) have also started their services w.e.f. 1.4.2010. Claimant alongwith 53 other persons had filed a demand notice dated 22.2.2010 before Assistant Labour Commissioner and the same was defended by the answering Institute on merit. The Assistant Labour Commissioner completed all the conciliation proceedings in that demand Notice and the reference of the same had already been sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment, New Delhi for consideration vide letter No. 8(3)/2010/ALF, dated 18.5.2010 and the case was referred before this Court which is pending in the Court. It is wrong that the claimant had completed more than 240 days of continuous service in the last financial year with the respondent Institute. Rather the services of the claimant ware never engaged by the management Institute and therefore there is no question of issuing any notice under ID Act and at the same time there is no requirement of compliance of section 25-F, 25-G and 25-H of the Act. It is also wrong that the persons junior than the claimant are retained by the management Institute. It is also wrong that the work still exists with the management against which the claimant alleged to work rather the claimant was never engaged by the answering respondent. It is pertinent to mention here that the Institute had already adopted the Outsourcing Policy of the Central Government w.e.f. 1.4.2010. It is also wrong that the management committed any offence which is punishable under section 32 and 34 of the ID Act and Section 2 (ra) and schedule (v) of the Act.

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 183

4. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal the case was fixed for evidence of workman but none is responding on his behalf. Several opportunities have already been given to the workman for evidence of workman but of no use. Which denotes that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the matter on merits.

5. Since the workman has neither put his appearance since long nor he has filed any replication to prove his cause against the management, as such, this Tribunal is left with no choice except to pass a 'No Claim Award'. Accordingly, no claim award is passed in the present case. File after completion be consigned in the record room.

6. Let copy of this award be sent to Central Government for publication as required under Section 17 of the ID Act, 1947.

KAMAL KANT, P.O.-cum-Link Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 50.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार निदेशक/मुख्य वार्डन, राष्ट्रीय प्रौद्योगिकी संस्थान, कु रूक्षेत्र, के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और श्री सुरेंद्र कु मार, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में के न्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय-1 चंडीगढ़ पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 78/2012) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 12/01/2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल. 42012/146/2012-आईआर-(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 50.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 78/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court –1,Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation The Director/chief warden, National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra ,and Shri Surender Kumar, Worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 12/01/2024.

[No. L- 42012/146/2012- IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Offier, Chandigarh.

ID No.78/2012

Registered On:-30.01.2013

Surender Kumar S/o Sh. Jai Bhagwan R/o Village DyalPur, Post Officer Gurukul Kurukshetra, Haryana

...........Workman

Versus

National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra though it's director/ chief warden.

........Respondent

Award

Passed On:-16.11.2023

1. Central Government vide Notification No. L-42012/146/2012-IR(DU) dated 16.01.2013/21.01.2023, under clause (d) of Sub-Section (1) sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act), has referred the following Industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:-

"Whether the demand of Sh. Surender Kumar S/o Sh. Jai Bhagwan, Ex Security Guard for reinstatement and

regularization in service with the management of Director, NIT Kurukshetra w.e.f. 23.02.2009 as Security

Guard is just, fair and legal? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?"

184 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

2. The brief facts relevant for deciding this claim petition as per the claim of the workman is that the workman was appointed as Security Guard on 23.02.2009 by the respondent management at the salary of Rs.2500/- Per Month. The work and conduct of workman remained good and satisfactory during the tenure of his service with management. On 27.05.2010 the services of the workman was dispensed without following the procedure laid down in the ID. Act. No notice has been given to applicant, whereas the workman had completed the more than 240 days of service continuously as required under section 25F of the act. So the workman is entitled to the protection under 25F and other provisions of the Act, which the respondent has not followed at the time of terminating the service of applicant. The respondent has also not followed the principle of the act at the time of terminating the services of workman Viz, notice no enquiry; no charge sheet was given to the applicant, which is clear violation of Section 25F and other provisions of the Act. The management has retain in service juniors to the applicant, which is the violation of section 25-G of I.D. act. Workman has also sent the 15 days notice to respondent for taking him back in service, but the management had not sent any reply.

3. Respondent has filed written statement alleging therein the present claim statement is an abuse of process of law and the claimant has not come with clean hands before this Hon'ble Court and toe-twisted the true facts. The true facts of the case are that the claimant was engaged by the Mess Committee in the Hostel at its own level and the respondent Institute only guide to the students and just help them to maintain the services. There is no sanctioned post in the Institute against which the claimant alleged to work and same has never been advertised. No interviews was conducted and no appointment letter was issued to the claimant. The claimant had never been paid from the consolidated/budget funds of the Institute nor there is any provision for the same in the budget for the payment of such type of engagement. The management /Institute has adopted the outsourcing policy laid down by the Government of India and has outsourced the work of security, maintenance and sanitation in the Institute by calling the tenders w.e.f. 1.4.2010. The allotted/selected Service Provider(s) have also started their services w.e.f. 1.4.2010. Claimant alongwith 53 other persons had filed a demand notice dated 22.2.2010 before Assistant Labour Commissioner and the same was defended by the answering Institute on merit. The Assistant Labour Commissioner completed all the conciliation proceedings in that demand Notice and the reference of the same had already been sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment, New Delhi for consideration vide letter No. 8(3)/2010/ALF, dated 18.5.2010 and the case was referred before this Court which is pending in the Court. It is wrong that the claimant had completed more than 240 days of continuous service in the last financial year with the respondent Institute. Rather the services of the claimant ware never engaged by the management Institute and therefore there is no question of issuing any notice under ID Act and at the same time there is no requirement of compliance of section 25-F, 25-G and 25-H of the Act. It is also wrong that the persons junior than the claimant are retained by the management Institute. It is also wrong that the work still exists with the management against which the claimant alleged to work rather the claimant was never engaged by the answering respondent. It is pertinent to mention here that the Institute had already adopted the Outsourcing Policy of the Central Government w.e.f. 1.4.2010. It is also wrong that the management committed any offence which is punishable under section 32 and 34 of the ID Act and Section 2 (ra) and schedule (v) of the Act.

4. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal the case was fixed for evidence of workman but none is responding on its behalf. Several opportunities have already been given to the workman for evidence of workman but of no use. Which denotes that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the matter on merits.

5. Since the workman has neither put his appearance since long nor he has filed any replication to prove his cause against the management, as such, this Tribunal is left with no choice except to pass a 'No Claim Award'. Accordingly, no claim award is passed in the present case. File after completion be consigned in the record room.

6. Let copy of this award be sent to Central Government for publication as required under Section 17 of the ID Act, 1947.

KAMAL KANT, P.O.-cum-Link Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 51.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार उप.

महाप्रबंधक, टीएचडीसी इंडिया लिमिटेड, देहरादून; उप. महाप्रबंधक, उत्तराखंड पूर्व सैनिक कल्याण निगम लिमिटेड,

देहरादून, के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और श्री अजु र्न सिंह नेगी, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद

में के न्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय-1 चंडीगढ़ पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 133/2018) को जैसा कि

अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 18/12/2023 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल– 42012/118/2018-आईआर-(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 185

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 51.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 133/2018) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court –1,Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation The Dy. General Manager, THDC India Limited, Dehradun ;The Dy. General Manager, Uttarakhand Purv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd, Dehradun, and Shri Arjun Singh Negi,Worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 18/12/2023.

[No. L- 42012/118/2018- IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Offier, Chandigarh.

ID No.133/2018

Registered On:-21.01.2019

Arjun Singh Negi R/o Tarun Vihar, Near Sidheshwar Mahadev Temple Satyam Wedding Point, Kedarpuram, Dehradun-248001.

...........Workman

Versus

1. The Dy. General Manager, THDC India Limited 26, EC Road, Dehradun-248001.

2. The Dy. General Manager, Uttarakhand Purv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd, Dehradun-248001.

........Respondents

Award

Passed On:-07.12.2023

Central Government vide Notification No. L-42012/118/2018(IR(DU)) dated 04.12.2018, under clause (d) of Sub-Section (1) sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act), has referred the following Industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:-

"Whether the termination of Shri Arjun Singh Negi working as security guard w.e.f. 01.11.2017 by

the THDC India Ltd. (Principal Employer) Dehradun and Uttarakhand Purva Sanik Kalyan Nigam

Ltd. (Contractor) is legal and justified? If not, what relief he is entitled to?"

1. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal, the case was fixed for Cross-examination of the workman but none is responding on its behalf. Several opportunities have already been given to the workman for evidence but of no use which denotes that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the matter on merits. It is submitted by the Respondent No.1 as well as Ld. Counsel for Respondent No.2 that the workman is not turning for Cross-examination while several opportunities have already been given to the workman.

2. Perused the file and it is found that the contention of the Ld. Counsels for both the respondents are true.

3. Since the workman has neither put his appearance since long nor he has led any evidence to prove his cause against the management as such, this Tribunal is left with no choice except to pass a 'No Claim Award'. Accordingly, no claim award is passed in the present case for non-prosecution of workman. File after completion be consigned in the record room.

KAMAL KANT, PO-cum-Link Officer186 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 52.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार गैरीसन इंजीनियर (वायु सेना), एमईएस, वायु सेना स्टेशन, हलवारा, लुधियाना; मैसर्स सांगा सिंह एंड कं पनी, गुरु तेग बहादुर नगर, राजकोट रोड, वायु सेना स्टेशन, पंजाब, के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और महासचिव, एमईएस कॉन्ट्रैक्ट वर्क र्स यूनियन (एडी) हलवारा, अकालगढ़, द-रायकोट, लुधियाना, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में के न्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय-1 चंडीगढ़ पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 147/2018) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 18/12/2023 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल– 14011/10/2018-आईआर-(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 52.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 147/2018) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court –1,Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation The Garrison Engineer (Air Force), MES, Air Force Station, Halwara, Ludhiana; M/s Sanga Singh and Co., Guru Teg Bahadur Nagar, Rajkot Road, Air Force Station, Punjab, and The General Secretary, MES Contract Workers Union (AD) Halwara, Akalgarh, The-Raikot, Ludhiana, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 18/12/2023.

[No. L- 14011/10/2018- IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I, CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Officer, Chandigarh.

ID No.147/2018

Registered On:-22.01.2019

General Secretary, MES Contract Workers Union (AD) Halwara, C/o CITU Office, H.No.180, Pratap Nagar, New Abadi, Akalgarh, The-Raikot, Ludhiana-141001.

...........Workman

Versus

1. Garrison Engineer (Air Force), MES, Air Force Station, Halwara, Ludhiana-141002.

2. M/s Sanga Singh and Co., Guru Teg Bahadur Nagar, Rajkot Road, Air Force Station, Punjab-141106.

Award

Passed On:-23.11.2023

Central Government vide Notification No. L-14011/10/2018-IR(DU) dated 02.01.2019, under clause (d) of Sub- Section (1) sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act), has referred the following Industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal

"Whether the demand of MES contract workers union, AD Halwara, for reinstatement of old contract

workmen (As mentioned in annexure 1) against garrion engineer (Air Force) MES, Air Force Station,

Halwara and M/s Sanga Singh & Co. Halwara is legal, fair and justified? If yes, than what relief union/

workmen are entitled to and from which date? (Workmen as mentioned in Annexure 1)?]"

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 187

1. The brief for deciding this claim petition as per the claim of the workman are that the union of the workmen is registered under the Trade Union Act SVI of 1926. The respondents have terminated the service of all the workers as mentioned in Annexure P-3 except Surinder Singh. The respondents neither offered nor paid the workmen the notice pay and retrenchment compensation. The juniors of the workmen in the same category were retained in service and other workmen in the same categories were appointed after the services of the workmen were terminated without sending prior notice to the workmen. All the workers are entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service with full back wages. They could not secure any other employment inspite of best efforts put by them. It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the respondents may be directed to reinstate all the workers with continuity of service, with their old terms and conditions of employment, with full back wages and with costs.

2. Respondent No.1 i.e. Garrison Engineer (Air Force), MES, Air Force Station, Halwara, Ludhiana has filed its written statement, alleging therein that the respondent had nothing to do with the services of the complainant/ applicant. The Garrison Engineer (MES), Air Force station Halwara, District Ludhiana have not terminated services of the complaint/applicants. In fact the Garrison Engineer (MES), have never given any employment to the complainants. The Garrison Engineer (MES), Air Force station Halwara, District Ludhiana floats tenders for its work including the works of Manning and operation of DG Sets, Manning and operation of Sewage installation, Manning and operations, at Air Force station, Halwara. From time to time tenders are floated and the winning bidders are awarded the contract by the Govt. of India. Amongst the various winning bidders namely M/s. Sanga and company, M/s. Indo Guard Security System, M/s Jassi Traders, M/s. Choudhary Enterprises were awarded contracts of the works for the duration of 11 months. The contractor to whom works have been awarded were to engage their own workmen for carrying out the works under the awarded contract. The contractor as pre law is to engage, employ, hire their own workmen. The complaint is not maintainable as the primary employer / employing contractor have not been made a party in the complaint. There is no privity of contract between the Garrison Engineer and the complainant. It has been found that the above mentioned persons have been working under the contractor M/s. Choudhary Enterprises under CA No GE/Hal-08/17-18 and GE/Hal-09/17-18. As per the record the Garrison Engineer have issued completion certificate of the works to the above named contractor vide certificate dated 04.08.2018 and 04.08.2018. It is on record that the alleged workmen have been found lacking in their work, involved in Civil/disputes and have endangered the work services of the Air Force, which is a sensitive defense installation and very important for the safety and security of war waging assets. The said workmen have intentionally concealed the said information and misleading the Court. In this connection a copy of letter dated 13.01.2018. It is therefore respectfully prayed that keeping in view the facts and circumstances mentioned in detailed reply to petition, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief being sought in the present petition and thus, the present petition is liable to be dismissed with costs.

3. Respondent No.2 i.e M /s Sanga Singh and Co., R/o Guru Teg Bahadur Nagar, Raikot Road, Air Force Station, Punjab has filed his written statement alleging therein that the present statement of claim has been filed just to grab the money from the answering respondent. The present statement of claim has been filed to harass the respondent no.2 and to extort some amount from the respondent no.2. In fact there is no contract between the respondent and the workman. The answering respondent has entered into contract agreement with the respondent no.1 and the said contracts were 5 in numbers and first was started from 20.11.2017 to 19.10.2018 and other four were started from 18.1.2018 to 17.12.2018. It is submitted that the demand of MES Contract Workers Union, AD Halwara for reinstatement of old contract workman against the answering respondent is illegal and not justified. The CAT Chandigarh had also dismissed the case of the workman on the ground that these workers do not come under the provision of section 14 of administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 by order dated 30.5.2018. The Hon'ble High Court has cleared that the workers who are working with Contractor cannot claim work after the completion of work of 11 months as contract agreement with the respondent no.1 is for 11 months. It is, therefore, prayed that the statement of claim filed by the workman may kindly be dismissed.

4. Today the case is again fixed for filing replication by the workman but none appeared despite repeated calls. It appears that workman is not interested in adjudication of the case on merits. This Tribunal is left with no option except to pass No Claim Award. Hence, No Claim Award is passed in the present reference for the non-prosecution of the workman. File after completion be consigned to the record room.

5. Let copy of this award be sent to Central Government for publication as required under Section 17 of the ID Act, 1947.

KAMAL KANT, P.O.-cum-Link Officer188 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 53.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार प्रबंधक (कार्मिक), भारतीय कृ त्रिम अंग निर्माण निगम, कानपुर, (यू.पी),के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और महासचिव, एलिमो मजदूर संघ, हीरागंज, कानपुर (यू.पी), के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट ेि न्द्रीय सरािर कानपुर पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 86 of 2014) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 09.01.2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल–42012/42/2014-आईआर(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 53.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 86 of 2014) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court –Kanpur, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The Manager (Personnel), Artificial Limbs Manufacturing Corporation Of India, Kanpur, (U.P), and The General Secretary, ALIMO Mazdoor Sang, Heeraganj, Kanpur (U.P), which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 09.01.2024.

[No. L- 42012/42/2014-IR(DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, KANPUR

PRESENT

SOMA SHEKHAR JENA

HJS (Retd.)

I.D. No. 86 of 2014

No L-42012/42/2014-IR(DU) dated 15.07.2014

BETWEEN

The General Secretary

ALIMO Mazdoor Sang,

Branch Office 106/371

Heeraganj

Kanpur (U.P)

AND

The Manager (Personnel)

Artificial Limbs Manufacturing Corporation of India

G.T. Road, Kanpur (U.P)

AWARD

This award arises out of the reference stated in schedule below communicated to this Tribunal by letter no. L-42012/42/2014-IR (DU) dated 15.07.2014 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Artificial Limbs Manufacturing Corporation of India, Kanpur in awarding punishment of stoppage of one increment with cumulative affect vide order dated 23.03.2001 and punishment of censure vide order dated 07.10.2003 on Shri Ram Kishan is just fair & legal? If not, to what relief the workman concerned is entitled to?"[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 189 The averments of statement of claim constituting Industrial Dispute are concisely stated below:-Claimant workman in his claim statement stated that the establishment of the O.P. management comes under the provisions of the Industrial Act, 1946 and is bound to provide various benefits such as insurance, EPF, Bonus and other benefits defined in Industrial Act.

One room was dedicated to the union which accommodated of facilities like typewriter and phone and complicated issues that arose on day to day basis between workers and management were resolved by bilateral talks.

The Managing Director with the intention to establish his dominance recognized the rival union as the main union and took all the various facilities from the existing union. And the Managing Director with malicious intent started harassing all the members of the existing union.

Under mentioned policy of harassing the members of the existing real union the members were cited as accused persons in complaint which were exaggerated in nature and for which Members were punished severely. The services of members of the existing real union were terminated by agreement accorded by the fake union in front of RLC.

In the written statement the O.P management has taken the stand that charge sheet was issued against claimant workman Ram Krishan with misconduct of threatening, assaulting, intimidating fellow co-employee of the corporation and habitually violating the rules applicable to the corporation as enshrined in clause 31 (11) and clause 31 (26) of the certified standing order.

Clause 31 (11) of C.S.O: Threatening, intimidating or assaulting any employee/ official of the corporation.

Clause 31 (26) of C.S.O: Habitual breach of any law applicable to the corporation.

It has been averred on the behalf of the O.P management that enquiry against Ram Krishan was conducted strictly in accordance with the principles of Natural Justice. Ram Krishan was given full opportunity to defend him in enquiry proceedings. On the basis of findings of enquiry officer Ram Krishan was inflicted with penalty of 'censure' with period of suspension as not on duty in accordance with clause 34 (e) of the certified standing orders. The O.P management has taken stand the text of the charges against Ram Krishan and another delinquent N.B Saxena were totally different in substance. The O.P management refuted the allegation of bias against the workman and breach of fair labour practice by the O.P management. During pendency of industrial dispute on the behalf of claimant union a memo was filed for withdrawal of Industrial Dispute raised by claimant union.

Prima-facie it is seen that Ram Krishan was penalized by the O P management on proved allegations of misconduct and the punishment was imposed after due enquiry. In such Scenario and in view of the memo filed by the claimant union for treating Industrial Dispute as not pressed the reference stands disposed of with NIL award.

Parties are left to bear their respective costs.

SHRI SOMA SHEKHAR JENA, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 54.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार अध्यक्ष

एवं प्रबंध निदेशक, कृ त्रिम अंग निर्माण निगम, कानपुर, (यू.पी.), के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और राष्ट्रीय महासचिव,

इंडियन नेशनल ट्रेड यूनियन कांग्रेस (आई एन टी यू सी),कानपुर (यूपी), के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट के न्द्रीय सरकार कानपुर पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 28 of 2022) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 09.01.2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल–42011/3/2022- आईआर(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 54.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 28 of 2022) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court –Kanpur, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The Chairman and Managing Director, Artificial Limbs Manufacturing Corporation, Kanpur, (U.P), and National General Secretary, Indian National Trade Union Congress (INTUC), Kanpur (U.P), which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 09.01.2024.

[No. L-42011/3/2022-IR(DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

190 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL – CUM- LABOUR COURT, KANPUR

PRESENT

SOMA SHEKHAR JENA

HJS (Retd.)

I.D. No. 28 of 2022

L-42011/3/2022-IR (DU) dated 14/02/2022

BETWEEN

Sh. K.K. Tiwari,

National General Secretary, Indian National Trade

Union Congress (INTUC), FT-191, Armapur Estate

Kanpur (U.P)-208009

AND

The Chairman and Managing Director,

Artificial Limbs Manufacturing Corporation,

G.T. Road, Kalyanpur, Kanpur (U.P)-209217

AWARD

This award arises in respect of the reference mentioned in the schedule stated below as received from the Government of India in letter no. L-42011/3/2022-IR (DU) dated 14/2/2022.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of ALIMCO, Kanpur in transferring Sh. Vinod Kumar, Machinist from Kanpur to Bhubaneswar as raised by Indian National Trade Union Congress (INTUC), Kanpur vide letter dated 06.07.2021 and 30.7.2021 is proper, legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman Concerned is entitled to and what directions are necessary in this respect?"

On receipt of notification, notices were issued both the parties on 28th February 2022In response to the notice the Authorized Representative of the management appeared and filed the authority letter. But none appeared for the claimant workman. Again case was fixed to 02.06.2022 for filling of claim statement. On 02.06.2022 only the management side appeared. None appeared on behalf of the claimant workman. Case was fixed for 30.06.2022 for filling of claim statement. But on 24.06.2022 a memo for not pressing the case was filed by claimant workman and the union ALIMCO SHRAMIK Sangathan.

From the aforesaid circumstances it is crystal clear that the workman and the union are not interested in prosecuting the case further before the Tribunal.

Hence in the given circumstances the references stands disposed of as of 'NIL' award.

Parties are left bear their respective costs.

SHRI SOMA SHEKHAR JENA, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 55.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार निदेशक/मुख्य वार्डन, राष्ट्रीय प्रौद्योगिकी संस्थान, कु रूक्षेत्र, के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और श्री गुरमित सिंह, कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में के न्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय-1 चंडीगढ़ पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 76/2012) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 12/01/2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल–42012/144/2012-आईआर-(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 191

New Delhi, the 16th January, 2024

S.O. 55.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 76/2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court –1,Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation The Director/ chief warden, National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra , and Shri Gurmit Singh,Worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 12/01/2024.

[No. L-42012/144/2012- IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,

CHANDIGARH.

Present: Sh. Kamal Kant, Presiding Officer-cum-Link Officer, Chandigarh.

ID No.76/2012

Registered On:-30.01.2013

Gurmit Singh S/o Sh. Rakam Singh R/o V.P.O. Barsaana, Distt. Kaithal, Haryana.

...........Workman

Versus

National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra though it's director/ chief warden.

........Respondent

Award

Passed On:-16.11.2023

1. Central Government vide Notification No. L-42012/144/2012-IR(DU) dated 16.01.2013/21.01.2013, under clause (d) of Sub-Section (1) sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act), has referred the following Industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal

"Whether the demand of Sh. Gurmit Singh S/o Sh. Rakam Singh Ex Security Guard for

reinstatement and regularization in service with the management of Director, NIT, Kurukshetra w.e.f.

22.04.2009 as Security Guard is just, fair and legal? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?"

2. The brief facts relevant for deciding this claim petition as per the claim of the workman is that the workman was appointed as Security Guard on 24.04.2009 by the respondent management at the salary of Rs.2500/- Per Month. The work and conduct of workman remained good and satisfactory during the tenure of his service with management. On 27.05.2010 the services of the workman was dispensed without following the procedure laid down in the ID. Act. No notice has been given to applicant, whereas the workman had completed the more than 240 days of service continuously as required under section 25F of the act. So the workman is entitled to the protection under 25F and other provisions of the Act, which the respondent has not followed at the time of terminating the service of applicant. The respondent has also not followed the principle of the act at the time of terminating the services of workman Viz, notice no enquiry; no charge sheet was given to the applicant, which is clear violation of Section 25F and other provisions of the Act. The management has retain in service juniors to the applicant, which is the violation of section 25-G of I.D. act. Workman has also sent the 15 days notice to respondent for taking him back in service, but the management had not sent any reply.

3. Respondent has filed written statement alleging therein the present claim statement is an abuse of process of law and the claimant has not come with clean hands before this Hon'ble Court and toe-twisted the true facts. The true facts of the case are that the claimant was engaged by the Mess Committee in the Hostel at its own level and the respondent Institute only guide to the students and just help them to maintain the services. There is no sanctioned post in the Institute against which the claimant alleged to work and same has never been advertised. No interviews was conducted and no appointment letter was issued to the claimant. The claimant had never been paid from the consolidated/budget funds of the Institute nor there is any provision for the same in the budget for the payment of such type of engagement. The management /Institute has adopted the outsourcing policy laid down by the Government of India and has outsourced the work of security, maintenance and sanitation in the Institute by calling the tenders w.e.f. 1.4.2010. The allotted/selected Service Provider(s) have192 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] also started their services w.e.f. 1.4.2010. Claimant alongwith 53 other persons had filed a demand notice dated 22.2.2010 before Assistant Labour Commissioner and the same was defended by the answering Institute on merit. The Assistant Labour Commissioner completed all the conciliation proceedings in that demand Notice and the reference of the same had already been sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment, New Delhi for consideration vide letter No. 8(3)/2010/ALF, dated 18.5.2010 and the case was referred before this Court which is pending in the Court. It is wrong that the claimant had completed more than 240 days of continuous service in the last financial year with the respondent Institute. Rather the services of the claimant ware never engaged by the management Institute and therefore there is no question of issuing any notice under ID Act and at the same time there is no requirement of compliance of section 25-F, 25-G and 25-H of the Act. It is also wrong that the persons junior than the claimant are retained by the management Institute. It is also wrong that the work still exists with the management against which the claimant alleged to work rather the claimant was never engaged by the answering respondent. It is pertinent to mention here that the Institute had already adopted the Outsourcing Policy of the Central Government w.e.f. 1.4.2010. It is also wrong that the management committed any offence which is punishable under section 32 and 34 of the ID Act and Section 2 (ra) and schedule (v) of the Act.

4. During the pendency of the proceedings before this Tribunal the case was fixed for evidence of workman but none is responding on its behalf. Several opportunities have already been given to the workman for evidence of workman but of no use. Which denotes that the workman is not interested in adjudication of the matter on merits.

5. Since the workman has neither put his appearance since long nor he has filed any replication to prove his cause against the management, as such, this Tribunal is left with no choice except to pass a 'No Claim Award'. Accordingly, no claim award is passed in the present case. File after completion be consigned in the record room.

6. Let copy of this award be sent to Central Government for publication as required under Section 17 of the ID Act, 1947.

KAMAL KANT, P.O.-cum-Link Officer

नई दिल्ली, 17 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 56.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार

अध्यक्ष-सह-प्रबंध निदेशक, मेसर्स स्कू टर इंडिया लिमिटेड, सरोजिनी नगर, लखनऊ, के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और

अध्यक्ष, स्टाफ एसोसिएशन स्कू टर उद्योग स्कू टर इंडिया लिमिटेड सरोजिनी नगर लखनऊ (यू.पी), ेि बीच अनुबंध में

निर्दिष्ट के न्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय, लखनऊ पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 13/2015) को जैसा कि

अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 09/01/2024को प्राप्त हुआ

था l

[सं. एल–42011/07/2014- आईआर(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 17th January, 2024

S.O. 56.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 13/2015) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court–Lucknow, as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to The President and Managing Director, M/s Scooter India Limited, Sarojini Nagar, Lucknow,(U.P.) and The President Staff Association Scooters Udyog Scooter India Ltd. Sarojini Nagar Lucknow (U.P.), which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 09/01/2024.

[No. L-42011/07/2014- IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 193

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW

PRESENT

JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR

PRESIDING OFFICER

I.D. No. 13/2015

Workers Vs Scooter India Ltd.

BETWEEN

The President Staff Association Scooters Udyog

Scooter India Ltd. Sarojini Nagar Lucknow (U.P.)

AND

The President and Managing Director Scooters India

Limited Sarojini Nagar Lucknow (U.P.)

AWARD

By an order dated 19.03.2014 appropriate authority as referred the following reference to be adjudicated by this Tribunal.

''क्या प्रबंधन, स्कूटर्स इण्डिया लिमिटेड, द्वारा अधिकारियों व कामगारो की संख्या में संतुलन न करे आईसीडब्लए से स्टाफ के ग्रेड 1 का कार्य लिया जाना व इन्हें अधिकारी श्रेणी के ग्रेड 1 पर नियुक्त किया जाना न्यायेचित एवंम्‌ वैधानिक हैघ् यदि नही ंतो यूनियन क्या हित लाभ पाने की अधिकारी है।

Thereafter a corrigendum was issued on 14 July 2014, which reads as under:-

F. No.I-42011/07/2014-IR(DU): In this Ministry's order No. 42011/072014-IR(DU) dated 19.03.2014, the address mentioned at Serial No. 01 of the list therewith may be read as follows:-

The Presiding Officer

Central Government Industrial Tribunal –cum- Labour Court Kendriya Bhawan 8th Floor, Hall No.

01, Sector- H, Aliganj

Lucknow (U.P.)-226012

Instead of

The Presiding Officer

Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court

B-5 to B-8, ATI Campus, Shram Bhawan, Govind Nagar

P.O. Udyog Nagar,

Kanpur- 208022

Accordingly ID case 13/2015 registered before this Tribunal.

Fact of the case

On 07.01.2016 on behalf of respondent claim statement was filed in which inter-alia following prayer were made.

"Wherefore it is most respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the opposite party and

grant the following relief to the Union.

1. The Proportion of No. of Officers, Staff and Workman be determined on the basis of previous record of the

company and imbalance prevailing at present may directed to be stopped.

2. The company may be directed to frame a transparent and clear rules and regulation of recruitment of

officers, and staff and till then the termination of the proportion among all the employees may be done on the

basis of existing rules of company.

3. The services of Job Trainees working for than 7 years may be directed to be regularized.

4. The Recruitment of ICWAs in the pay and Scale of the Officer Grade may be quashed holding it is against

the existing rules of the company.

5. Other relief in the facts and the circumstances of the case if any the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper"

On 05.09.2016 on behalf of respondent, written statement was filed relevant prayer taken therein are as under:-

194 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

i. "That the reference made by the Ministry of labour/Shram Mantralaya is wrong as the President Staff

Association Scooter Udyog, Lucknow has wrongly impleaded as a party to the dispute.

ii. That the President Staff Association Scooter Udyog, Lucknow has no right to contest the said matter as he

was not the party to the conciliation proceeding before the RLC (C), Lucknow on the said dispute and

the claim is being filed with the malafide intentions.

iii. That no discrimination is being by the management relating to officer, staff and workmen whereas the

number of officers, staff and workmen are recruited on the basis of the requirement in the factor in

compliance with the company's rules and policies.

iv. That the allegation made by President SASU are false, baselss, and misconceived and claim has been filed

on frivolous and vevatious ground.

v. Such other relief as the Hon'ble Tribunal deems fits.

Hence it is therefore, requested please reject the claim statement filed by applicant holding that he is not entitled to

any relief whatsoever.

For Scooters India Limited".

And time was granted to file rejoinder affidavit.

Thereafter by an order dated 08.03.2019 time was again granted to claimant to file rejoinder/evidence by way of affidavit.

On 05.04.2019 an order was passed that as from the side of workman's rejoinder/evidence on affidavit in support of his case was not filed so management was directed to file evidence by way of affidavit in support of his case.

By an order dated 30.12.2020, parties are directed to file evidence of this case was closed matter was listed for argument.

Lastly on 22.02.2023 order was passed quoted herein below:-

"Sri Neeraj Sharma filed authority on behalf of the SIL, taken on record none for claimant union.

By means of reference dated 19.03.2014 and subsequent corrigendum dated 24.07.2014, the present

adjudication case has been reference to this Tribunal; accordingly ID No. 13/2015 has been registered on

30.04.2015 and the claimant union filed is statement of claim on 07.01.2016. Thereafter the respondent files

its written statement M-15 was filed on 05.09.2019 and matter was listed for rejoinder. By an order dated

14.08.2018 dated was fixed for parties' documents and thereafter by order dated 08.03.2019, the matter was

listed for workman's evidence on affidavit. The matter was fixed for management evidence on affidavit by

order dated 05.04.2009 and thereafter the matter was fixed for 17.02.2021 for argument.

Thus, in view for above factual background and in the Interest of justice time is granted to the workman's

union to file its rejoinder on or before next date of listing.

List on 14.04.2023. Office is directed to issue notice to the claimant union".

In response to the above said facts notice was issued by the office which was served on claimant.

Thereafter on 15.06.2023 order was passed. In presence of the learned counsel for the parties.

Further on 14.08.2003 when the case was listed, none appeared on behalf of claimant, Sri Neeraj Sharma was present on behalf of respondent. So last opportunity was granted to the claimant/workman to take appropriate steps as early order by this Tribunal and matter was listed for ex-parte hearing.

Today when the matter was taken up in the revise list.

None appeared from the side of parties.

So taking into consideration the above said facts as well as the law laid by the Hon'ble High Court in the case of V.K. Raj Industries v. Labour Court ((I) and others 1981 (29) FLR 194 as under:-

"It is well settled that if a party challenges the legality on an order, the burden lies upon him to prove

illegality of the o4der and if no evidence is produced the party invoking jurisdiction of the Court must fail.

Whenever a workman raises dispute challenging the validity of the termination of service if is imperative for

him to file written statement before the Industrial Court setting out grounds on which the order is challenged

and he must also produce evidence to prove his case. If the workman fails to appear or to file written

[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्र : जनवरी 20, 2024/पौष 30, 1945 195

statement t or produce evidence, the dispute referred by the State Government cannot be answered in favour

of the workman and he would not be entitled to any relief."

In the case of M/s Uptron powertronics employees' Union, Ghaziabad Through its Secretary V. Presiding Officer, Laour Court (II), Ghaziabad and others 2008 (118) FLR 1164 Hon'ble Allhabad High Court has held as under:-

"The law has been settled by the Apex Court in case of Shankar Chakrawvarti V. Britannia Biscuit Co. Ltd

V.K. Raj Industries V. Labour Court and Ors. Airtech Private Limite4d V. State of U.P. and Ors. 1984 (94)

FLR 38 and Meritech India Ltd V. State of U.P. and Ors (1996 FLR that in the absence of any evidence led

by or on behalf of the workman the reference is bound to be answered by the Court against the workman. In

such a situation it is not necessary for the employers to lead any evidence at all. The obligation to lead

evidence to establish an allegation made by a party is on the party making the allegation. The test would be,

who would fail if no evidence is led."

And by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of District Administrative Committee, U.P. P.A. C.C.S.C. Services V. Secretary-cum-G.M. District Co-operative Bank Ltd. 2010 (126) FLR 519: wherein it has been held as under:-

"The submission is that even if the petitioner failed to lead the evidence, burden was on the shoulders of the

respondent to prove the termination order as illegal. He was required to lead evidence first which he failed.

A perusal of the impugned award also does not show that any evidence either oral or documentary was led

by the respondent. In the case of no evidence, the reference has to e dismissed".

As the workman has not filed any statement of claim/documentary evidence, so the present case is liable to be dismissed.

For the foregoing reasons, the case is dismissed and; and the workman is not entitled for any relief:'

Award as above.

Lucknow. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR, Presiding Officer 22.11.2023

नई दिल्ली, 18 जनवरी, 2024

का.आ. 57.—औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, के न्द्रीय सरकार फ्रं टलाइन (एनसीआर) बिजनेस सॉल्यूशंस प्राइवेट लिमिटेड ; मैसर्स डिशनेट वायरलेस लिमिटेड; मैसर्स ग्लोबल इनोवसोर्स सॉल्यूशंस प्रा. लिमिटेड, के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कामगार, के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट के न्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- सह- श्रम न्यायालय- कोलकाता पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 15 OF 2014) को जैसा कि अनुलग्नक में दिखाया गया है, प्रकाशित करती है जो के न्द्रीय सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉपी के साथ 18.01.2024 को प्राप्त हुआ था l

[सं. एल–42011/170/2013-आईआर(डीयू)]

दिलीप कु मार, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 18th January, 2024

S.O. 57.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. 15 OF 2014) 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 Frontline (NCR) Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd. ; M/s. Dishnet Wireless Ltd. ; M/s. Global Innovsource Solutions Pvt. Ltd., and their worker, which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 18.01.2024.

[No. L-42011/170/2013-IR (DU)]

DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy.

196 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JANUARY 20, 2024/PAUSHA 30, 1945 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

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

REF. NO. 15 OF 2014

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of

Frontline (NCR) Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

AND

Their Workmen

Appearance :

On behalf of Management, Frontline (NCR) Business : Absent

Solutions Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Dishnet Wireless Ltd., & M/s.

Global Innovsource Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

On behalf of the Workmen/Union : Absent

Dated 23rd January, 2023

AWARD

The Union which has espoused the present dispute has failed to appear inspite of due service of notice upon it as per A.D. Card.

The Party No.2 M/s Frontline (NCR) Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd. too fails to appear inspite of service of notice of appearance to it as per A.D. Card.

Similarly, Party No.3 M/s Dishneet Wireless Limited too has failed to appear. It has refused to accept the notice of appearance sent by regd. Post.

Notice of appearance issued to Party No.4 M/s Global Innovsource Solutions Pvt. Ltd. has returned with postal endorsement "Left". No fresh notice could be issued as in the record I do not find any alternative address of Party No.4.

In fact previous order sheet reflect the case was fixed for exparte evidence from the side of Union. The Union has filed evidence on affidavit of one Narayan Santra on 23.02.2015, but it has failed to tender the witness before the Tribunal to corroborate the content of the same and to prove the documents filed by it.

Thus, there is nothing except the statement of claim filed by the Union and reply filed by M/s Dishnet Wireless Ltd.

Be that as it may, the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour vide its order No. L-42011/170/2013-IR(DU) dated 18.02.2014 has referred the following dispute for adjudication.

" Whether the action of management of M/s Frontline (NCR) Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd., a contractor of M/s Dishnet Wireless Limited (AIRCEL) is justified in denying 21-points charter of demands raised by Union is legal or justified? If not, what relief the workmen are entitled to?".

Unfortunately, the Union which has espoused the cause of the persons working for Aircel, a telecom company, through its contractor appears to have abandoned the case perhaps it has no more grievance against the contractor employer and principal employers or may be its charter of demands might have been settled by the Employers.

Under the circumstance, there exist no dispute for adjudication by this tribunal.

Accordingly, Reference case No. 15 of 2014 is dismissed and an award to that effect is passed.

Send copy of this Award / order to the Ministry for doing needful.

Justice K. D. BHUTIA, Presiding Officer

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

Cite this issue. Weekly Gazette of India, Government of India, 20 January 2024. Indian Gazettes, https://egazette.servantsofknowledge.in/details/in.gazette.central.w.2024-01-20.251580/. Archive identifier in.gazette.central.w.2024-01-20.251580.