Subject NOT available

click here for IIIF manifest

The Gazette of India

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

No. 40] NEW DELHI, SATURDAY, OCTOBER 7, 1967'ASVINA 15, 1889

Separate paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed

as a separate compilation. -

NOTICE

The undermentioned Gazettes of India Extraordinary were published up to the 19th Septem-

ber, 1967.

No.and Date

Issued by

Subject

Issue No.

Ministry of Com-

S. O. 3303, dated 15th

Further amendment to the Exports 443

(Control) Order, 1963.

merce,

September, 1967.

S.O. 3304. dated 15th

Do.

Further amendment to the Exports

September, 1967.

(Control) Order, 1962.

0. 3305, dated 16th

44

Election Commis- sion, India.

September, 1967.

Amendments in notification No. 508/UP/67, dated 11th Janu- ary, 1967-

S O. 3306, dated I6th

Corrigendum to S. O. 2460, dated 445

Central Board of Direct Taxes.

September, 1967.

22nd July, 1967.

Ministry of Com-

S. O. 3307, dated 16th

446

merce.

September, 1967-

Quality control and preship- ment inspection of solvent extracted oilcakes.

S. O. 3308, dated 16th

Do.

Direction that the order No. S. O. 447

September, 1967.

1196, dated 13th April, 1966 shall continue to have effect for a furtherperiodupto15th October, 1967.

(3699)

. No. Mid Date

Issued by

Subject

Issue No.

Ministry of Home

448 S. O. 3309, dated 18th

Affairs.

September, 1967.

Extending upto the 31st December, 1967, the period within which the Commission of Inquiry •hall make its report.

S. 0. 3310, dated 19th

Approval of the films as speci- 449

September, 1967,

fied therein.

Ministry of Infor-

mation & Broad-

casting

Do.

Approval of the film as speci- S. O. 3311, dated 19th

fied therein.

September, 1967.

Ministry of Indus-

450 S. 0. 3406, dated 19th

September, 1967.

trial Development and

Company Affairs

Rescission of the Commercial Vehicles (Distribution and Sale) Control Order, 1963.

Do.

S. O. 3407, dated 19th

September, 1967.

The Scooters (Distribution and Sale) Control (Amendment) Order, 1967,

Copies of the Gazettes Extraordinary mentioned above will be supplied on Indent to the Manager of Publications, Civil Lines, Delhi. Indents should be submitted so as to reach the Manager within ten days of the date of issue of these Gazettes.

PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (H)

Statutory orders and notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Govern-

trf>t of India t'other than the Ministry of Defence) and by Central

Authorities (other than the Administration of Union Territories )

ELECTION COMMISSION, INDIA

New Delhi, the 22nd September 1967

S-0. 3508—In pursuance of section 106 of the Representation of the People Act, 1SS1, the Election Commission hereby publishes the Order, pronounced on the 3rd August, 1907 by the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Election Petition No. 35 of 1967.

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (Election Petition Side)

ELECTION PETITION¹ NO. 35 OF 1987

Jagan Nath son of L- Mathura Dass, Advocate, Moga, District Ferozepore—

Petitioner.

Versus

1. Shrl Sohan Sintfh Basi, Member Parliament, 17-D Defence Colony, New Delhi-

2. Shri Nirbhy Singh Dhlllop 82, Jhoke Road, Ferozepore Cantt,—Respondents.

Petition under Section 80 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 calling in question the election of Shri Sohan Singh Basi respondent No. 1 elected from the Ferozepore Parliamentary Constituency and praying that the election of the returned candidate be declared void and the petitioner be declared to have been duly elected as Member of the Lok Sabha from that constituency.

Dated the 3rd August, 1967

PRESENT:

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice A. N. Grover

For the Petitioner.—Mr. J. N. Kaushal, Senior Advocate with Mr.. M. R. Agnihotri, Advocate.

For the Respondent—Mr. H. L. Sibal. Senior Advocate with M/s. B. S. Dhillon and S. S. Bindra Advocates and also Mr. B. S- Bhant Advocate.

JUDGMENT

This is a petition of Shri Jagan Nath, Advocate of Moga, calling in question the election of Shri Sohan> Singh Basi, respondent No. 1, who was declared elected from the Ferozepore Parliamentary Constituency to the Lok Sabha. The Petitioner and respondent No. 1 polled 149558 and 162198 votes respectively. Originally two prayers were made in the petition. The first was that the election of the returned candidate be declared void and the second was that the petitioner be declared to have been duly elected as member of the Lok Sabha from that constituency. During the trial of the petition the second prayer was given up.

The election of respondent No. 1 was attacked primarily on the following four grounds:—

(1) The said respondent was not qualified for the membership of Lok Sabha under section 4 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (herein- after to be referred to as the Act) as he was not an elector in any Parliamentary Constituency. He had filed a certified copy of the entry in the electoral roll of the Parliamentary Constituency of . Ludhiana but since he never resided in Jagraon (District Liudhiana) nor did he own or possess any dwelling house there he was not entitl- ed to be registered as an elector of Jagraon. Furthermore his perma- nent residence was at New Delhi and at Assam. In addition, the application form requesting for registration at Jagraon purported to have been filed on 29th December 1966 whereas the name appeared to be included in the roll on or before 24th December 1966. The application was neither signed by respondent No. 1 nor contained any mention of the date or place. Everything appeared to have been done in a suspicious manner with a fraudulent intention either by taking into confidence the registering authorities or hoodwinking by suppressing material facts with the connivance of one Shri Lachman Singh, M.L.A. of Jagraon.

(2) Respondent No- 1 was disqualified on the date of filing the nomination papers as well as on the date of declaration of his result by reasons of the provisions contained in Article 102 of the Constitution, read with section 9-A of the Act. This was because of subsisting contracts having been entered into bv him with th° Central Government for the supply of goods to or for the execution of certain works under- taken by the Central Government, Respondent No. 1 was a Director of Excavators (India} Private Ltd., New Delhi, which company had at all material times subsisting contracts with the Director-General of Supplies and DisaosaK Government of India.' New Delhi. These contracts were for the supnlv of T.ornins Equipments which the com- pany imported from Ohio (U.S.A.). Respondent No- 1 was also run- ing his business in the name and style of Continental Construction Company (Private) Ltd., New Delhi, for which he was the Assistant Managing Director. Besides, he was a Director of M/s. Bahri & Company (P) Ltd., Calcutta- Both these companies had subsisting contracts for supply of goods to and for the execution of works undertaken by the Central Government. There was a general alle- gation that respondent No. 1 had various other subsisting contracts for the supply of goods as well as the execution of works undertaken by -the Central Government, detailed particulars of which were to •be submitted during the course of .evidence.

•(3) Corrupt practices of bribery had been committed by respondent No. 1 himself or through his agents and with his consent of which iii stances were given in sub-clauses (a) to (m) of clause (v) of paragraph 1 of the petition.

(4) Out of 11,149 votes which had been declared to be invalid, majority of votes had been cast in favour of the petitioner. The Returning Officer had illegally and with a mala /ide motive rejected those votes which had materially affected the result of the election so far as the returned candidate was concerned. In Xhe written statement filed by respondent No. 1 a number of objections were raised and it was inter alia pleaded that so far as the registration of respondent No. 1 as an elector was concerned. It was .final for all purposes and this Court had no jurisdiction to go into the matter at the state. It was maintained that respondent No. 1 was properly enrolled at Jagraon where he was ordinarily residing at the appropriate time. It was denied that on the date the nomination papers, were filed or on the date of scrutiny there subsisted any contracts between respondent No. 1 and the Central Government of the nature alleged. It was admitted that respondent No- 1 was a Director of Excavation (India) Private Ltd., New Delhi, which had entered into certain contracts with the Director- General of Supplies and Disposals. The Central Government or any other Government, however, had not contributed any share capital to the aforesaid Private Company It was further admitted that res- pondent No- 1 was a Director of Continental Construction Company (Private) Ltd. as also of M/s. Bahri & Company (P) Ltd-, Calcutta. So far as the first company was concerned, it was stated that there was no subsisting contract of the nature alleged. As regards the second Company, it was admitted that certain contracts with the Central Government for supply oif goods were subsisting but it was maintained that no disqualification was incurred on that ground. It was repeated that the capital of the Private Limited Companies of which respondent No. 1 was a Director had been subscribed to by Private shareholders and the Government did not have any share capital in them. The allegations regarding corrupt practices were firmly denied and all the other material facts relating to those allegations were stated. Apart from raising an objection in respect of want of particulars with •i;egai;d to the improperly rejected votes respondent No. 1 pleaded that at the time when the votes were rejected objections were invited by the Returning Officer and they were properly decided- Out of these rejected votes, some had been cast in favour Of the petitioner, seme in favour of respondent No. 1 and some in favour of other candidates. The petitioner never took any objection with regard to the rejection of votes at any previous stage-

Respondent No. i 1 entered appearance and filed his written statement o" 15th May 1967. Mr. A. S. Ambalvi appeared for respondent No- 2 and stated that his client was ill and, therefore, he had not been able to file a written statement. Certain preliminary issues were framed on that day and Mr- Ambalvi was given time till the next date of .hearing for filing the written statement- The ease was ^Bxe,d ifor .aii^unients on the pre^in^nary issues on 19>th May_1967. On that date -3QO .one .appealed for respondent No- 2 ,nor was a.ny written statement filed on his .feeftajf. Ex-jpJMrte proceedings weiie ordered to he .taken in -respect of respondent No- 2 Counsel for 1£ie petitioner and (respondent No- 1 agreed that the preliminary issues which h"d been frasped did apt arise in vA&w of the .desiston of the Full Jjeach in Election Petition No. 15 ol 1967 decided on. 17th May 1©6!7 toy which the question jsrtjetoejr any objections of the nature raided in the .petition to the enrol- fltlfirjkt of respondent No- 1 as an elector in the electoral rolls

The following two issues were framed on the merits:—

1. Whether isespondent No- 1 has committed the corrupt practices as detailed in paragraph 7(v) (a) to (m) of the petition?

2- Whether respondent No. 1 has subsisting contracts with the Central Government for fee sufiply of gGods and execution of work under- taken by &ie Centra! Gswrnment? If So, what is its effect?,

**he petitioner produced 11 witnesses, apaM tegm putttaf JtJmsself in. the witness- box. Respondent No. 1 produced two witnesses and gave his own statement.

1 en J r

SEC. ⁵(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER ⁷, ¹⁹⁶J(/ASVINA ¹⁵, ¹⁸⁸⁹ 37°5

Bagicha Singh said that "we should vote for Bachan Singh of Dheruwal." The witness proceeded to say—

"I cast ony one vote. I was told that I should vote for the persons whose symbol was 'scales' and beyond that I did not realise whether the votes were to be cast for the person for whom the first ballot-paper was supplied."

In cross-examination he admitted that the symbol of Bachan Singh, who was a candidate for the Assembly constituency, was also "scales" and that he had seen Bagicha Singh going about with Bachan Singh. In answer to a Court ques- tion he said that he was never paid the amount mentioned above by any one. I am unable to hold on the evidence of Wasan Singh that any corrupt practice of the nature alleged had been committed. In section 123(1) "bribery" has been defined to mean any gift, offer or promise by a candidate or hia agent or by any- other person with the consent of a candidate or hisi election agent of any gratification, to any person whomsoever, with the object, directly or indirectly of inducing etc. There is neither any pleading in sub clause (c) nor proof that Bagicha Singh was an agent of respondent No. 1. It, therefore, became necessary that the offer alleged to have been made of the sum of Rs. 200/- for inducing the electors of village Bahadurwala to vote in favour of respondent No. 1 should be proved to have been made by Bagicha Singh with the consent of the said respondent or his election agent. The evidence of Wasan Singh does not estab- lish, nor has any other evidence been produced to the effect, that Bagicha Singh had made the offer with the consent of respondent No. 1. Moreover, all that Wasan Singh's evidence, even If believed, establishes is that Bagicha Singh saiej that the witness as also the other villagers should vote for Bachan Singh €8t Dheruwal and nothing was said about voting for respondent No. 1. It is signi- ficant that- Bagicha Singh had been summoned by the petitioner as a witness) and he was present in Court but he was given up which showed that Bagicha Singh was not prepared to support the case of the petitioner.

In sub-clause (f) it was alleged that Sunder Singh son of Bhag Singh of village Arifwala, Tehsil Ferozepore, was paid Rs. 50/- on 18th February, 1967 at Arifwala by Fateh Singh and Jagga Singh agents of respondent No. 1 as reward! for inducing the Harijan electors of nearby villages to vote in favour of respon- dent No. 1. An additional sum of Rs. 150/- was also to be paid to the Harijan for the Gurdwara of their village which sum was stated not to have been paid so far. Sunder Singh (P. W. 4) was produced by the petitioner in support of the above allegation. He stated that one Jagat Singh approached him and told him to vote for Bassi (respondent No. 1). He offered Rs. 50/- and said that he would give Rs. 150/- later if he voted in favour of Bassi. A sum of Rs. 50/- was paid for repairs to the Gurdwara. The sum of Rs. 150/- which had been promised, was never paid. He admitted that he was not a granfhi of the Gurdwara of Harijans nor was he a member of the Managing Committee of that Gurdawara. There is actually no Gurdwara and only some walls upto a certain height had been constructed. There were about 100 to 200 voters in the village and the offer of Jagat Singh was made in. the presence of other persons at the gathering of the village at the crusher of the witness- Jagat Singh had approached him with one or two other persons, one of whom was Fateh Singh. An assurance was given by him alone to Jagat Singh that the votes of the villagers would be given to Bassi. He admitted that there was a Panchayat in the village and that the Panchayat was never told about this matter, nor was the petitioner told about the payment of the aforesaid amount or the promised payment of the balance amount of Rs. 150/-. It may be mentioned that the demeaneur of this wit- ness was not impressive and during the cross-examination, as noted by me, he was mostly in a peevish mood and was very reluctant to answer questions. I would be most reluctant to rely on the evidence of this witness for finding¹ a charge of bribery which has been alleged. Moreover, although in the petition it was stated that Fateh Singh and Jagga Singh had met Sunder Singh and made the offer but Sunder Singh in his evidence mentioned the name of Jagat Singh and not Jagga Singh- Jagga Singh was produced as P-W- 10 but he did not support the case of the petition. Fateh Singh, who had been summoned as a witness by the petitioner, was present but he was not examined. Moreover, there is no material on the record to show that Jagat Singh an agent of respondent No. 1. I am therefore not at all satisfied that the allegations contained in sub-clause (f) have been established.

In Sub-clause (j) it had been stated that on 17th February 1967 Surain Singh son of Budh Singh, resident of Rajiwala was paid Rs. 20/- at Rajiwala by Bagicha

Singh, the polling agent of respondent No. 1, for inducing electors of his village to vote for respondent No. 1. An additional sum. of Rs. 30/- was also promised to be paid to Suratei Singh. This was all done with the consent of' respendent No. 1 P.W. 3 Surain Singh was produced in support of this allcoatfcr.. Acrordinrr to him, Bagicha Singh met him a couple of days before the date of yc..:u+ ;•:!.! i.i.ii; him Rs. 20/- saying that he would pay him another sum of R:\ 'M).'- t-.'.-'.'r the polling had taken place. This payment was to be in consideration, of Surain Singh voting in favour of respondent No. 1. He further stated that Bagicha Singh was an agent of the party whose symbol was "scales" and that he was saying that votes should be given in favour of candidates with that symbol. In cross-examina- tion he stated that Bagicha. Singh belonged to his village Rajiwala and he met when no one was present. He further stated that Bagicha Singh had gone to all the voters in the village and had offered them bribe for casting votes. The following portion of his statement in cross-examination may be reproduced:

"It is because Bagicha Singh asked me to vote in favour of the candidates, whose symbol was scales that I thought he was helping the candi- dates who were contesting with that symbol. I had no other infor- mation or knowledge of his association with the contestants * * • * * • * •

Nobody approached me on behalf of the petitioner to give evidence nor; did I ever tell Shir Jagan Nath that any bribe had been offered ft* m e"

The criticism of this witness as pressed by Mts Hira Lai Sibal for respondent No- 1 is on similar lines as in respect of Wasan Singh (P.W. 1). Although it was alleged in sub-clause (j) that Bagicha Singh was a polling agent of respousl- ent No. 1, no evidence was led on that point nor has any other proof been adduced, The mere fact that Bagicha Singh canvassed for support in favour of candidates, whose symbol was 'scales' was not sufficient to establish that he was acting with the consent of respondent No. 1. The other interesting feature of the evidence of this witness is that according to him he never informed Sfari Jagan Nath or anyone else that any such offer of bribe had been made to him. This aspect becomes material because unless he had given some information to the petitioner or to any one else who could have conveyed the same to him, how could the petitioner know that such an offer had been made to him and cite him as a witness- According to the statement of the petitioner (P.W. 12), his clerk Durga Dass had collected all the information relating to the various corrupt prac- tices alleged to have been committed by respondent No. 1 Durga Dass was however, never produced as a witness. It is difficult, therefore, to find on the evidence of P.W. 3 Surain Singh or that of the petitioner that the allegations contained in sub-clause (j) have been proved.

In Sub-clause (k) of paragraph 7(v), it has been allaged that on 17th February 1967 Fauja Singh son ofLakha Singh of village Bahadurwala was paid Rs, 50/- at Bahadurwala by Bagicha Singh, the polling agent of respondent No. 1, with, a further promise to pay Rs. 50/- more for inducing¹ the electors of his village to vote in favour of respondent No. 1. Fauja Singh (P.W. 2) was produced to establish the charge laid in this sub-clause. He stated that two days prior to the date of the elections Bagicha Singh, who was a representative of respondent No. 1, came to him and paid a sum of Rs. 50,/- and further promised to give him Rs- 50/- more which, however, were never paid. This was done under an arrange- ment by which the votes were to be cast in favour of respondent No. 1. He admitted in cross-examination that except for the fact that Bagicha Singh said that he was representing Sohan Singh Bassi he had no knowledge that Bagicha Singh had come to him on behalf of respondent No. 1. According to this witness, Bagicha Singh told him that votes should be cast for Shri Gurbachan Singh (Bachan Singh) who was a candidate for the Assembly Constituency also Bagicha Singh, came a couple of times previously in connection with support for Girdhara Singh, the Congress candidate, because he wanted to cast votes only for those persons who gave money. He. however, did not demand any money from any other candidate nor did any other candidate offer any. The evidence of Fauja Singh, even if accepted, cannot possibly establish that Bagicha Singh had made the pavment of the amount question to him and agreed to pav another sum of Rs. 50/- with the consent of respondent No. 1. Even in the petition in sub-clause (k) no such consent is alleged. As has been mentioned earlier, Bagicha Singh was described as a poking agent in the sub-clause. There is absolutely no proof nor any material which may show that Bagicha Singh

wat a polling agent of respondent- No. 1. As has been previously observed, Bagieha Singh was summoned as a witness and although he was present in Court, he was given up and not examined. It is not possible to find on the statement of Fauja Singh that a corrupt praotioe of the nature alleged was committed by respondent Na 1.

It may be mentioned that with regard to all the instances of corrupt practices which have been discussed above, Bagicha Singh was not been proved by any cog- ent evidence or material to have been acted as an agent in connection with the elec- tion with the consent of the candidate within the meaning of Explanation apper- ing in the end of section 123 of the Act, nor was any such contention advanced.

No other point was pressed on behalf of the petitioner. As both the Issues have been found against the petitioner and in favour of respondent No. 1., the petition Is dismissed with costs, whioh are assessed at Rs. 1399/65 (inclusive of Counsel's fees fixed at Rs. 1000/-) payable to respondent No. (1) only.

3rd August, 1987.

(Sd.) A, N- GROVBR, Judge.

[No. 82/PB/35/67-J

New, Delhi, the 2Bth September 1967

S.O. 3509 .—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 13-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 (43 of 1950), the Election Commission, in consultation with) the Government of Punjab hereby nominates Shri H B- Lai, as the Chief Electoral Officer for the State ctf Punjab for the period from 30th March, 1967 to 1st September 1987 vice Shrl A. N. Kashyap.I.A.S.

[No- 154/11/67]

S.O. 3510,—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 13-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1B50 (43 of 1950), the Election Com- mission in consultation with the Government of Punjab hereby nominates Shri A. N. Kashyap, as the Chief Electoral Officer for the State of Punjab with effect from 1st September, 1967 and untill further orders vice Shrl H. B. Lai.

[No- 154/M/67-]

ORDERS

New Delhi, the &th September 1967

S,O. S511.—Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Ram Nirksban Sinha of Village and P,O- Samartha via Dalslng Sarai, District Daltanganj, a contesting candidate for election to the House of the People from Begusarat Constituency, has failed to lodge an account of his election expenses in the manner required by the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and the Rules made thereunder;

And whereas, after considering the representation made by the said candidate, the Election Cofcnmisslon is further satisfied that he hag no good reason or justifi- cation for the failure;

Now, therefore, in pursuance of section 10-A of the said Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shrl Ram Nirkshan Singh to be disqualified ior being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly oir Legislative Council of a State for a period of three years from the daje of this order.

[No. BR-HP/32/67/(16)-]

New Delhi, the 18th September 1967

S.O. 3512,—Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Krishna Deo Singh of village Mehda, P.O. Kara, District Gaya (Bihar), a contesting candidate for election to the House of the People from Aurangabad Constituency, has failed to lodge an account of his electiofa expenses within the time and in the manner ( requjired by the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and the Rules made thereunder;

And whereas, alter considering the representation made by the said candidate the Election Commission is further satisfied that he has no good reason or justifi- cation for the failure;

Now, therefore. In pursuance of section 10A of the said Act, the Election.

Commission hereby declares the said Shri Krishna Deo Singh to be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State for a period of three years from the date of this order.

[No. BR-HP/40/67(10).]

S.O. 3513.—Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Khairat Ahmad Kirdar of village Jhikatia Saliasa, P.O. Kothi Bikopur, District Gaya, a contesting candidate for election to the House o* the People from Aurangabad Constituency, has failed to lodge an account of his election expenses within the time and in the manner¹ required by the Representation of the People Act, J 951, and the Rules made thereunder;

And whereas the said candidate, even after due notice has not given any reason or explanation, for the failure;

Now, therefore, in pursuance of section 10-A of the said Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shri Khairat Ahmad Kirdar to be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State for a period of three years from the date of this order-

[No. BR-HF/40/87(ll).]

S.O. 3514.—Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Ram DenI Singh of village Dhawai, P.O. Madanpur, District Gaya (Bihar), a contesting can- didate for election to the House of the People from Aurangabad Constituency, has failed to lodge an account of his election expenses within the time and in the man- ner required by the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and the Rules made thereunder;

And whereas, after considering the representation made by the said candidate, the Election Commission is further satisfied that he has no good reason or justifi- cation for the failure;

Now, therefore, in pursuance of section 10-A of the said Act. the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shri Ram Deni Singh to be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly oc Legislative Council of a State for a period of three years from the date of this order.

[No. BR-HP/40/67(12).}

New Delhi, the 20th September 1967

S O 3515.—Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Rameshwar Daya'l of Village Jota, P.O. Sewatar, District Gaya (Bihar), a contesting candidate for election to the House of the People from Nawada Constituency, has failed to lcldfie an account of his election expenses within the time and in the manner required by the Representation of the People Act, 1051, and the Rules made thereunder;

And whereas, the said candidate, even after due notice has not given any reason or explanation for the failure;

Now therefore in pursuance of section 10-A of the said Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shri Rameshwar Dayal to be disqualified for being chosen as, and foir being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State for a period of three years from the date of this order.

[No. BR-HP/42/87U3)-]

S.O 3516. Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Khedu Prasad Poddar a contesting candidate for election to the House of the People from Mahasamund Constituency, has failed to lodge an account of his election expenses within the time and in the manner as required by the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and the Rules made thereunder;

And, whereas the said candidate, even after due notice has not given any reason or explanation far the failure;

Now, therefore, in pursuance of section 10-A of the said Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shri Khedu Prasad Poddar ot be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State for a period of three years from the date of this order-

[No. MP-HP/14/67.]

New. Delhi, the 21st September 1967

S.O. 3517.—Whereas Shri Goutamanand a contesting candidate for election to the House of the People from the DUTR Constituency, failed to lodge any account. of his election expenses as required by the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and the Rules made thereunder, and was given due notice of such failure;

And, whereas the Election Commisslo)n is Satisfied that the account since lodged by him has also not been lodged in the manner prescribed in the said Act and. Rules, and he has not furnished any good reason or justification for the failure^,

Now. therefore, in pursuance of section 10-A of the aaid Act. the Election Commls.itcin hereby declares the said Shri Goutamanand to be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State for a period of three- years from the date of this order.

•

[No- MP-HP/18/67.].

S.O. 3518.—Whereas Shri Onkar Singh a contesting candidate for election to the Housa of the People from the Shahdol Constituency, failed to lodge any account of his election expenses as required by the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and the Rules made thereunder, and was given due notice of such, failure;

And, iwhereas, the Election Commission is satisfied that the account since- lodged by him has also not been lodged in the manner prescribed in the said Act and Rules, and he has not furnished any good reason or justification for the failure;

Now, therefore, in pursuance of section 10-A of the said Act, the Election Coimmisslon hereby declares the said Shri Onkar Singh to be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislature Assembly or Legislative Council of a State for a period of" three- years from the date of this order.

[No. MP-HP/8/67(l).]

S.O. 3519,—Whereas Shri Sampat Singh a contesting candidate for election to the House of the People from the Shahdol Constituency, failed to lodge any account of his election expenses as required by the Representation of; the People Act, 1951, and the Rules made thereunder, and was given due notice of such failure;

And, whereas the Election Commission ig satisfied that the account since lodged by him has also not been lodged in the manner prescribed in the said Act and Rules, and he has not furnished any good reason or Justification for the failure;

Now, therefore, in pursuance of section 10-A of the said Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shri Sampat Singh to be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State for a period of three years from the date of this order.

[No MP-HP/8/67(2).]

And whereas, the Election CojmmUaion is satisfied that the account since lodged by him has also not been lodged in the manner prescribed in the said Act and Bules, and he haa not furnished any good reason or justification, lor the failure;

Now, therefore, in pursuance of section 10-A of the said Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shri Banshrup Singh to be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State for a period of three years from the date of this order.

[No. MP-HP/10/67(l).]

S.O. 3521^-Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Ch.akradharf Singh a contesting candidate for election to the House of the People .from Surguja Constituency, has failed to lodge an account of his election expenses within the , time and in the manner as required by the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and the Rules made thereunder;

• And whereas, the said candidate, even after due notice has not given any reason or explanation for tHej failure;

Nowi therefore, in pursuance of section 10-A of the said Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shri Chakradnarl Singh to be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being,. a member of either House o

[No- MP-HP/10/67 (2) ]

New Delhi, the 22nd September 1987

S.O. 3622.—Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Mani Raj Singh a contesting candidate for election to the House of the People from Rewa Constituency, has failed to lodge an account of his election expenses in the manner required by the Representation of the people Act, 1951, and the Rules miade thereunder;

And, whereas the said candidate, even after, due notice has not given any reason or explanation for the failure;

Now, therefore, in pursuance of section 10-A of the said Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shri Mani Raj Singh to be disqualified for being chosen as, and fotr being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State for a period of three years from the date of this order.

[No. MP-HP/7/67(1).]

S.O. 3523.—Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Ram Jiyawan a contesting candidate for election to the House of the People from Rewa Consti- tuency, has failed to lodge an Recount of his election expenses in the manner re- quired by the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Rules made there- under.

And, whereas the said candidate, even after due notice has not given any reason or explanation for the failure:

Now, therefore, in pursuance of section 10-A of the said Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shri Ram Jiyawan to be disqualified for being chosen as. and for being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State for a period of three years from the date of this order.

!

[No. MP-HP/ 7/8*2 (8) ]

New Delhi, the 23rd September 1907

S.O. 3584.—Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Wani Wilas ShaStri a contesting candidate for election to the House of the People, from Rajnandgaon Constituency, has failed to lodge an account of his election expenses as required by the Representation of the Peolple Act, 1951; and the Rules made' thereunder;

And whereas the said candidate, even after due notice has not jglven any reason or explanation for the failure;

Now, therefore, in pursuance of section 10-A. at 'Ihp said Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shri Want Wllas Shastri to be disqualified foi being chosen as* and for being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State for period of three years from the date of this order.

LNo- MP-HP/H9/67.]

S.O. 3525.—Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Dukhram a contesting candidate for election to the House of ihe People from Raigarfr Constituency, has failed to lodge an account of his election expenses as required by" the Representation of the Peciple Act, .1951, and the Rules made thereunder;

And whereas the said candidate, even after due notice has not given any reason or explanation for the failure;

Now, therefore, i n; pursuance of section 10-A of the said Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shri Dukhram to be disqualified for being chosen as, .and for being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State for a period of three years from the date of this order.

[No MP-HP/11/67(1)-J

S.0. 3526.—Whereas Shri Nakul Singh a contesting candidate for .election to the House of the People; from the Raigarh Constituency, failed to lodge any account of his election expenses as required by the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and the Rules made thereunder, anqL was given due nottice of such failure;

And whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that the account since lodged by him has also not been lodged in the manner prescribed In the said Act end Rules, and he has¹ not furnished any good reason or justification for the failure;

Now. therefore, in pursuance of section 10-A of the said Act, the Electi&n, Commission hereby declares the said Shri Nakul Singh to be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a. member of either House of Parliament on of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State for a poridd of three- years from ttie date of this order-

[No. MP^HP/ll/fl7(2)]

New Delhi, the 25th September 1967

S.O. 3527.—Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Mugdasani Venkata Narsimha Reddy of Magilipak Village, a contesting candidate for election to the House of the People from 40-Nalgonda Constituency, has failed to lodge an account df his election expenses as required by the Representation of the People Act. 1951, and the Rules made thereunder;

And whereas the said candidate, even after due notice, has not given any reason or explanation for the failure;

Now, therefore, In pursuance of section 10-A of the said Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shri Mugdasani Venkata Narsimha Reddy to be disqualified for being chosen, as and foir being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State for a period of three y*ars from the date of this order.

[No. AP-HP/40/67.]

S.O. 3528.—Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Ramprasad Pathtak a ontesting candidate for election to the House of the People from Balaghat Constituency has failed to lodge an account of his election expenses in the manner as required by the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and the Rules made thereunder;

And w*ieuefts the said candidate,, even after due notice has not given any reason

MIN1STEY OF HOME AFFAIRS

New Delhi, the 25th September 1967

S.O. 3529.—In exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso ot article 309 of the Constitution, the President makes the following rules to amend the "Tripura Employees (Revision of Pay and Allowances) Amendment Rules, 1967," namely, 2. These rules may be called "Tripura Employeeo (Revision of Pay and AUow- ••ances) Amendment Rules, 1967".

3. Rule 1(2) of the Tripura Employees (Revision of Pay and Allowances) .Amendment Rules, 1967, shall be substituted as under

"These shall be deemed to have come Into effect from the 1st April, 1961",

[No. F. 2/33/63-(MT)HMT.]

V. P. MALHOTRA, Dy. Secy.

New Delhi, the 26th September 1967

S.O. 3530.—In exercise Of the powers conferred by the proviso to article 3T)9 of -the Constitution, read with rule 33 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, the President hereby makes the following rules -further to amend the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Ttules, 1968, namely: —

1. These rules may be called the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Fourth Amendment Rules, 1967.

2. In the Schedule to the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1997, which is deemed to be the Schedule to the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, by virtue of rule 33 thereof, in Part II, "Central Civil Services, Class II," against the entry in column 1 relating to "Posts In Union Territories", the following shall respectively be -inserted In columns 3 and 4, namely: —

4

3

"In the Union territory of Himachal Pradesh—

(i) to (iv)"

Head of the Department.

[No. 7/9/67-ESTS.(A).]

P. S. VENKATESWABAN, Under Secy.

New Delhi, the 27th September 1967

S.O. 35S1.—Whereas the Central Government is satisfied that it is necessary to issue the following notification in the public interest.

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (6) of sec- tion 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (74 of 1956) the Central Government thereby directs that nfc> tax under this Act shall, with effect from the . 1st of October 1966, be payable by any dealer having his place of business in the Union territory of Delhi, or the Union territory of Himachal Pradesh, or the Union territory of Manipur, in respect of the sale by him from any such place of business of any goods to the Bihar Relief Committee, or to the Manav Rahat Mandal, Patna, in the course of inter-State trade or commerce subject to the 'Condition that the Bihar Relief Committee or the Manav Rahat JIandal, Patna, furnishes a certificate In the Form appended hereto that the said goods have been purchased by it for use In connectipn with the draught relief programmes in -the State of Bihar.

Form of Certificate

Certified that the goods specified in the voucher (s) Bill No. /cash memo(s) mentioned below were purchased by the Bihar Belief Committee/Manav Kahat Mandal for use in connection with the draught relief programmes in the State of Bihar.

Date Amount SI. No. Registraton No. of the dealer

Voucher/ Bill No./ Cash Memo.

Signature

Date

Designation

[No. F. 16/21/67-UTL.]

P. N. VASUDEVAN, Dy. Secy.

CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

ESTATE DUTY

New Delhi, the 16th September 1967

S.O, 3532.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2A) of section 4 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (34 of 1953) and In partial modification of the notifi- cation No. 6/F.No.l/9/67-E.D. dated the 28th April, 1907 published as S.O. 1660 in Part II, Section 3(li) of the Gazette of India dated the 13th May, 1967, the Central Board of Direct Taxes hereby directs that Shri N. K. Ganguly, an Assistant Com- missioner of Income-tax, appointed to be an Appellate Controller of Estate Duty by the notification of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue & Insurance) No. 18/F.Nol/9/67-E D. dated the 19th September, 1967, shall perform the functions of an Appellate Controller of Estate Duty in respect of—

(a) the estates of deceased persons assessed to estate duty on or after the lat July, 1960, by an Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, and - (b) the estates of deceased persons in relation to which an appeal lies under section 62 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, against an order passed on or after the 1st July, I960, by an Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, where such Assistant Controller has in exercise of his functions under the Estate Duty Act, 1953, made such assessments or passed such orders,—

(i)in any area comprised within the jurisdictions of the Commissioners of Income-tax mentioned below: —

Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bcngal-I, Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-II, Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-Ill, Commissioner of Income-tax, Assam, Nagaland, Tripura and Manipur,

and Commissioner of Income-tax, Bihar & Orissa;

(ii) in respect of any of the estates of the deceased persons who were being assed to income-tax in the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Central), Calcutta,

2. This notification shall be deemed to have come into force on the forenoon of the 26th day of June, 1967.

[No. 19/1/9/67-E.D.l

S.O. 3533,—In exercise of the powers cqnfwred by sub-section (2A) of sec- tion 4 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (34 of 1953) and in partial modification of its notification No. 19/F. No. l/ft/07-E.D., dated the 19th September, • 1067, the Cen- tral Board of Direct Taxes hereby directs that Shri T. K. Sourirajan, an Assist- ant Commissioner of Income-tax, appointed to be an Appellate Controller of Kstate Duty by the notification of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue & Insurance) No. 20/F. No. 1/9/97-E.D., dated the 19th September, 1967, shall perform the functions of an Appellate Controller of Estate Duty In respect of—

(a) the estates of deceased persons assessed to estate duty on or after the 1st July, 1960, by an Assistant Controller df Estate Duty, and (b) the estates of deceased persons in relation to which an appeal lies under section 62 of the Estate. Duty Act, 1953, against an order passed on or after the 1st July, I960, by an Assistant Controller • of Estate Duty,

where such Assistant Controller has in exercise of his functions under the Estate Duty Act, 1953, made such assessments or passed orders—

(i) in any area comprised within the jurisdictions of the Commissioners of" Income-tax mentioned below:—

Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-I, Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-II, Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-m,

* Commissioner of Income-tax, Assam, Nagaland, Tripura and Manipur, and Commissioner of Income-tax, Bihar and Crissa;

(ii) in respect of any of the estates of the deceased persons who were being assessed to income-tax: in the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Calcutta.

/

2. This notification shall be deemed to have come into force cm th" afternoon •"f the 16th day of August, 1967.

JNo. 21/SV No. l/ft/67-E.D.J

O. K. HEGDE, Secy.

INCOME-TAX

New Delfrf, ttie 22nd September 1M7

SO 8534.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sab-aoctieti (1) off Sec- tion #122 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) and all other powers enabling it in that behalf, the Central Board of Direct Taxes hereby makes the M W I M; further amendments in the Schedule appended to its Notification No. 52, dated- 7th July, 1067.

I Against "A"-Range, Nagpur under Column (2) the following shall be' added:—

(22) City Circle, Nagpur.

II. Against "B"~Range, Jabalpur under Cotamn (2) the following shall be- added.'—

(12) H-Ward, Jabalpur.

This notification shall take effect from 25th September, 1987.

f xptanatorv Ntite

The amendments have become necessary on account of the ca-eation of New- Circle/Ward in the Commissioner's charge,

(The above note does not form a part of the Notification, but is Intended to- be mewfly elarfflcatory).

INo. 105 (F. No. 50/20/67-ITJ.J

New Delhi, the 27th September 1967

S.O. 3S35^—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 122 of the Incometax Act, 1061 (43 of 1961) and of all other powers enabling it in that behalf and in BupeXBesaion of all the previous notifications in this regard, the Central Board of Direct Taxes hereby directs that the Appellate Assistant Commissioners oS Ineometax of the Ranges epecifled in column (1) of the Schedule below, shall perform their functions in respect of all persons and incomes assess- ed to incometax or Super-tax in the Incometax Circles, Wards and Districts specified in the corresponding entry in column 2 thereof: —

SCHKKTLH

Range

Incometax Circles, Wards and Districts.

2

1

A-Range, Hyderabad

1. Ward I-A of Hyderabad Circle 2. Ward I-B of Hyderabad Circle. 3. Ward I-C of Hyderabad Circle. 4. Ward I-D of Hyderabad Circle. 5. Ward I-B of Hyderabad Circle. 6. Circle I, Hyderabad. 7. A-Ward, Hyderabad. 8. I.T.-ram-W.T. Circle I, Hyderabad. 9. Nandyal. 10. Warangal.

B-Range, Hyderabad.

1. Ward II-A of Hyderabad Circle. 2. Ward II-B of Hyderabad Circle. 3. Ward II-BB of Hyderabad Circle. 4. Ward II-C of Hyderabad Circle. 5. Ward n -D of Hyderabad Circle. 6. Ward II-DD of Hyderabad Circle. 7. Ward II-E of Hyderabad Circle. 8. Ward II-EE of Hyderabad Circle. 9. Circ'e II. Hyderabad,

10. B-Ward, Hyderabad^ 11. LT.-cum-W.T. Circle, II Hyderabad. 12. Survey Circle, Hyderabad. 13. Spl. Survey Circle L Hyderabad. 14. Spl. Survey Circle II Hyderabad. 15. Survey Circle I, Hyderabad. 16. Survey Circle II, Hyderabad. 17. Spl. Survey Circle (Old) Hyderabad. 18. Salary Circle, Hyderabad, 19. Sangareddy. 20. Kothasudem.

C-Range, Hyderabad.

1. Ward III-A of Secunderabad Circle. 2. Ward HI-B of Secunderabad Circle. 3. Ward III-C of Secunderabad Circle, 4. Ward III-D 01 Secunderabad Circle. 5. Ward III-E of Secunderabad Circle. 6. Circle III. Hyderabad. 7. C-Ward, Hyderabad. 8. I.T.-ctiro-W.T. Circle III, Hyderabad. 9. Kurnool.

10. Mahaboobnagar.

D-Range, Hyderabad,

1. Company Ward of Secunderabad Circle. 2. Company Circle, Hyderabad. 3, Company Circle (Old), Hyderabad. 4. Recovery Circle, Hyderabad. 5. Nizamabad. 6. Nirmal. 7. Project Circle, Hyderabad. 8. M.P.P. Circle, Hyderabad. 9. Central Circle, Hyderabad.

10. Karimnagar. 11. Khammam,

2

Viaakhapatnam Range, Visakhapatnam.

Kakinada Range, Kakinada.

Rajahmundry Range, Rajahmundry.

1. Visakhapatnam. 2. Vizianagaram. 3. Srikakulam. 4. Bobbili. 5. Anakapalle. 1. Kakinada (Old). 2. Raraachandrapuram. 3. KaklnadB-I. 4. Kakinada-II. 6. Masulipatam. 6. Gudivada. 1. Rajahmundry. 2. Eluru.

4. Amalapuram. 5. Palacole. 1. Vijayawada.

Vljayawada Range, Vijayawada. Guntur Range, Guntur.

Anantapur Range, Anantapur.

1. Guntur. 2. Nellore, 3. Mica Circle, Nellore. 4. Bapatla. 5. Tenali. 6. Chlttoor. 7. Thirupathi. 1. Anantapur. ?,. Hindupur. 3. Adoni. 4. Cuddapah. 5. Proddatur.

Where an Income-tax Circle, Ward or District or part thereof stands trans- ferred by this notification from one Range to another Range, appeals arising out of assessments made in that Income-tax Circle, Ward or District or part thereof and pending immediately before the date of this notification before the AppellaTe Assistant Commissioner of Incometax of the Range from whom that Incometux Circle Ward or District or part thereof is transferred shall, from the date this notification shall take effect, be transferred to and dealt with by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of the Range to whom the said Circle, Ward or District or part thereof is transferred.

This notification shall take effect from 30th September, 1967.

Explanatory Note-

The amendments have become necessary on account of the abolition of two Appellate Assistant Commissioners' Ranges at Warangal and Chittoor and the shifting of the A.A.C.'s office from Nel'ore to Guntur and the consequent revision of the jurisdictions of the other A.A.C.s in the Commissioner's charge.

(This note does not form a part of the notification but is intended to be merely clarificatory),

[No. I ll (No. F. 50/143/67-1TJ).]

P. G. GANDHI, Under Secy.

MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY PLANNING

(Department of Health)

ORDER

New Delhi, the 25th September 1967

S O 3536.—Whereas the Government of India in the late Ministry of Health has, by notification No. 32-70/64-MPT, dated 23rd January, 1965, made in exercise

of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956), recognised the medical qualification "M.D." granted by the University of Creigton, USA for the purposes of the said Act;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to sub- section (1) of section 14 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1966), the Central Government hereby specifies a further period of two years with effect from the 3rd February, 1067, or so long as Dr. Charles Walton Emerick Who possesses the said qualification, continues to work in the Miraj Medical Centre, P.O. Miraj, Sangli District, Maharashtra to which he is attached for the time being for the purposes of teaching, research or charitable work, whichever is shorter, as the period to which the medical practice of the said Dr. Charles Walton Emerick shall be limited.

[No. F. 19-35 /67-MFT,] L. K. MUETHY, Under Secy.

MINISTRY OF COMMERCE (Office of the Jt. Chief Controller of Imports and Exports) (Central Licensing Area) ORDER

New Delhi, the 20th September 1967

S.O. 3537.—Whereas M/s. New Pals Radios Production-cum-sale Ce-op. Industrial Society Ltd. Ward No. 2, 186, Kaisthan Area, Panlpat or any bank or any other person have not come forward furnishing sufficient cause, against Notice No. 338/63/ENF/CLA/3376, dated 17th Macrh, 1967 proposing to cancel licences No- (1) P/SS/1579757/C/XX/19/CD/19-20, dated Hth April, 1965 for Rs. 4950 for the Import of Acrylic Plastic Sheets (2)-P/SS/15054H4/C/XX/21/CD/ 21-22, dated 8th July, 1967 valued at Rs. 6,065 for the import of Permissible components, Radio parts and Acrylic Plastic Sheets (3)-P/SS/1507128/C/XX/21/ CD/23-24, dated 11th August, 1966 valued at Rs. 39,050 for the import of Domestic and cheap Radio Parts, Acrylic Plastic sheets granted to M/s. New Pals Radios Production-cum-sale Co-operative Industrial Society, Ward No 2, 180, Kaisthan Area, Panipat by the Joint Chief Controller of imparts and Exports, (Central Licensing Area), New Delhi, Government of India, in the Ministry of Commerce in exercise of the powers conferred by the Clause 9 of the Import (Control ? Order, 1955, hereby cancel the aforesaid licences, issued to M/s, New Pals Radios Prcr duction-cum-sale Co-operative Industrial Society, Ward No- 2, ISO, Kaisthan Area, Panipat-

1. M/s. New Pals Radios Production-cum-sale Co-op.

Industrial Society, Ward No. 2, 186, Kisthan Area. Panipat.

LNo- 338/63/ENF/CLA/3047.] 2. Village Kundli G.T. Road, RAM MURTI SHABMA, P.O. Singhu, Distt. Rohatak. Jt. Chief Controller of Imports and Exports-

MINISTRY OF FOOD, AGRICULTURE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & COOPERATION (Department of Cooperation; New Delhi, the 25th September 1967

S.O. 3538.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 6 B of the Multi- Unit Cooperative Societies Act, 1942 (6 of 1942) and in supersession of the Ministry of Food Agriculture, Community Development and Cooperation (Department of Cooperation) Notification No. 7-13/66-Credit dated the 7th October 1966 the Central Government hereby directs that the following amendment shall be made in the notification of the Government of India in the former Ministry of Commu- nity Development and Cooperation (Department of Cooperation) No. S.O. 1953, dated the 28th June, 1961 published at page 1555 of the Part II Section 3(ii) of the Gazette of India of the 8th July, 1961, namely: —

In the said notification for the existing entry against Serial No. 6, the entry "Shri K. Madhavan Nair," shall be substituted. ^ ^ 7-13/66-Credit.]

V, V. NATHEN, Dy. Secy.

MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT & SHIPPING

(Transport Wtaf)

MERCHANT SHIPPHTC

New Delhi, the 25th September 1967

S.O. 3639.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (21 of section 7 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 (44 of 1958), the Central Government hereby directs that the power exercisable by it under or in relation to sub-section (l) of section 299A of the said Act shall be exercisable also by the Director General of Shipping.

[No. 46-MA(7)/67.]

K. V. SANKARAN, Dy. Secy.

DEPARTMENT Or COMMUNICATIONS

(P. & T. Board)

New Delhi, the 21th September 1967

S.O. 3540.—In pursuance of para (a) of Section III of Rule 434 of Indinn Tele- graph Rules, 1951, as introduced by S.O. No. 627 dated 8th March, I960, the Director General, Posts and Telegraphs, hereby specifies the 1st November 1967 as the date on which the Measured Rate System will be introduced in Motihari Telephone Exchange.

[No. 5-48/67-FHB.}

D. R. BAHL,

Asstt. Director General (FHB).

MINISTRY OF LABOUR, EMPLOYMENT AND REHABILITATION

(Department of Labour and Employment)

New Delhi, the 22nd September 1967

S.O. 3542.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of, 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Industrial Tribunal Calcutta, in the industrial dispute between the employers In relation to the East Jamuria Colliery, Post Office Toposi, District Burdwan and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 30th September, 1967.

, E . . A. i 7, , .. /Asv A 15, . ' 3 7!9

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CALCUTTA

Reference No. 17 of 1967

PARTIES :

Employers in relation to the East Jamuria Colliery.

AND

Their Workmen.

PRESENT:

Shri S. K. Sen Presiding Officer.

STATE; West Bengal.

INDUSTRY: Coal Mine-

(AWARD)

By Order No, 6/4/67-LRII dated 15th February 1967, the Central Government referred lor adjudication an industrial dispute between the employers in rela- tion to the East Jamuria Colliery, P.O- Toposi, Dt. Burdwan and their workmen arising from the refusal of employment lo Shri Basu Mahato, Surface Trammer with effect from the 7th November, I960.

2. Both the parties filed written statements. According to the union, the workman concerned had joined other workmen in complaining to the RX C Central Implementation Dhanbad about short payments by the management and" the management being displeased with the workman stopped him from work with effect from 7th November 1966 without serving any chargesheet or any order of suspension or transfer on him. According to the written statement of the management, Baus Mahato was a temporary surface trammer and he voluntarily absented himself from 14th October 1966. He was asked to explain his unautho- rised absence by a registered letter issued by the management but he never sent a r;.ply and at that stage the union took up the case and complained before the Conciliation Officer.

3. On the date of hearing neither party has appeared. The first date of hearing was 24th July 1967. On that date Shri B. Mishra, Executive Officer, appeared on behalf of the management and asked for adjournment on the ground of illness of the Personnel Officer, Shri S. N. Misra. The union however did not appear on that day. The hearing was adjourned to 15th September 1967 and a notice of the adjourned date of hearing was given to the union by registered post and appears to have been received by the General Secretary of the union. Still on the adjourned date of hearing, 15th September 1967, the union was absent and the management also failed to turn up- It must therefore be pre- sumed that there is no dispute now pending.

4. My award therefore is that there is now no dispute pending.

(SdJ S- K. SEN,

Presiding Officer.

Dated, 15th September, 1967.

[No. 6/4/87-LRII.l

S.O. 3543.—In pursuance of seciion 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Industrial Tribunal, Jabalpur, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the East Bastacolla Colliery of Messrs Easi Bastacolla Colliery Company, Poet Office Jharia, Distt. Dhanbad lad their workmen, which wa3 received by the Central Government on the 18tfT September, 1967.

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUE COURT, JABALPUR.

Camp at Dhanbad. Dated 1th September, 1967.

PRESENT:

Shri G. C. Agarwala, Presiding Officer,

REFERENCE NO. 125 OF 1964 (DHANBAD TRIBUNAL) REFERENCE NO. CGIT/LC(R)(60)/67 (JABALPUR TRIBUNAL) In the mater an industrial dispute in relation to the East Bastacolla Colliery •of Messrs East Bastacolla Colliery Company, Post Office Jharia, District Dhanbad : and their workmen.

APPEARANCES :

For the employers: Shri S. C. Patra, Manager, East Bastacolla Colliery. For the workmen: Shri Prasanta Burman, Secretary Khan Mazdoor Congress- INDUSTRY: Coal Mines- DISTRICT: Dhanbad (Bihar).

AWARD

By Notification No. 2/116/64-LRII dated the 10th November 1964, the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, referred the following matter of dispute, as stated under the Schedule to the order of reference, to the Central Government Industrial, Dhanbad, for adjudication from where the proceedings were transferred to this Tribunal vide Govt. Notification No. 8/25/67-LRII tiated 25th April 1967:

SCHEDULE

(1) Whether the stoppage from work of Shri Jagannath Chamar, Miner of East Bastacolla Colliery of Messrs East Bastacolla Colliery Company, Post Office Jharia (District Dhanbad), from the 11th May, 1964 was caused by the management of the said Colliery?

(2) If so, to what relief is the workmaji entitled?

The proceedings remained pending before the Dhanbad Tribunal from 16th November 1964, till transferred to this Tribunal.

Written statement of the workmen was filed before the Dhanbad Tribunal. Empjoyers filed their written statement on 13th July, 1967. Neither party, how- ever, filed any rejoinder and therefore this date WOB fixed for hearing. Re- presentatives of the parties appeared and filed a compromise petition, terms of which are reproduced in the armexure. The dispute relates to non-employ- ment of one workman, Shri Jagannath Chamar. The management has agreed to re-employ him and has further agreed to make an ex-gratia payment of Rs. 200/- within 30 days of his re-employment. The Union has accepted the terms which are reasonable and fair. Compromise is, therefore, accepted as a satis- factory solution of the dispute and an award is recorded in terms thereof.

(Sd.) G. C. AGARWALA,

:

residing Officer.

BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT (CENTRAL)

JABALPUE.

REFERENCE NO. CGIT/LC(R)(60)/67.

BETWEEN

Employer in relation to East Bastacolla Colliery of M/s. East Bastacolla Colliery Co., P.O. Jharia District Dhanbad.

AKD

Their Workmen, represented by Khan Mazdoor Congress.

Petition for Compromise Settlement

The humble petitioners named below beg to state as follows:—

(1) That the employer In the above dispute is represented by Shri S. C. Patra, Manager, East Bastacolla Colliery and the workmen are represented by Shri Prasanta Burman, Secretary, Khan Mazdoor Congress.

(2) That the petitioners have reached a compromise settlement of the dis- pute abovenamed on the following terms;—

Terms of Settlement

(3) The management agrees to re-employ Shri Jagannath Chamar as a permanent miner in East Bastacolla Colliery, if he reports for employment with- in 30 days from the date of receipt of the notice of employment to be served by the management as soon as the Award becomes enforceable. Any delay in reporting after the above date, if caused by sufficient reason, shall be excluded.

(4) The management agrees to pay Rs. 200/- (Rupees Two Hundred) only ex-gratia, within 30 days of his employment to Shri Jagannath Chamar, over and above any outstanding legal dues that he may be entitled to.

(5) The Union agrees to accept the terms referred to in paras 3 and 4 above In full satisfaction of the claims of the workmen with respect to Jagannath Chamar's leinstatement with back wages and to make no further demand on this account.

(6) The petitioners pray that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to approve the above compromise settlement and to make an award in terms thereof.

And for this the humble petitioners shall ever pray.

For the Workmen.

For the Employer. S d /- S. C PATRA, Manager, East Bastacolla Colliery.

Sd-/- PRASANTA BURMAW, Secretary Khan Mazdoor Congress.

Dated, Dhanbad the 7th September, 1967.

(Sd.) G. C. AGAHWALA,

Pesiding Officer.

Part of Award "

Industrial Trlbunal-eum-Labour Court.

(Central)

Jabalpur. m

[No. 2/116/64-LRII.I

S.O. 3544.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Additional Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Khas Karanpura Colliery, Post Office Patratu, District Hazaribagh and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 20th September, 1967.

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ADDITIONAL INDUSTRIAL.

TRIBUNAL AT DHANBAD.

In the matter of reference under Section 10(1) (d) of the Industrial Dlspuctea Act. 1947.

REFERENCE NO- 31 or 1967

PARTIES :

Employers in relation to the Khas Karanpura Colliery, Post Office Patratu, Dist. Hazaribagh.

AND

Their Workmen

PRESENT :

Shri Nandagiri Venkata Rao, Presiding Officer.

APPEARANCES :

For the Employers: Shri S- S. Mukherjee, Advocate-

For the Workmen: Shri S- K. Mukherjee, Advocate.

STATE: Bihar

INDUSTRY: Coal.

Dhanbad, the 13th September, 1967

AWARD

The Central Government, being of opinion that an industrial dispute exists between the employers in relation to the Khas Karanpura Colliery, Post Office Patratu District Hazaribagh and their workmen, by Its order No. 2/28/65-LRH dated 7th April 1905, referred to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal,

Dhanbad under section 10(1) (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for adjudi- cation the dispute in respect of the matters specified in the schedule annexed thereto. The schedule is extracted below:

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Khaa Karanpura Colliery, in diamlsing Shri Mundrika Singh, Register Keeper, with effect from the 14th July, 1964 by their letter dated the 7th August, 1964 waa legal and justified? If not, to what relief is the -workman entitled?"

2. The Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad registered the refer- ence as reference No. 58 of 1965 on ita file. The workmen filed their statement of demands. While it was pending before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad the proceeding was transferred to this Tribunal, by the Cen- tral Government by its order No. 8/25/67-LRII dated 8th May 1967 under section 33(B)(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1M7. Consequently the reference is re- numbered on the file of this Tribunal as reference No. 31 of 1967. The employers also filed their statement of demands.

3. The workman, Mundrika Singh (herein after referred to as the affected work- man) was a register keeper in the colliery of the employers. On 10th July 1964 he was on duty in the 3rd shift marking attendance in the prescribed register of the miners going in end coming out of the mine. In respect of many mfners who did not go into the min^ he did not make any mark in the register and kept the columns "in" and "out" blank. Considering this a serious misconduct the employers issued to him a chargeeheet dated the 14th July 3 964, charging him for violation of the standing order No. 18(f) and (q) for neglect of work and for breach of Mines Regulations and suspending him pending departmental enquiry from the very date. The affected workman filed his explanation to the chargesheet saying that it was the practice in the colliery for the employers to make some workmen work in another mine or in tome other plare as re- quired by the management and as the attendance clerji do not get information about the engagement of the workmen else where, they keep the columns ''in" and "out" blank and make the necessary entries at the time of preparation, of weekly abstract of attendance after knowing the fact whether the workmen were employed in another mine or other working places or actually did not report to their duties, It is Btated that this practice was prevalent since a long time when other persons were Managers. The Management considered the explana- tion as not satisfactory and proceeded with the departmental enquiry. The en- quiry was adjourned at the request of the affected workman and then proceeded with on 4th Aupust 19"4. During the enquiry three witnesses are examined for the prosecution and two for the affected workman, inclusive of himself. The affected workman participated in the enquiry, cross examined at length tho pro- secution witnessed and adduced defence evidence. The enquiry was conducted by one of the partners of the employers. In his enquiry report the enquiry offi- cer found the affected workman guilty of the charge and directed his dismissal with retrospectiva effect from the date of tne chargesheet. Again a notice was issued to the affected workman to show cause as to why he should not be dis- missed with retrospective effect from the date of the chargeaheet lor violation of the provisions of the (standing orders 18(f) and (q). The affected workman submitted hia explanation, but finding it unsatisfactory the Manager issued the final letter dated 7th August 1964 dismissing the affected workman with retros- pective effect from the date of the chargesheet and directed him to collect his dues upto 13th July 1964 within three days. These facts are not in dispute.

}'•< ^f *f f e c t ed workman does not deny that he had left the columns "in" ana out blank in the concerned register. His only explantion is that he did so in pursuance of the long standing practice. He further alleged that the emp- loyers took the action Hfainst him only to victimise him for his trade union acti- vities He also pleaded thai he is a protracted workman. The employers stand is that there was HO fuch practice in violation of the statutory provisions, thai the admitted neglect of duty by the affected workman was a serious misconduct ji-2 t h° meaning of the Btanding orders and the Mines Act 1152, Rcgulntions and Rules framed thereunder. Thry denied that" there was any motive on thoir part or reason to victimise the affected workman, The workman were represent- ed by Shri S. K. Mukherjee, Advocate and the employers by Shri S. S. Mukherjee Advocate. By consent of the employers, Exts. Wl to W5 were marked for the workmen and by consent of the workman Ixts, Bl to E10 were marked

, ,. . , Gv . OF A: ( i I 1, 196|/ASVINA lfi, 1S89 3723

ior the employers. No witness was examined by any of the parties. The only point lor consideration is how far the practice pleaded by the affected workman justified is not maintaining the attendance register in accordance with the statutory instructions.

5- Section 48 of the Mines Act, 1952 provides for maintenance of Registers of persons employed in a mine. Sub-Sec- (4) thereof lays down that for every mine other than an exempted one, there shall be kept in the prescribed form and place separate registers showing in respect of each person employed in the mine, below ground and above ground showing the name of the employee, class or kind of his employment, the shift to which he belongs and the hours of the shift. Sub-Sec.(5) of the section further lays down that the registers of persons emp- loyed below ground referred to above sail show at any moment the name of every person who is then present below ground in the mine. Sec. 58 of the Mines Act empowers the Central Government to make Rules for the purposes mentioned thereunder. Chapter X of the Rules deals with maintenance of regis- ters and notices. Rule 78 of the Chapter prescribes the form of Register re- quired to be maintained under sub-section (4) of section 46 of the Mines Act, 1952. It is to be in form *C' provided under the Rules. Section 57 of the Mines Act enables the Central Government to make Regulations for the purposes men- tioned therein. Regulation 57 deals with the duties of register keepers and the attendance clerks- According to it the register keepers or attendance clerks are to make entries in the register with the reasonable despatch. Under clause (4) of the Regulation it is his duty, if after the commencement of a shift any official or a competent person has not got his attendance recorded in the register main- tained under section 48(4) of the Mines Act to report the fact in writing to the Manager, or the under Manager or Asst. Manager or other official in-charge of the shift within two hours after the commencement of the shift. Under the Mines Act penalties are prescribed for contravention of the provisions c3f the Act, Regulations, Rules or Bye-laws made thereunder, Section 73 of the Minos Act provides penalty for contraventions for which penalty ia not provided under the Act. It prescribes imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fine. Thus, non-maintenance of the attendance register in ac- cordance with the instructions contained in the Mines Act, Regulations or Rules made thereunder is a serious contravention exposing the register keepers or the attendance clerks to a serious penalty. The affected workman admits th;it he had not marked "in" and "out"' columns of the prescribed registers in respect of seve- ral of the workmen on 10th July lf'64. This omissions on his part was capable of giving rise to several mol-practices. There have been cases in which non- maintenance of the Attendance Register in confirmity with the Mines Act. Re- gulations or Rules, made it impossible to know how many people met death when the mine collapsed or exploaded. Under such circumstances no amount of practice contrary to the law could come to the rescue of the affected workman- No doubt, during the domestic enquiry the affected workman sought and succeed- ed to an extent that his act of omission was In accordance with the long standing practice and that several other register keepers or attendance clerks also commit- ted similar omissions. But this practice is of no avail to him when his act of omission is against the statutory provisions making him liable to serious punish- ment.

6. The charge, Ext- El was under standing- order No- 13(f) and (qi and the affected workman guilty of the charge. Clause (f) of the standing order deals with habitual neglect of work and clause (q) with any breach of the Mines Act, Regulations, Bye-laws thereunder, any other Act, Rules or any standing orders, The contention is that there was absolutely no evidence to warrant guilt oF the affected workman under clause (f), But, he could be punished for having been found guilty under clause (q). It is also argued that the dismissal with the retrospective' effect from +he date of the chargesheet was not corro^ As pointed out by the SuDreme Court in Jeevaratnam Vs- State of Madras [IQKKD L.L.J. P. 391~|, such an order of dismissal is, In substance, an order of dismissal as from the date of the order. It is also urged that suspension pending domes- tic enquiry for more than 10 days is also not in confirmity with the standing orders. I agree with this contention. In this respect also the affected workman can claim his dues in proper forum. But that does not make his dismissal illegal. As regards victimisation of the affected workman in view of his trade union ac- tivities, there is absolutely no evidence.

7, For the above reasons I hold that the action of the management of Khas Karanpura Colliery, in dismissing the workman Shri Mundrika Singh, Register Keeper with effect from the 14th July, 1964 by their letter dated 7th August

1964 was legal and justified, and, consequently, the affected workman is not en- titled to any relief. The award is made accordingly and submitted under sec- tion 15 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1"47.

(Sd.) N- VENKATA RAO, Presiding Officer.

APPENDIX I

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ADDITIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

AT DHANBAD

REFERENCE N O. 31 OF 1967

PARTIES :

Employers in relation to the Khas Karanpura Colliery, Post Office : Patratu, District Hazaribegh.

AND

Their Workmen

List of documents admitted in evidence for the Employers

Description of document

Whether

Distinguishing mark

Proved bv or number

and date

Date of admission

admitted or proved

[10-7-67 Admitted

Ext. E1 . . Copy of the charge sheet No. 2 dated 14-7-64 to Shri Mun- drika Singh.

Ext. E 2 .

Reply of chargesheet dated 16-7-64 by Mundrika Singh Do.

Do.

Ext. E 3 .

Letter dated 21-7-64 of Shri Mundrika Singh to Manag- ing Director for time (in Hindi).

Do.

Do.

Ext. E 4

Do.

Letter dated 23-7-64 from Shri Mundrika Singh to Shri G. L. Sharma for time (in Hindi) ' 1 .

Do.

Letter dated 1-8-64 of Shri

Ext. E 5

Mundrika Singh to Shri G. L. Sharma reg. date of enquiry Do.

Do.

Report of the domestic enquiry

Ext. E 6 . .

Do.

dated 14-7-64

Do.

Domestic enquiry dated 4-8-64

Ext. E 7 .

..

(in Hindi).

Do.

Do.

Ext. E 8 . . Copy of the show-cause notice dated 5-8-64 to Shri Mun- drika Singh

Do.

Do.

Ext. E 9 .

Copy of the reply of show-cause notice by Shri Mundrika Singh dated 6-8-64.

Do.

Do.

Ext. E 10

Copy of the dismissal letter dated 7-8-64 to Shri Mundrika Singh ,

Do.

Do.

••

List of documents admitted in evidence for the workmen

Distinguishing mark

Proved hy Description of document and date

or number

Date 9f admission

Whether admitted or proved

Ext. W I

10-7-64

Employers' letter dated 7-8-64 dismissing the workman

Admitted

Copy of reply of chargesheet

Ext. W 2

Do.

Do.

dated 16-7-64.

Ext. W 3.

Copy of reply of chargesheet of Manasa Charan Mukhcrjeej dated 16-7-64

Do.

Do.

Ext. W 4

Do.

Do.

Reply of show-cause dated 6-8-64 . . ..

Letter to Angustus Kujur

Ext. Wj

Do.

Do.

dated 8-8-64

(Sd.) N. VENKATA RAO, Presiding Officer,

Central Govt. Additional Iodustra

Tribunal at Dhanbad.

APPENDIX II

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ADDITIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

AT DHANBAD

REFERENCE N O. 31 OF 1967

PARTIES :

Employers in relation to the Khas Karanpura Collieryj Post Office : 'Patratu¹' District: Hazaribagh.

AND

Their Workmen .

List of witness examined on behalf of the employers.

No. of witness

Name of the witness

Date of

examination

Nil

Nil Nil

List of witness examined on behalf of the workmen

No. of witness

Name of the witness

Date of examinatio &

Nil

N il Nil

(Sd.) N. VENKATA RAO, Presiding Officer, Central Govt. Additional Industrial Tribunal at Dhanbad.

[No. 2/28/65-LRII.]

New Delhi, the 23rd September 1967

SO- 3545—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the' following award of the Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Selected Kajora Jambad Colliery, Post Office Ukhra, Burdwan and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 20th •September, 19U7.

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, CALCUTTA.

REFERENCE NO. 24 OF 1967

PARTIES :

Employers in relation to the Selected Kajora Jambad Colliery,

AND

Their Workmen

PRESENT:

Shrl S- K- Sen, Presiding Officer.

APPEARANCES :

On behalf of Employers: Absent. On behalf of Workmen: Shri Bankey Singh, Organising Secretary, Colliery Mazdoor Union.

STATE- West Bengal.

INDUSTRY; Coal Mines.

*

(AWARD)

By Order No. 6/20/67-LRII, dated 4th March 1967, the Central Government referred for adjudication an industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Selected Kajora Jambad Colliery P.O. Ukhra Distt. Burdwan and their workmen in respect of the mutter specified in the following schedule:

"Whether the refusal to employ the following workers with effect from the 29th November, 1966 by the management of Selected Kajora Jambad Colliery was justified?" 1. Shrl Basudeo Gowala, Clipman. 2. Shri Indrapal Koiri, U/G Trammer. 3. Shri Futu Koiri, U/G Trammer. 4. Shri Ramsurut Gowala, U/G Trammer. 5. Shri Kanhai Koiri, U/G Trammer. 6. Shri Ram Nehore Koiri, U/G Trammer. 7. Shrl Narihu Kolrl, Sf. Trammer. 8- Shri Ram Murat Gowala, Sf. Trammer.

If not, to what relief are they entitled?

2. Both the Asensol Coal Field Workers' Union and the Colliery Mazdoor Union filed written statements on behalf of the workmen but ultimately the case wae conducted by the Colliery Mazdoor Union. According to the case of the unions, the management used to make short payment to the workers and the workmen complained to the A.L.C., Central, Raniganj and the Labour En- forcement Officer, Central Ukhra and on some occasions the Labour Enforcement Officer, Central Ukhra personally visited the colliery and insisted on full payments. This antagonised the management and the management with effect from 29th Novem- ber, 1966 stopped the 8 workmen concerned in this case from working in their respective jobs although no chargesheet was served on any one of them nor was any notice of transfer nerved on them- On behalf of the workmen the unions romplained to the A-L.C, Central, Raniganj, and conciliation proceeding was held by him but no settlement was arrived at and ultimately the matter had to be referred to adjudication-

3. The management filed a written statement stating that the workmen were all temporary workmen and as the coal seam of Pit No. 5 of Selected Kajora Jambad colliery where these workmen were employed was getting exhausted,

the management felt it nece"sary to reduce the strength of tha temporary work- ers and so transferred two of them namely Ram Nehore Koiri, U/G Trammer and Kanhai Koiri, U/G Trammer to East Jamuria colliery which is under the same management, and transferred four other workmen, namely Ramsurat Gowala, Indrapal Koiri and Futu Koiri, U/G Trammers and Basudeo Gowala, Clipman, to Goenka Kajora colliery, which is also under the same management; but they did not join at the collieries to which they had been transferred. As regards Nanhu Koiri, Sf. Trammer and Ram Murat Gowala. Sf. Trammer, the management stated that they had been voluntarily absenting themselves without any leave and it was not correct that the management had stopped them from work.

4- At the hearing of the case the management has not ultimately been repre- sented. The date of hearing -was originally fixed as 24th July 1967. On that day Shri B. Mishra, Executive Officer, appeared on behalf of the management- and some witnesses were examined on behalf of the union and at the prayer ot Shri B. Mishra hearing was adjourned to 15th September 1967 to enable the Personnel Officer, Shri S. N. Misra, to appear on behalf of the management. On 15th September 1967 howflvwj, nobodj ippeared on behalf of the management, and after waiting for over one hour the case was taken up for ex-carte hearing.

5. Six of the worlonen concerned have appeared before the tribunal, namely (1) Basudeo Gowala, Clipman, (2) Indrapal Koiri U/G Trammer (3) Futu Koiri U/G Trammer, (4) Ramsurat Gowala, U/G Trammer, (5) Kanhui Koiri U/G Trammer and (8) Ram Murat Gowala, Sf- Trammer. Of them, Basudeo Gowala and Futu Koiri stated that they have been employed for 5 years at the colliery and the remaining 4 workmen claimed to have been in the employment of the colliery for 6 or 7 years and all of them claimed to be permanent. Basudeo Gowala produced an authorisation slip for work as a CHpmari vide Ext- 1 dt. 12th. December 1965. He stated that he worked for some years as a trammer and then from 12th December 1985 he was promoted as a Clipman. The evidence of these workmen that they were permanent workers stands uncontradicted It appears from the failure report that before the A.L.C., Central, Raniganj the management was asked to produce the B form register to show the date of appointment of the workmen concerned, but the management failed to produce the B form register, ultimately taking the ground that the B form register was not available. In the circumstances, it must be held that these workmen, l.e-r the six workmen who have appeared before the tribunal and have given evidence,' were permanent workmen and not temporary workmen. Accordingly, summary dismissal or stoppage from work in their case must be held to be unjustified.

6. As regards the contention of the management in the written statement and also before the A.L.C., Central, Raniganj that they had been transferred to other collieries in the neighbourhood as there was not sufficient work at Select- ed Kajora Jambad colliery, the workmen have all stated that they did not get any order or transfer before they were stopped from working. Basudeo Gow&Ia has stated that he first came to know of the alleged transfer when the mannpe- ment said so before the Conciliation Officer. Moreover, Shri Bankey Singh, Or- ganising Secretary, has deposed on oath that the East Jambad Kajora Colliery and the Goenka Kajora Colliery do not belong to Shri Sheo Bhagawan Goenka who is the owner of the Selected Kajora Jambad colliery though they belong to his relatives. In the circumstances, it must be held that the owner of the colliery* was not competent to transfer these workmen to the other concerns as claimed¹ in the written statement.

7. Accordingly the six workmen who have appeared before- the tribunal are entitled to reinstatement aa well as wages for the period of non-employment. As regards the two workmen -who have failed to appear, there being no evidence before the tribunal that they are permanent workers, no relief can be given to them.

I

8. My award therefore is that the refusal to employ the following six work- men with effect from 29th November, 1968 by the management of Selected Jam- bad Kajora Colliery was not justified:— 1. Basudeo Gowala, CHpman. 2. Indrapal Kolrl. U/G Trammer. 3. Futu Koiri, U/G Trammer. 4. Ramsurat Gowala, U/G Trammer. 5. Kanhai Koiri, U/G Trammer. 8. Ram Murat Gowala, Sf. Trammer.

I therefore direct that they be taken back in their posts within one month of the publication of the award and that they be given their wages for the period of non-employment. So far as No. (6) Ram Nehore Koiri, U/G Trammer and No. (7) Nanhu Koiri, Sf. Trammer, are concerned, there being no evidence to show that they were in permanent service no relief can be given to them.

(Sd.) S- K. SIN,

. .Presiding Officer.

Dated the 15th September 1967

[No. 6/20/67-LRII.]

New Delhi, the 25th September 1967

S.O. 3546.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Industrial Tribunal, Jabalpur, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Pure Kujama Colliery of South Basra Coal Company, Post Office Jharla, District Dhanbad and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 21st September, 1967.

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR Camp at Dhanbad Dated September 8, 1967

PRESENT:

Sri G. C. Agarwala—Presiding Officer.

REITERENCE NO. 45 OP 1964 (DHANBAD TRIBUNAL) REFERENCE NO. CGIT/LC(R) (24)/67 (JABALPUR TRIBUNAL)

PARTIES :

Employers In relation to Pure Kujama Colliery of South Basra Coal

Company. Post Office Jharia, District Dhanbad (Bihar).

Vs.

Their workmen through Koyala Mazdoor Panchayat, P.O. Jharia, District Dhanbad.

APPEARANCES :

For employers—Sri D. S. Jamkar, Manager. For workmen—Sri Haribansh Singh, Secretary, Koyala Mazdoor Panchayat. INDUSTRY: Coal Mine. DISTRICT: Dhanbad (Bihar).

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, by Notifica- tion No "/34/64-LRII, doted 18th April. 1904 referred a dispute to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad, under Sec. 10(1) I.D. Act for adjudi- cation. By another Notification No. 2/34/64-LRII, dated 6th June 1964 a corri- gendum' correcting the name of the employers which was originally mentioned as South Basra Colliery was issued as a result of this corrigendum the employers are now Pure Kujama Colliery of South Basra Coal Company. The corrected issue under reference is now as follows :—

Matter of Dispute

1 Whether the stoppage of Shri Faudar Gowala, Trammer, Pure Kujama Colliery of South Basra Coal Company from work with effect from 22nd November, 1963 by the management Pure Kujama Colliery of South Basra Coal Company, P.O. Jharia Dlstrlit Dhanbad was justified

2. If not to what relief is the workman entitled?

The proceedings remained pending before the Dhanbad Tribunal till transferr- ed to this Tribunal by Notification No. 8/25/67-LR.II. dated April 25, 1967. After issue of usual notices, the case was taken up on various dates because the parties intimated that they were compromising the dispute It waa, ultimately taken up today and the sponsoring Union, Koyala JMazdoor Panchayat, intimated iby means of a petition terms of which are reproduced in the annexure, that they are satisfied from the records of the management that the workman concerned

has settled the claim with the management and received payment. The Union, therefore, withdrew their appearance and did not contest the dispute. It, there- fore, follows that the workman has been paid in full settlement of his claim and the issue is no more open for determination.

Decision: —

It is, therefore, held that since the workman concerned has settled the claim with the management, it is not necessary to record a finding on Issue No. 1. For Issue No. 2, it is held that he is not entitled to any further relief.

(Sd.) G. C. AQABWALA,

Presiding Officer.

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

Camp : Dhanbad

REFERENCE NO. 24/67

Between the Management of Pure Kujama Colliery of South Basra Coal Co., P.O. Jharia Dist. Dhanbad.

AND

Their workman Shri Faudar Gowala, represented by the Koyala Mazdoor Panchayat, P.O. Jharia, Dist. Dhanbad.

.

In the matter of stoppage of work of Shrf Faudar Gowala, Trammer.

May it please the Hon'ble Tribunal.

1. That the workman Shri Faudar Gowala, Trammer, South Basra Colliery, was represented in the Reference by Koyalo Mazdoor Panchayat, hereinafter re- ferred to as the panchayat.

2. That the employer has shown the Panchayat a payment voucher of Shri the employer maintains that Shri Faudar Ahlr is Faudar Ahir of Faudar Gowala of the present Reference.

3. That the payment voucher says that the payment was made to Shri Faudar Ahir alias Faudar Gowala in the presence of Shri Haribansh Singh of Koyala Mazdoor Panchayat.

'

4. Shri Haribansh Singh confirms that payment as shown in the payment voucher of the employer was made to Shri Faudar Ahir alias Faudar Gowala In his presence.

E. That the Panchayat inspitc of its best effort, has failed to trace Shri Faudar Ahir, alias Faudar Gowala and is therefore, unable to obtain further instructions from Shri Faudar Ahir alias Faudar Gowala.

The Panchayat, therefore, craves leave to withdraw its appearance from the Present reference and hereby withdraws Its appearance on behalf of Shri Faudar Ahir alias Faudar Gowala-

And for this the Panchayat shall ever pray,

Yours faithfully, HARIBANSTI SINGH, Secretary,

Koyala Mazdoor Panchayat.

Dated 8th September 1967.

Part of Award

(Sd.) G. C. AGARWALA,

Presiding Officer,

Industrial Trlbunal-cttm-Labour Court,

(Central) Jabalpur.

[No. 2/34/84-LRIL]

S.O. 8547.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes th& following award of th" Industrial Tribunal, Jabalpur, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Madhuband Colliery, Post Office Nudkhurkee, District Dhan- bad and. their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the- 21st September, 1967.

BEFORE THE CENTRAL, GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABODR COURT, JABALPUR

Camp at Dhanbad Dated September 8, 1967

PRESENT:

Sri G. C. Agarwala, Presiding Officer.

REFERETTCK NO. 72 OF 1964 (DHANBAD TRIBUNAL) REFERENCE NO. CGIT/LC(R) (35)/67 (JABALPUR TRIBUNAL)

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to Madhuband Colliery, Post Office Nudkhurkee, District Dhanbad.

Vs.

• Their workmen represented by Hindustan Khan Mazdoor Sangh.

APPEARANCES:

For employers—Sri K. C. Nandkeolyar, Dy. Chief Personnel Officer of the employers.

For workmen^-Sri S. V. Acharior, General Secretary, Hindustan Khan Mazdoor Sangh.

INDUSTRY: Coal Mine. DISTRICT; Dhanbad (Bihar).

AWARD

By Notification No. 2/97/63-LRII-I, dated 25th June 1964 the Ministry of Labour So Employment, Government of India, referred the following matter of dispute to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad for adjudica- tion:

Matter of Dispute

Whether the management of the Madhuband Colliery, Post Office Nudkhur- kee, District Dhanbad locked out the following four workmen with effect from the respective dates noted against them, if so, to what relief are the workmen entitled?

S. No. Name and designation of the workmen

Date of lockout.

1. Chhota Ramdhanl Beldar, Miner 2. Ramkaran Beldar, Miner 3. Lagan Rajbhor, Miner 4. Lotan Rajbhor, Miner

17-10-1963. 16-10-1963. 16-10-1963. 17-10-1963.

The proceedings remained pending before the Dhanbad Tribunal from 3rd July 1964 till transferred to this Tribunal by Notification No. 8/25/67-LR-II, dated 25th April, 1967.

Neither party filod statements of claim either before the Dhanbad Tribunal or before this Tribunal. On issue of usual notices by this Tribunal, the parties went on taking time till the Union's representative, Sri S. V. Acharior, General Secretary of the Union, intimated today by means of a petition, terms of which are reproduced in the annexure stating that since the workmen concerned were not traceable the Union would not press for adjudication in the matter. The emp^yers were thereafter required to produce ex parte evidence. Sri K. C. Nandkeolyar, Deputy Chief Personnel Officer, examined himself and stated that the four concerned workmen were not at all locked out by the management but they were actually transferred from one mine to another in the same colliery. "The transfer order was duly served but they did not join at their new place of

SEC. ³(fl)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER ⁷, ¹⁹⁶^/ASVINA ¹⁵, ¹⁸⁸⁹ 373 r

work. That being so, it ia held that the management did not lock out the con- cerned workmen but they themselves remained absent and therefore they ar" not entitled to any relief.

Sd./- G. C AGAFWALA, Presiding Officer.

8-9-1967.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

Camp at Dhanbad

IN THE MATTER OF REFERENCE NO, CGIT/LCO5) or 1967

Employers in relation to Madhuband Colliery

V*.

Their workmen represented by Hindustan Khan Mazdoor Sangh.

Humble petition on behalf of the workmen: —

1. That the case is fixed for hearing on 7th September, 1967. 2. That the workmen are untraccable and hence the Union does not press for any adjudication in the matter.

That under the circumstances, it is prayed that the dispute may kindly be treated as withdrawn by the Union, and for that the petitioner, as in duty bound, shall ever pray. DHANBAD, Dated 8th September, 1967.

(Sd.) S. V. ACHARIOH, General Secretary, Hindustan Khan Mazdoor Sangh,

Dhanbad.

Port of Award.

(Sd.) G. C. AOARWALA,

Presiding Officer.

8-9-1967.

[No. 2/97/63-LR.II-I.]

S.O. 3548.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Industrial Tribunal, Jabalpur, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relations to the Madhuband Colliery, Post Office Nudkhurkec, District Dhanbad and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 21st September, 1967.

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR Camp at Dhanbad Dated, September 8, 1967

PRKENT:

Shrl G. C. Agarwala—Presiding Officer.

REFERENCE NO. 73 OF 1964 (DHANBAD TRIBUNAL) REFERENCE NO. CGIT/LC (R) (38) /67 (JABALPUR TRIBUNAL)

PAHTIM:

Employers in relation to Madhuband Colliery. Post Office Nudkhurkee, District Dhanbad,

7*.

Their workmen represented by Hindustan Khan Mazdoor Sangh.

A F P S A H A N C E S:

employers.

For employers—Sri K. C. Nandkeolyar. Dy. Chief Personnel Officer of the u¹ ' For workmen—Sri 8. V. Acharior, General Secretary. Hindustan Khpn Mazdoor Sangh.

INDUSTRY: Coal Mine. DISTRICT: Dhanbad (Bihar).

AWARD

By Notification No. 2/97/63-LRJI-II, dated 25th June, 1964. the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, referred the following matter -at dispute to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad, for aujudlca- tion:

Matter of Depute

Whether the management of the Madhuband Colliery, Post Office, Nudkhurkee, District Dhanbad, was justified in transferring' Shri Kam- swarup, Miner, from 1/10 pit to 17 seem, vide the managements oriter dated the 7th November 1963, 11 not, to what result is the workmen entitled?

The proceedings remained pending before the Dhanbad Tribunal from 8rd July, 1964 till transferred by Notification No. 8/25/67-LR.II, dated 25th April, 1967.

Neither party filed any statement of claim before the Dhanbad Tribunal or this Tribunal. After issue of notices by this Tribunal, the parties went on tak- ing time to compromise which they have ultimately done today and have tiled a compromise petition, terms of which are reproduced in the annexure. The dispute relates to one workman, Sri Ramswarup, Miner. From the terms of reference it appears that the dispute related to justifiability of the transfer by the management. By the terms of compromise it appears that the management hail agreed to take him back on the original job with continuity .of service which seems to have been broken for non-compliance of the transfer order. The dis- pute is satisfactorily resolved and an award is recorded in terms of compromise.

(Sd.) G. C. AOARWALA,

Presiding Officer. Dated 8th September, 1967.

ANNEXUKE

Before the Presiding Officer.—Central Government Industrial Trlbunal-cum-Labour Court Jabalpur

(Camp at—Dhanbad)

IN THE MATTER OF .REFERENCE NO. CGIT/LC(R) (36) OF 1967

Employers in relation to Madhuband Colliery,

Vs.

Their workmen represented by Hindustan Khan Mazdoor Sangh.

Joint petition on behalf of both the parties:

Both the parties beg to submit as under: —

1. That this case is fixed for hearing for 7th September, 1967.

2. That without prejudice to their respective stands both the parties have amicably settled the matter as follows: —

(a) That the workmen concerned shall be taken back in hia original job of miner with continuity of service provided he reports ior duty within 14 days from the date of the award, positively.

(b) The intervening period will be treated as leave without pay.

(c) That the parties will bear their own costs.

It is therefore prayed that award based on the above settlement may kindly toe given for which the parties as in duty bound, shall ever pray.

Dhanbad:,

Hated 8th September, 1967.

(Sd.) K. C. NANDKIOLYAB,

Dy. Chief Personnel Officer.

M/fi. Karam Chand Thapar & Bros. (P) Ltd.

For the employers.

(Sd.) S. V. ACHAHIOR,

General Secretary, Hindustan Khan Mazdoor Sangh,

For w or km en.

• - Part of Award

(Sd.) G. C. AOARWALA,

Presiding Offlqer.

[No. 2/97/63-LR.II-H.]

New Delhi, the 26th September 1967

S.O. 3549.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14.

of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Industrial Tribunal, Jabalpur, in the industrial dispute between the employers ih relation to the Gararia Colliery of Messrs Gararia Colliery Company (P) Limited, Post Office Bansjora, District Dhanbad and their workmen, which wag received by the Central Government on the 21st September, 1967.

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

Camp at Dhanbad

Dated September 6, 1967

PRESENT:

Shri G. C. Agarwala—Presiding Officer.

REFERENCE NO. 90 OP 1964 (DHANBAD TRIBUNAL)

REFERENCE NO. CG1T/LC(R) (10)/G7 (JABALPUR TRIBUNAL)

PAHTTES:

1. Employers in relation to Gararia Colliery of Messrs Gararia Colliery Co. (P) Ltd., P.O. Bansjora, District Dhanbad (Bihar).

2, M/s. Sendra Bansjora Colliery Co. (P) Ltd.

Vs.

Their workmen represented through (1) Colliery Mazdoor Sangh, Dhanbad and (2) Mine Mazdoor Union, Dhanbad.

APPEARANCES •

For employers—Svi B. P. Dabral, Chief Personal Officer. For workmen—(I¹) Sri S. Das Gupta, Secretary, Colliery Mazdoor Sangh.

(2) Sri Prasant Burman, Vice President, Mine Mazdoor Union.

INDUSTRY: Coal Mine. DISTRICT: Dhanbad (Bihar).

AWARD

The Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, by Notifica- tion No. 2/85/64-LRII, dated 11th August, 1964, referred the following dispute between the Gararia Colliery as employers and the workmen represented by

Colliery Mazdoor Sangh to Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad, under Section 10(1) I.D. Act for adjudication:

Matter of Dispute

Whether the management of the Gararia Colliery was Justified in stopping the workmen In the colliery from work with effect from the 29th May, 1964? If not, to what relief are the workmen entitled?

The proceedings remained pending before the said Tribunal till transferred to this Tribunal by Notification No, 8/25/67-LRII, dated April 25. 1967.

It appears that Gararia Colliery was closed with effect from 28th May, 1964. It, however, did not declare a lock out or a closure. Colliery Mazdoor Sangh raised a dispute about this non-employment of workers of the Colliery in conci- liation which resulted in this reference. Meanwhile, the management of Gararia Colliery by some agreement was taken over by Sendra Bansjora- Colliery. The new management entered into a settlement with the Union on 11th October, 1964, terms of which are reproduced in the annexure "A". This was in Form H Rule B8 of the Industrial Disputes Rules and copies thereof were sent to proper authorities. The parties, however, did not inform the Dhanbad Tribunal abcut this settlement. Another Union, Mine Mazdoor Union, on coming to know of this settlement applied to Dhanbad Tribunal on 7th December, 1964 that they were representatives of the workmen and filed a long list of 115 workmen ia proof of their authorisation. This Union claimed representation. No orders were passed by the Dhanbad Tribunal on this petition. When the matter came up for consideration before me on 25th May, 1967, after issue of usual notices, the representative of Sendra Bansjora Colliery appeared and filed a joint peti- tion that the settlement entered into by Colliery Mazdoor Sangh and both the employers, Gararia Colliery Co. and the new management of Sendra Bansjora Colliery, after amalgamation of the two companies should be accepted. Notice of this fact was sent to Mine Mazdoor Union and after hearing all the parties at length on 19th June, 1967 "at Dhanbad it was directed that the new manage- ment of Sendra Bansjora Colliery Company and the opposing Union, Mine Maz- door Union, shall be made parties and be heard under Section 18(3) I.D. Act. This Union, Mine Mazdoor Union, which had vehemently opposed the settlement intimated before me at the time of hearing on 6th September, 1967 at Dhanbad that they are satisfied with the settlement and will abide by the same. A copy of their petition is annexure "B" to this award. That being so, both the unions now accept the settlement which was arrived at during reference. Strictly speaking, it is not a settlement as defined in Section 2(p) of I.D. Act. It, however, represents fair adjustment of dispute by compromise. In order to judge whether the compromise is really fair for the workmen I required the new management of Sendra Bansjora Co. to file a statement on affidavit showing the entire com- plement of workers both permanent and temporary, who were in the employ- ment of Gararia Colliery at the time of closure and the manner in which each workman has been dealt with either by payment of retrenchment compensation or by re-employment or both. This the management complied with and filed the same. On perusal of this it appears that the workmen) have been fairly treated. Consequently the compromise settlement, dated 11th October >lp

(Sd.) G. C, AOARWALA,

Presiding Officer,

ANNEXXTRE 'A' FORM-H (See Rule—58) Memorandum of Settlement

NAME OF PARTIES:

TlT'Ihri S N Tibrewalla, Managing Director, M/s. Gararia Colliery Co,

Pvt. Ltd.

(2) Shri L J Pathak, Chief Personnel Officer, Sendra Bansjora Colliery

Co. Pvt. Ltd.

(4) Shri B P Dabrol, Group Labour Officer, Sendra Bansjora Colliery Co. Pvt. Ltd,

Representing Workmen:

(1) Shri S. Das Gupta, Secretary, Colliery Mazdoor Sangh. <2) Shri Mahendra Pratap Singh, Secretary, Colliery Mazdoor Sangh Branch, Gararia Colliery.

(3) Shri Mahadeo Singh, Asstt. Secretary, Colliery Mazdoor Sangh, Branch, Gararia Colliery.

Short Recital

Due to economic reasons, Gararia Colliery of M/s. Gararia Colliery Co. (Pri- vate) Ltd,, was in bad shape for quite sometime, leading to the stoppage of production on and from 28th May, 1964. Thereafter, the Colliery remained closed, though some members of the Office Staff and a few others worked, even after 28th May, 1964, on certain days. In the meanwhile, M/s. Gararia Colliery Co. (P) Ltd., negotiated with M/s. Scndra Bansjora Colliery Co. (Private) Ltd., far amalgamation of the former's Gararia Colliery with the latter's Sendra Bansjora Colliery. The negotiations between the two parties have since been finalised and the Collieries have been amalgamated.

One of the terms of the Deed of Amalgamation between the Parties is that M/s. Gararia Colliery Co. Pvt, Ltd. would retrench their staff and workmen excepting those whom M/s. Sendra Bansjora Colliery Company (Pvt,) Ltd., wpuld be in a position to retain at the time of taking over for the purpose of working the amalgamated unit. This term has brought in sharp focus the ques- tion of determination as to who should be retained by M/s, Sendra Bansjora Colliery Co, (P) Ltd., and who should be retrenched and what benefits should be allowed to the retrenches.

The entire situation arising from the above was discussed between the parties on several days and finally on the 11th October, 1964, when the following amic- able settlement was reached.

Terms of Settlement

(1) Agreed that the Gararia Colliery of M/s. Gararia Colliery Co. (Private) Ltd. shall be deemed to have been closed with effect from 1st June, 1064.

(2) Agreed that all the permanent miners and Wagon Loaders be taken over by M/s. Sendra Bansjora Colliery Co. (P) Ltd., in their employment with conti- nuity of service. The period from 1st June, 1964, till 19th October, 1904, shall be treated as leave without pay.

(3) Agreed that in case, any of the permanent trammers are willing to work as Wagon Loaders, they shall also be taken over by M/s. Sendra Bansjora Colliery Co. (P) Ltd. on the same terms as in Clause—2 above.

(4) Agreed that all other workmen shall be deemed to have been retrenched with effect from 1st June, 1964, and shall be paid notice-pay and retrenchment compensation in terms of the proviso to Section 25FFF of the I.D. Act.

(5) Agreed that the monthly paid staff and the daily rated workmen shall be •paid the salary/wages for the month of June 64 on ex-gratia consideration.

(6) Agreed that proportionate bonus for the quarter ended 30th June, 1964, shall be payable to all the workmen on rolls provided that they have put in the proportionate requisite attendances in the said quarter.

(7) Agreed that proportionate Leave Wages would be paid to the retrenched workmen in respect of the service in 1964 in all cases where the requisite pro- portionate qualifying attendances have been put in.

(8) Agreed that in future vacancies, occurring in the amalgamated unit, preference would be given to the persons retrenched.

(9) Agreed that all payments to the workmen in this respect shall be com- pleted by 31st October, 1964, on their handing over the vacant possession of the Company's quarters.

(10) Agreed that the managements shall take immediate steps to get the Coal Mines Provident Fund accumulations refunded to the retrenched workers.

(11) Agreed that besides the retrenchment benefit and other legal dues pay- able to the entitled workers, a sum equivalent to one month's wages shall be paid to each one of the retrenched employees on ex-gratia considerations.

(12) Agreed that all unpaid wages and bonus shall be paid to the workmen on or before 31st October, 1964.

(13) Agreed that Train fare for outward journey shall be paid to all retrench- ed workmen, who may qualify for proportionate leave.

(14) Agreed that all the aforesaid amounts shall be paid by M/s. SendrA Banejora Colliery Co. (P) Ltd., on account of M/s. Gararia Colliery Co. (Pvt.) Ltd.

(15) It is agreed that joint compromise petitions shall be filed by the Parties concerned before the appropriate authorities for dropping proceedings under Sec. 107 Cr. P. C.

(16) It is agreed that a joint settlement in respect of Industrial Disputes re- ferred to the Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad, for adjudication regarding justifi- cation or otherwise "in stopping the workmen in the Colliery from work with effect from 29.5.64" should be filed by parties concerned in terms of this agree- ment.

Representing employers Representing Workmen

Sd/- S. N. TIBRAWALLA, ' Sd/- S. DAS GOTTA,

11-10-84.

n^ ° - 6 4-

Secretary.

Managing Director, ^ + T+^ Colliery Mazdoor Sangh. The Gararia Colliery Co. Pvt. Ltd. Sd/- M. P. SINGH,

Sd/- L. J. PATHAK, 11-10-64.

11-10-64

Chief Personnel Officer, Secretary,

Sendra Bansjora Colliery Co. (P) Ltd.

Sd/- B. P. DABEAI,, C.M.S. Branch, Gararia Colliery.

Sd/- MAHADEO SDJOH,

,, in BA

r"" T"ahour Officer Asstt. Secretary, fendra SjorTColliery. C.M.S., Gararia Branch.

Sd/- Illegible,

11-10-64.

Copj* to.—(1) The Conciliation Officer (C), Dhanbad.

(2) The Regional Labour Commissioner (C), Dhanbad.

(3) The Chief Labour Commissioner (C), New Delhi.

(4) The Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour and Employment.

Sd/- S. DAS GUPTA, Sd/- B. P. DABRAL.

Part of Award

Sd/- G. C. AOABWALA, 0-9-87.

. .. .ANNIXURE 'B'

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT (CENTRAL), JABALPUR

Camp, Jamshedpur

REFERENCE NO. 675-CGIT/LC(R) (19)/67

PABTIKS:

Employers in relation to Gararia Colliery,

AKD Their Workmen.

Petition for withdrawal of objection to settlement, dated 22nd May, 1967, filed by the management and the Colliery Mazdoor Sangh.

This humble petition by the Mine Mazdoor Union, Sijua, hereinafter referred to as the "Union" shows as under:

1. That in response to the direction of the Hon'ble Tribunal, the Union had filed on 5th June, 1F67, their objections to the compromise petition filed by the management and the Colliery Mazdoor Sangh earlier on 22nd May, 1967.

2. That, on spot verification, the Union has since found that the amalgamation of Gararia Colliery with, and administration thereof by, Sendra Bansjora Col- liery is an indisputable fact, and further, the workmen concerned have settled their claims directly with the new management,

3. That, the Union is genuinely satisfied that the workmen concerned in the present Reference have ceased to have any more active interest for pursuing the dispute sponsored by the Union.

4. That under the aforesaid circumstances the Mine Mazdoor Union is no longer interested In pursuing their objections raised in their earlier petition of 5th June, 1967 and. therefore, hereby pray that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to pass such orders as may be deemed proper and necessary for final determination of the present dispute.

For which act of kindnesg the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.

5. The Petitioners further submit that a copy of the present petition has been duly served on the Employers.

For Workmen:

Sd./- FHABANTA BTTKMAN,

Dated, Dhanbad, the 17th August, 1967. 17-B-07.

Vice President,

Mine Mazdoor Union.

Part of Award

Sd/- G. C. AGARWALA, .

Presiding Officer. [No. 2/85/04-LR.II.J

S.O- 3^0.—Tn oursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disoutes Act, 1947 (14 nf 15M7"), the Cpi-itril Government hei-ebv publishes the following award Of the Industrial Tribunal, Jahalnur. in thf industrial d i l u te hetwppn the emnlovers in rpifi+ion +0 thf> Knitore CniHprv (RfineneunfTe Coal Association Limited") Post Office Kusunda Dhanhad and their Contractors Messrs D M. Shukia and Company of the or>p nart and their woT-Vmen of tho other nart, which was received bv the Central Government on the 21 st, Renfemher, 1967.

BEFORE THE CENTRAL CJrwF^TvnvfWT^T n\rrm"sp'TRTAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

Dated September 15, 1967

PRifiFNT:

Sri G. C. Agarwala—Presiding Officer.

RKFFHEWE NO. 48 OF 1QR4 (DHANBAD TnrBUNALi REFERENCE NO- CGIT/LC(R)(12)/67 (JABALPUR TRIBUNAL)

PAKTna:

BETWEEN

Employers In relation to the Kustore Colliery (Raneegunge Coal Associa- tion Limited), Post Office Kusunda, Dhanbad and their contractors Messrs D. M. Shukla and Company of the one part and their work- men, on the other part, through Bihar Koyla Mazdoor Sabha, Dhanbad (Bihar).

APPIAHANCM :

For employers—1. Shrl S. N. Basu, Chief Personnel Officer, Kustore Colliery.

2. Shri Harsadray Shukla, M/s. D. M. Shukla & Co.

For workmen—Shri Lalit Burman, Secretary, Bihar Koyla Mazdoor Sabha, Dhanbad.

INDUSTRY: Coal Mine. DISTRICT: Dhanbad (Bihar).

AWARD

By Notification No. 2/1/64-LR.II, dated May 5, 1964, the Ministry of Labour and Employment. Government of India, referred the following matter of dispute to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad:—

Matter of Dispute

Whether the action of the management of Kustore Colliery (Raneegunge Coal Association Limited) and their contractors Messrs D, M. Shukla and Company In refusing employment to the following 12 Hard Coke workers was justified? If not, to what relief are" the workmen entitled?

Name

1. Balgobind Kumhar. 2. Dhaneswar Singh. 3. Ainu Mia. 4. Paban Rajwar. 5. Jhupni Kamin. 6. Fulmani Rajwarin. 7. Makhni Rajwarin. 8. Janki Rajwarin. 9. Rabni Rajwarin. 10. Kusumi Rajwarin. 11. Bhimla Rajwarin. 12. Beli Rajwarin.

The proceedings remained pending before the said Tribunal from 11th May, 1964 till transferred to this Tribunal by Notification No. 8/25/67-LRII, dated April 25, 1967.

The parties filed their statements of claim before the Dhanbad Tribunal. After issue of usual notices, the parties took time to file rejoinders and have ultimately compromised the dispute, terms of which are reproduced in the annexure.

The dispute relates to the non-employment of 12 workmen and aa the terms of compromise would show, eight have already settled their dispute with the management For the remaining four, the management has agreed to make cer- tain payments in full and final settlement of their claims. . The Union has, there- fore not pressed the dispute. The compromise has been duly verified before the Regional Labour Commissioner, Dhanbad. It is a just and fair settlement of the dispute and an award is recorded In termn thereof.

S&/-G. C. AGAHWALA,

Presiding Officer,

15-9-67.

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT (CENTRAL), JABALFUR

REFERENCE NO. CGIT/LC (R)/12/67

PARTIES:

Employers in relation tg Kustore Colliery (Messrs. Raneegunge Coal Asso- ciation Ltd.), P.O. Kusunda, Dt. Dhanbad and their Contractors M/s. D. M. Shukla & Co. on the one part.

AND

Their Workmen on the other part—represented by the Bihar Koyla Mazdoor Sabha.

Petition of Compromise

This humble petition on behalf of the parties above-named beg to submit:—

1. That the industrial dispute in respect of the 12 workmen—

(1) Balgobind Kumhar (2) Dhaneswar Singh (3) Ainu Miah (4) Paban Rajwar (5) Jhupni Kamin (6) Fulmoni Rajowarin (7) Rabni Rajo- warin (8) Kusml Rajowarin (9) Bhimla Rajpwarin (10) Bell Rajo- warin (11) Makhni Rajowarin (12) Janki Rajowarin has been pend- ing before the Hon'ble Tribunal.

2. That during the pendency of the above reference the following workmen concerned have settled their cases with the management directly, having received full and final payment, and have submitted applications individually to the Hon'ble Tribunal—

(i) Paban Rajowar (il) Fulmoni Rajowarin (iii) Makhni Rajowarin (iv) Janki Rajowarin (v) Rabni Rajowarin (vi) Kii3mi Rajowarin (vii) Bhimla Rajowarin (viii) Beli Rajowarin,

3. That in view of the above fact the workmen and the Union agree not to agitate over the claims of the above-named workmen.

4. That in respect of the rest of the four workmen concerried, the parties, without prejudice to their respective submissions before Hon'ble Tribunal, agree to settle the disputes on the following terms and conditions:

Terms of Settlement

(a) That the employers (The Contractors) agree to make payment of the amounts to the workmen concerned as shown against the name of each below:—

Name

Amount

Dhaneawar Singh

R9, 900,00 (Rupees nine hundred)

CO

BaJgobind Kumhar

Ra. 600.00 (Rupees six hundred)

Oi)

(iii) Ainu Miah

Rs. 600 00 (Rupees six hundred)

(iv) Jhupni Kamin

Rs. 450.00 (Rupees four hundred & fifty only)

in full and final settlement of all their claims.

(b) That the workmen shall have no other claim on the company or the

contractor after the above payments are made to them.

(c) That the management agrees to make payment of the agreed amount as noted above to the workmen concerned within a week from the date of this settlement.

5. That the parties humbly pray that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to hold the above terms of settlement as fair and reasonable, nnd may be pleased to pass an award accordingly.

And for this the petitioners shall pray.

Date 23rd August, 1967. For the Workmen: For M/s. D. M. Shukla & Co. Sd/- Illegible.

Sd^- HARSADRAY SHUKLA,

23-8-67. Main Road, Jharia, Dhanbad. 3d/- LALIT BUHMAN, For the Management, Kustore Colliery- (Raneegunge Coal Association Ltd-) Secretary,

23-8-67.

Sd/- S. N. BABU,

Bihar Koyla Mazdoor Sabha, Dhanbad. Chief Personnel Officer. Witness:

(Sd.) G. C. AGQAHWALA.

(Sd-) Illegible. Part of Award

Presiding Officer, [No. 2/1/64-LRIL] SO. 3551.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the. following award of the Industrial Tribunal Calcutta, In the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Nag's Kajora Jambad Colliery, Post Office Ukhra, District Burdwan and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 21st September, 1967. BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, CALCUTTA

REFERENCE NO. 23 OF 1967.

PARTIES :

Employers in relation to the Nag's Kajora Jambad Colliery,

AND

Their Workmen.

PRESENT :

Shrl S. K. Sen Presiding Officer

APPEARANCES: On behalf of the Employers: Shri K- P- Mukherjee, Advocate. On behalf of the Workmen: Shrl S- N. Banerjee, Advocate. STATE- West Bengal.

INDUSTRY: Coal Min*

AWARD By Order No. 6/18/67-LRII dated 3rd March 1967, the Central Government referred for adjudication an industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Nag's Kajora Jambad Colliery, P. O. Ukhra, Dist. Burdwan and their work- men in respect of the matters specified in the following schedule:

"Whether the retrenchment of the following workers by the management of Nag's Kaiora Jambad Colliery with effect from the 14th January, 1967 is justified?

1. Shri Sriekbal Pandey, Peon 2. Shri Kallo Saikc, Peon 3. Shri Rajeshwar Tiwari, Peon 4. Shri Sant Ram, Loader 5. Shri Mukhlal Singh, Loader 6. Shrl Rambali Singh, Loader 7- Shri Deokaran Ahir, Loader- 8. Shri Karmu Sahis, Loader 9. Shri Manu Lai Passy, Loader

10. Shri Duioy Ram, Loader 11. Shri Rambagas, Loader 12. Shri Sudha Ram. Loader 13. Shri Sandeo Raibhar, Loader 14. Shri Mihesh Yndav, Loader 15. Shri Jakhu Yadav, Loader

If not, to what relief are they entitled?

2. According to the management, on account of shortage of working faces they decided to retrench 12 out of 140 loaders, and In order to effect some economy as colliery was running at a loss, decided to reduce the staff of peons and night guards by 3; accordingly the management issued notices of retrenchment on 15th December, 1966 informing the 3 peons or night guards and the 12 loaders that they would be retrenched with effect from 14th January 1967. In the notice It "was stated that retrenchment compensation would be paid by the 14th January 1S67 and that the workmen might collect their other dues between 14th January and 20th January, 1967. Seven of the workmen accepted the retrenchment com- pensation but the remaining workmen refused and to them the retrenchment com- pensation was sent by money order but the same generally came back undelivered The management however took at all the necessary steps required under Sec. 25F o| the Industrial Disputes Act in connection with retrenchment.

3. The workmen were at first represented by the Asansol Coal Field Workers* Union, which tried to obtain relief for workmen before the Conciliation Officer and which also filed a written statement after the case had been referred to adjudica- tion. Subsequently the workmen filed a petition on 30th May 1967, that they had given up membership of the Asansol Coal Field Workers' Union and had joined the Colliery Mazdoor Congress, HMS, and wanted to be represented by Siiri Joyanta Poddar of the Colliery Mazdoor Congress, HMS, and Shri S. N. Banerjee, Advocate. A fresh written statement was also filed by Joyanta Poddar as Assistant Secretary of the Colliery Mazdoor Congress, HMS, on behalf of the •workmen on the same date. This representation and the fresh written statement were accepted. The main point taken in the written statement on behalf of the workmen is that the 15 workmen served with retrenchment notice were permanent workmen and the company had a number of temporary workmen and if the com- pany really wanted to reduce the number of workmen they might have discharged some of the temporary workmen and not retrenched the permanent workmen.

4. It should be mentioned that before the affidavit in support of the fresh representation and the written statement by the Assistant Secretary of the Colliery Mazdoor Congress, HMS, were filed, 12 of the IB workmen concerned had been given temporary employment as trammers at the colliery. The settlement in this respect took place before the Conciliation Officer on 27th April, 1967. Before that there was trouble for about 5 days at the colliery. It was stated by Shri K. P. Mukherjee, Advocate appearing on behalf of the management that the settlement was the result of a 'Gherao' staged by the workmen as the result of which the then manager sent in his resignation. One of the witnesses examined for the workmen, namely Shri Ram Naresh Singh, denied that there was any "gherao' but he admitted that there was stoppage of work at the colliery for 3 days and that the manager had gone away and sent in his resignation at that time.

6. The case was heard on a contested basis on 25th July 1967 and was adjourn- ed to 16th September 1967 for further hearing. On 16th September 1967 the parties slated that the matter had been settled out of court and filed a joint petition embodying the terms of settlement. According to the terms of settlement, such of the retrenched workmen as are working at the colliery (as the result of the settlement of 27th April 1967) will continue to work in their present io¹^ and will be absorbed in their old categories if and wheji there are vacancies in those cate- gories and their period of non-employment will be treated as lenve without pay: the retrenched workmen who have not yet been employed at the colliery will be given notice by the management to report, and join and If thev fail to report within 2 weeks the management would not be bound to provide them wHh any emnloyment: those who accepted the retrenchment convoensation will refund the same in instalments, and the management shall nav a lumo sum of Rs. 500/- to the union. The terms are favourable to the workmen and are accepted.

An award is therefore made in terms of the petition of settlement a copy of which shall form part of the award.

Dated 16th September 1967.

(Sd.) S- K. S*w,

Presiding Officer.

The following settlement arrived at between the management of Nag's Kajora Jambad Colliery, P. O. Ukhra (Burdwan) and Colliery Mazdoor Congress (HMS), Bengal Hotel, Asansol.

1. That as regards the workmen whose cases are pending before the Hon'bl*? Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal Calcutta, Reference No. 23 of 1966—the parties agree that the matter Is amicably settled on the following terms:—

(a) That the Management of Nag's Kajora Jambad Colliery agrees to re- instate the workers under reference No. 23 of 1966 in their present job in which they are working with effect from 11th September 1907 and the period of idleness shall be treated as leave without pay, and they will bo absorbed in their old categories, if there be vacancy in the categories.

(b) That the parties agree that those retrenched workers who fail to report within two weeks will not be provided with any employment, after issue of due notice to such workers by the management at their res- pective home address.

(c) That those who accepted the retrenchment compensation shall refund

the amount in instalments.

(d) That the parties agree to submit joint petition before the Hon'ble Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta for a 'No Dispute' award in view of the present settlement,

(e) That the management agrees to pay a lump sum amount of Rs. 500/- (Rupees Five Hundred only) towards the expenses of the above Tribunal case to the union.

(Sd.) Illegible, TSd/- JAYANTA PODDAR 8/9/67. Representative of the Union Representative of the Colliery Mazdoor Congress (HMS) Management, Bengal Hotel, Asansol Nag's Kajora Jambad Colliery P. O. Ukhra (Burdwan).

Sd/- Illegible. Sd/- Illegible.

Sd/- N. C. Mukherjee

Dated 8th September 1967.

[No. 6/18/67-LR1L]

ORDERS

New Delhi, the 25th, September 1967

S.O. 3552.—Whereas .the Central Government is of opinion that an industrial dispute exists between the employers In relation to the Umaria Colliery of Rewa Coalfields Limited Post Office Dhansar, District Shahdol and their workmen In respect of the matters specified in the Schedule hereto annexed;

And, whereas tho Central Government considers It desirable to refer the said dispute for adjudication;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the* powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby refers the said dispute for adjudication to the Indu3trial Tribunal, Jabalpur, constituted under section 7A of the said Act.

THE SCHEDULE

Whether the Intended closure of one shift of Umaria Colliery with effect from 1st August 1967 by the management of Umaria Colliery of Messrs- Rewa Coal Fields Limited, PDst Office Dhanpuri, and asking the workers to opt for pension ol gratuity and also proposing transfer of surplus workers from Umaria Colliery to other collieries without following the precedures as laid down in Chapter VA of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is justified; if not to what relief are the workmen entitled?

[No. 5/31/67-LRIL]

S.O. 3553.—Whereas the Central Government is of opinion that an Indus- trial dispute exists between the employers in relation to the management of Bararee Colliery Nc|.5 Pit of Messrs East India Coal Company Limited, Post Office Jefclgora (Dhanbad) and their raising Contractors Messrs G- S Atwal and Com- pany (Asansol), G> T. Road, Asansol on the one part and their workmen cf the other part in respect of the matters specified in the Schedule hereto annexed;

And whereas the Central Government considers it desirable to refer the said dispute for adjudication;

Now, therefore, in exercise oi the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section (1) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby refers the said dispute for adjudication to the Addi- tional Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad, constituted under section 7-A of the said Act-

THE SCHEDULE

Whether the action of the management oi Bararee Colliery No- 5 Pit of Messrs East Indian Coal Company Limited, Post Office Jealji'ora and their Contractors Messrs G. S. Atwal anrl Company (.Asansol), Post Office Asansol in suspending the work of the said Colliery with effect fiom the 1st December, 196G and laying-off of the workmen was justified? Til not, to what relief, are tlie workmen entitled?

[No-2/ti2/G7-LR.lI]

BALWANT SINGH, Under Secy.

(Department of Labour and Employment)

New Delhi, the 25th September 1967

S-O. 3554.—In exercise of the powers confersed by the fourth proviso to clause (h) of Sub-section (5) of Section 8 of the Personal Injuries (Compensation Insurance) Act. 1963 (37 of 1963), read with sub-clause (2) oi Clausu 8 of the Personal Injuries (Compensation Insurance) Scheme, 1965, the Central Govern- ment hereby directs that the amount of the advance premium payable In respect of the quarter ending 31st December, 1967, shall—

(1) in the case of a person having a policy in force on the 30th Septem- ber 1067 be 'Nil' and

(2) in the case of a person who is required to take out a policy of insurance for the first time on the basis of his having been an employer for the complete quarter ending the 30th September 1967, be five paise per one hundred rupees of the wages bill for the quarter ending the 30th September, 1967-

[No- 2/2/fi7-Spl. Fac-IL]

P. SADAGOPAN, Dy- Secy.

(Department of Labour and Employment)

New Delhi, the 25th. September 1967

S O 35155.—Whereas the Central Government )s satisfied that the Government Press Aurangabad owned by the State Government of Maharashtra, is situated in an' area where the provisions of Chapter V of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1S48) have not been enforced;

And, whereas the said factory is both non-commercial and non-competitive in

nature;

Now therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 73F of the Hrrroloyees¹ State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948), the Central Government hereby •exempts the said factory from the payment of the employer's special contribu- 'tion leviable under Chapter VA of the said Act, until the enforcement of the provisions of Chapter V of the said Act, in the said area.

[No. F.6(2")/67-HI.I

S,O. 3556-—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 73F of the Employee* State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948), the Central Government, having regard to the location of the factories mentioned in Column 4 of the schedule appended below in sparse areas specified in the corresponding entry in Column 3 of th* said schedule, In the State of Andhra Pradesh, hereby exempts them from the payment of the employer's special contribution leviable under Chapter VA of the said Act, until the enforcement of the provisions of Chapter V of the said Act in tile said areas.

SCHEDULE

S. No.

Name of the District

Nqme of Area

Name of Factory '

2

4

3

X

1

East Godavarl Samalkot

I.

M/". The Andhra Brick and Tile m"n*' factoring Co. Cooperative Society Ltd.

2. Guntur

Lingamguntla (Via Narasaraopet)

P.W.D. Nagar ]unaa"gar Canals Workshops.

Vepagunta

Visakhapatnam

3-

Upper Silcru

Meters, relays testing and special maiirte' nance sub-diviaion (Simhachelam) Executive Engineer, P.W.D. Pensiock F"- brication and Ejection Division.

Aklvidu

West Godavari

M/s. Srce Ramakrishna Engineering Co. 4-

[No. F. 6(21)/67-HI.l

S.O, 3551 .•—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 73F of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948), the Central Government, having regard to the location of the factory namely, the Government Press at Bhavnagar, belong- ing to the State Government of Gujarat In an implemented area, hereby exempts the said factory from the payment of employer's special contribution leviable under Chapter VA of the said Act, for a period of one year with effect from the date of publication of this notification in the Official Gazette.

[No. F.6(51)/67-HZ]

S.O- 3558-—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that the employer,, and the majority of the employees in relation to the establishment known as Messrs J. B, Mody & Brothers, 121-Fort Street, Bombay-1, have agreed that the provisions of the Employees Provident Funds Act, 1952 (19 of 1952), should be made applicable to the said establishment;

Now, therefore, -in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of section 1 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby applies the provisions of the said Act to the said establishment.

This notification shall be deemed to have come into force on the 1st day of April, 1966.

[No. 8/42/67/PF-IL]

S.O. 3559.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that the employer and the majority of the employees in relation to the establishment known "j Messrs. New York Times, New Delhi Bureau, IENS Building, Ran Mar#, New- Delhi, have agreed that the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952 (19 of 1B52), should be made applicable to the said establishment;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of section 1 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby applies the provisions of the snid Act to the said establishment;

This notification shall be deemed to have come into force on the 1st November 1966.

[No. 8/8/67/PF-II.]

New Delhi, the 26th. September J.967

S-0. 3560—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 73-F of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948), the Central Government havlnff regard to the location of the factories specified in the schedule hereto annexed in a sparse area in the State of West Bengal, hereby exempts the said factorlei from the payment of the employer's special contribution leviable under Chapter VA of the said Act until the enforcement of the provisions of Chapter V of that Act in that area.

THE SCHEDULE

S. No.

Name of the District

Name of Area

Name of Factory

1.

Jalpatguri

Damanpur

(i) M/s. Manindra Nath Da"

Saw Mill

(ii) M/s. Dan Saw Mill.

[No. F. 6(31)/67-HI.]

S.O- 3561-—Whereas the Central Government has in pursuance of clause (f) of section 4 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948), nominated Shri R. N. Joahi, Senior Executive, Kohinoor Mills Company Limited, Bombay, to be a member on the Employees' State Insurance Corporation, in place of Shri Basudev Somani;

Now, therefore, in pursuance of section 4 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, K48 (34 of 1948), the Central Government hereby makes the following further amendment in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Rehabilitation (Department of Labour and Employ- ment) No. S.O. 2551, dated the 9th August, 1966, namely:—

In the said notification, under the heading "Members", under the sub-heading "(Nominated by the Central Government under clause (f) of section 4 in con- sultation with Organisations of employers recognised by the Central Government for the purpose)", for the entry against item, 23, the following entry shall be substituted, namely:—

"Shri R. N. Joshi, Senior Executive, Kohinoor Mills Company Limited, Killick House, Home Street, Forl, Bombay-1".

[No. F. 3/18/66/HL]

S.O 3562.—In exercise of the! power^ conferred by section 73-F of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948), the Central Government hereby makes the following further amendments in the notification of the Gov- ernment of India in the Ministry of Labour and Employment No. S.O. 137, dated the 9th January, 1962, namely:—

In the schedule to the said notification, (i) against serial No. 9 the entry "Veraval" in column 3 and the following entries in column 4, namely,

"1. Government Press House.

2. Western India Bone Mills and Manure Works. 3. Mathuradas Jadhavjl and Co. 4. Sonecha Oil Mills P. Ltd. 5. Veraval Oil Cake Co. 6. M/s. Islam Coltnn Pressing and Oil Mill. 7. Nutan Industry Works. 8. Sarvodaya Oil Mill. 9. Jay Hind Oil Mill."

shall be omitted;

(ii) against serial No. 17, the entry "Limbdi" in column 3 and ihe following entries in column 4, namely:—

"1. Trambaklal Manilal Shah Button factory.

2. Durgha Wood Works. 3. Saurashtra Cooperative Spinning Mills Ltd."

shall be omitted.

[No, F. 6(46)/67-HI.]