Subject NOT available

click here for IIIF manifest

REGISTERED NO. D. 222

The Gazette of India

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

NO. 42] NEW DELH1, SATURDAY, OCTOBER 21,1967/ASVINA 29, 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 ; October,

Subject

Issued by

Issue N o. and Date

Ministry of Finance,

S. 0. 3493, Dated 30th

September, 1967.

Authorising Shri R, B. Majumdar to exercise the powers of a Tax Recovery Officer in respect of certain areas in the State of West Bengal mentioned therein.

Do.

S. 0. 3494, dated 30th September, 1967.

Authorising Shri S. C. Banerjee to exer-- cise the powers of a Tax Recovery Officer in respect of certain areas in the State of West Bengal mentioned there

in.

Do.

S. O. 3495, dated 30th September, 1967.

Authorising Shri G. C. Som to exercise the powers of a Tax Recovery Officer in respect of certain areas in the State of West Bengal mentione therein.

Do.

S, O. 3496, dated 30th

September, 1967.

Appointing the Commissioner of Income- Tax, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, to be a Tax Recovery Commissionen..

Do.

S. O. 3497, dated 30th

September, 1967.

Authorising Shri P. Sreerama Murthy , to exercise the powers of a Tax Re- covery Officer in respect of districts in the State of Andhra Pradesh men- tioned therein.

(3879)

>y Subject

Issued t

No. and Di'C

No.

Ministry of Finance

S. O. 349S, dated 30th

September, 1967.

Authorising L$hri G- Suhrahmanyam to exercise the powers of a Tax Recovery Officer in respect of districts in the State of Andhra Pradesh mentioned therein.

Do.

S. 0.1499, dated 30th

September, 1967,

Amendment in the notification No. I<> (F. No. 16/14/66-ITBl, dated 25th August, 1967.

Do.

S. O. 3500, dated 30th September, 1967.

Amendment in the notification No. 64 (F. No. T6/14/66-ITB), dated 35th July, 1967.

S. O. 3501, dated 30th"] Central Hoard of Direct Taxes,

September, 1967.

Directing the Commissioic" of In~o*ne-tax, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, who is appointed as Tax Recovery Commi- ssioner shill perform th" funoiions of the Tax Rc-ov;ry Cimnl as- >ner in respect of districts in the Sl"tt of Andhra Pradesh mentioned therein.

Do."]

S. O. 3502, dated 30th

September, 1967.

Amendment in the notification No. 63 (F. No. 16/14/66-TTB), dated 25th July, 1967.

Ministry of Home

469

Affairs.

S. O. 3503, dated, 30th September, 1967. ZM

Specifying that with effect on and from the 1st October, 1967, no power con- ft'red or no duty imposed on the State Government by any provision of the Defence of India Rules, 1962 shall be exercised or discharged by any State Government other than the State Governments mentioned therein ex- cept with the previous approval of the Centril Government.

D o.

S. 0. 3504, dated 30th

September, 1967.

Direction that with effect on and from the 1st October, 1967, no action in relation to any alleged contravention of any of the provision* of the Defence of India Rules, 1962 or of any order made under any such provision, nhall be taken in any State or Union Territory not beinR the State of Assam (includ- ing N.E.F.A.), Jammu and Kashmir or Nagaland or the Union Territory of Manipur or Tripura by the State Government concerned or any officer or authority subordinate to the S'ate Government except with the previous sanction of the Central Government.

Do.)

S. O. 3505, dated f 30th September, 1967.-

Direction that no action taken or thiag done under any of the provisions of the Defence of India Rules, 1962 before the 1st October, 1967, by any State Government, other than the State Governments of Assam, Jammu and Kahsmir, Nagaland, Manipur tad Tripura, shall be continued except in accordance with such instructioni as the Central Government may gir# to the State Government concerned m this behalf.

Subject

No. and Date

Issued bv

Issue No.

S. O. 3506, dated I5t Ministry of Irrigation

and Power.

October, 7967.

Constituting the Bhakra Management Bourd according to the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966.

Do.

S. 0. 3507, dated m

October, 1967.

Constituting the Beaa Constructio* Board in consul¹ ation with the Go- vernments of the successor States and the State of Rajasthan.

Further amendment to the Export* S. O. 3592, Dated 3rd Ministry of Comm-

471

erce.

(Control) Order, 1961.

October, 1967.

Orders made by the State Governments.

472 S. O. 3593, dated 3rd

Do.

October, 1967.

Quality Control and pre-shipment ins-

Do.

S. 0.3594, dated 3rd

473

pection of human hair.

October, 1967.

S. 0. 3595, dated 3rd

47+

October, 1967.

Ministry of Labour, Employment and Rehabilitation.

Prohibit on of the continuance of a Strike in existence in connection with an industrial dispute betweeM Messrs, New Harbour Launch Service Private Limited, Bombay and their Workmen.

Do.

S. 0.3596, dated 3rd

October, 1967.

Referring the above dispute for adjudica- tion to the Industrial Tribunal Jabal- pur.

S. O. 3597, dated 4th Ministry of Com- Further amendment to the Exports 475'

October, 1967.

merce.

(Control) Order, 1962.

S. 0. 3593, dated 4A

476

Approval of the films as specified October, 1967.

Ministry of Informa- tion and Broad- therein.

casting.

'JS. O. 3599, datei 5th Ministry of Com-

477 .

October, 1967.

merce.

Direction that the East India Jute and Hessian Exchange Limitedj Calcutta to suspend entering into forward contracts in Jute Goods, other than(i) transferable specific delivery contracts and (ii) non-transferable specific deli- very contracts for a further period of seven days with effect on and from the 6th October, 1967,

S, 0. 3600, dated 5 th

Do.

478

October, 1967,

Granting recognition to the Jalna Mer- chants Association Ltd., Raiender Prasad Road, Jalna for a further period of three years from the 10th October, 1967 to the 9th October, 1970 in res- pect of forward contracts in Cottonseed*

Copies of the Gazettes Extraordinary mentioned above will be supplied OM. 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-

ment of India (other than the Ministry of Defence) nnd by Central

Authorities (other than the Administration of Union Territories )

ELECTION COMMISSION, INDIA

New Delhi, the 5th October 1967

S.O. 3696.-—In pursuance of section 306 of the Representation of the People Act, 19(51, the Election Commission hereby publishes the Order, pronounced on the 31st July, 1907 by the High Court for the States of Punjab and Hanyana at Chandigarh in Election Petition No. 2 of 1987.

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND IIARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Election Petition Side

ELECTION PETITION NO, 2 OF 1967

S, Kapur Singh, Agwar Khwaja Baju, Jagraon, District Ludhiana—Petitioner..

Versus. 1. S- Devinder Singh Garcha, Advocate, President Zila Prashld, Ludhiana, 2. S. Mohinder Singh M/s. Guru Nanak Oil Mills, Khanna, District Ludhiana-^ Respondenta.

Petition under section 80, Representation of People Act, 1951 praying that the election of the respondent to the Lok Sabha, during the General Elections of 10GT, be declared as void, under section IQO of the Represntation of the Peoples Act, 1051 on the grounds given in the Election Petition.

Dated the 31st July, 1967

PRESENT:

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

For the Petitioner.—-Mr. B. S. Chaw⁷a, Advocate. For the Respondents.—Mr. S. S, Kang, Advocate with Mr. Bhupinder Singh Blndra, Advocate.

ORDER

The Petitioner contested the election held in February 1367 to the Lok Sabha from the Ludhiana Parliamentary Constituency. He belonged to the Akali Dal-— Master Tara Singh Group (Master Group). Respondent No, 1, the returned candi- date, belonged to the Congress party. He polled 1,32,660 votes whereas the peti- tioner polled only about 28,000 votes and even lost his security deposit. Respon- dent No. 2 was also a candidate of the Akali Dal but he beloged to Sant Fateh Singh Group (Sant Group). He polled a£out 1,19,000 votes- The other contestants and the number of votes polled by them as also the parties to which they belonged are set out below:—

*(1) Shri Suresh Kumar (Jan Sangh) about 63,000. (2) Shri Balwant Singh (Republican) about 8,000. (3) Shri Babu Ram Shan (Hindu Maha Sabha) about 8,000. (4) Shri Hans Raj (Scheduled Caste Federation) about 6,000.

It may be mentioned that the Ludhiana Parliamentary Constituency comprises eight assembly- Constituencies, viz., Ludhiana North, Ludhiana South, Kum Kalan, Kllla Raipur, Jagraon, Rai Kot, Payal and Dakha.

The allegations in the petition briefly were that the scrutiny of the nomination papers of all the candidates was held in the Court room of the District Magistrate by the District Returning Officer, Shri B. S. Randhawa, on 23rd January, 1967 at 11 a.m. The petitioner raised an objection against acceptance of the nomination papers of respondent No. 2 on the ground that he had made an oath in the name of God as also subscribed to a solemn affirmation which was done simultaneously and this was in contravention of the requirements of Article 84 of the Constitu- tion. The Returning Officer heard arguments of both sides and pointed out that the said defect was to be found in other nomination papers also and, therefore, he would defer giving a decision till he had concluded scrutiny of the other nomi- nation papers which did not suffer from that defect. After accepting such nomi- nation papers not havin-g the aforesaid infirmity including that of the petitioner the Returning Officer ordered an adjournment of the proceedings till 2 p.m. on the same day. At 2.10 p-m., he heard further arguments but he pulled out a paper which had already been typed from his file and read it out accepting the nomina- tion papers of respondent No. 2. He also proceeded to accept the nomination papers of others which had not been accepted earlier. The correctness and lega- lity of the order of the Returning Officer accepting the nomination papers of res- pondent No- 2 (copy of which was attached as Annexure "A") were assailed on the ground that the requirements of Article 84 were mandatory and tha taking of an oath and subscribing to a solemn affirmation constituted a contravention thereof and that reliance on paragraph 7(7) of Chapter II of Hand-Book for Returning Officers (General Elections 19671 by the Returning Officer was wholly unjustified and was not permissible. It was next alleged that respondent No. 2 was a candi- date up by the Group with the election symbol of the "scales" in contradiction to the old election symbol of the Shirumani Akali Dal, the "Hand", which symbol had been allotted to the Group from which the petitioner stood ,para. 11 of the petition). According to the Petitioner, he and respondent No. 2 were panthi candidates and then combined votes come to 1,47,024 and although they fought under different symbols, it followed that if the nomination papers of respondent No. 2 had not been wrongly and illegally accepted, the petitioner as the only candidate of the Shiromani Akali Dal would have secured all the votes actually cast for the Dal and he would have won the election- It showed that the result of the election in so far as it concerned the returned candidate had been materially affected by the improper acceptance of the nomination papers of respondent No- 2. The specific grounds for getting the election of respondent No. 1 declared void were contravention of Article 84 of the Constitution and infringement of the pro- visions of section 36(5) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 in the matter of acceptance of the nomination papers of respondent No. 2 as also reliance by the Returning Officer on paragraph 7(7) of Chapter II of the Hc,nd-Book for Returning Officers which was described as altogether irrelevant and inapplicable.

Respondent No- 1 filed a written statement in which certain preliminary objec- tions were raised_ but which need not be mentioned. It was admitted that the petitioner had raised an objection to the acceptance of the :. •:••;•::.l::, • •.::;!•••• of respondent No. 2 but it was averred that the decision given bj .[•<• '.{ ••.•• !:i.- O "<•>>•• was perfectly valid and legal. According to the answering"."-i: " . .', S"• I:•-;• r-.-sn 1 Akali Dal, wh;---> is ,-> ^cogni^d —o;iJi._—>i nncty, had two groups, one headed by Master Tara Singh and the other by Sant Fateh Singh but a strong political ani- mosity subsisted between the two groups. Th>: Master Group was given the symbol of "human hand" whereas the Saa+ Groiro was allotted the symbol of "scales". In all predominantly Sikh Constituencies each of these Groups had set up candidates for election. In some of tne Cfnf-'utuencies it so htnjper,3d that the Master Group had set up a candidate but tlm Sant Group had not, and in that case the Sant Group entered into an alliance with some other party to defeat the nominee of the Master Group. Similarly, where ih" Sant Group had set up a candidate and the Master Group had not. the Hitter •••itered into an alliance with some other party to defeat the candidate of the Sant Group. The Master Group had put up their candidates in all the ei"ht Apsemb'v Constituencies within the Ludhiana Parliamentary Constituency while the S:nt Croup had sponsored their candidates in six constituencies excluding Ludhiana North and Ludhiana South. In Ludhiana South the Sant Grouo .was¹ purporting Shri Bhajan Singh, a candidate of the Communist Party, and in Ludhiana N0HI1 the Sant Group was supporting a candi- date other than the candidate of the Mr.Fter Group. Before the elections, six poli- tical parties, i.e.. the Snnt Grouo. Communist Party of India (Marxist). Communist Party of India, P S P.. S.S.P. and the Republican Party of India had formed on elec- toral alliance and jointly suopovted the candidate or candidates sponsored by these parties. Shri Arjan Singh had been put up as a candidate by the Republican Partv for the Ludhiana Parliamentary Constituency as also Shri Narjan Sinp.h and, Balwant Singh. The first two withdrew after the nomination papers of respondent No. 2 had been accepted. Shri Balwant Singh did not withdraw. Tt was denied that the petitioner was entitled to combine the votes secured by himself and by

respondent No. 2. It was further claimed that respondent No, 2 had secured the- number of votes which he did, not only because he was the nominee o£ the Sant Group but also for many other reasons, viz.. personal popularity, his influence with the voters, and the help which the workers of the Sant Group gave to him, etc- The petitioner who was a sitting member of Lhe Lok S&bha from the Cons- tituency in question got very small number of votes which showed that he was not popular in the Constituency. If respondent No. 2 had not contested, the probability was that the votes which some members o£ the electorate might have cast for the Sant Group would not have been polled for the petitioner who was the nominee of the Master Group because of the political animosity which existed in an extreme measure between these two Groups. It was, therefore, not possible to surmise how many votes would have been polled by the petitioner if respondent No. 2 had not been allowed to contest the elctlon.

The following issues were framed on 8(h May 19<37:—

1, Whether the nomination papers of respondent No, 2 had

been improperly accepted by the Returning Officer?

2. Whether the adjournment of the proceedings by the Returning Officer as alleged in paragraphs 6 to 8 rendered the proceedings illegal and void? If so, what is the effect?

3. If issue No. 1 is decided in favour of the petitioner, whether the result of the election has been materially affected so far as the returned candidate is concerned?

4, Relief,

The counsel for the petitioner did nut produce sny evidence with the exception of getting the records kept in lhe office of the Returning Officer, Ludhiana, for the Ludhiana Parliamentary Constituency in rcsoect of the nomination papers filed by respondent No- 2 produced which wa3 done by Shxi Narinder Singh, Election-Naib- Tehsildar, Ludhiana, on 12th July 1967 when he happened to be present In Court- Respondent No. 1 made his own statement and did not produce any other evidence

On the first issue, reference has been made by Mr- Chawla to clause (a) of Article 84 of the Constitution- It provides that a person shall not be qualified to be chosen to fill a seat in Parliament unless he is a citizen of India, and makes and subscribes before some person authorised in that behalf by the ElectJon Com- mission an oath or affirmation according to the foim set out for the purpose in the Third Schedule which is as follows:—

"I, A.B., having been nominated as a candidate to fill a seat In the Council of States (o the House of the People) do Swrar in the name of God/Solemnly affirm that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India as by law established and that I will uphold the sovereignty- and integrity of India,"

Clause (a) was substituted for the previous one by the Constitution (Sixteenth Amendment) Act, 1963. In the statement of objects and reasons by which Bill No- I of 1QG3 was introduced in Lok Sabha on iilst January. 19

"I, Mohinder Singh, hpvlnc! been nominated as a candidate to fill a seaf in the Lok Sabha/Puniab Vidhan Sabha do Swear in the name of God/ solemnly affirm that I will V>f"ar true Cuith and allegiance to the Constitu- tion of India as by lav/ established and thai I will uphold the sovereignly and Integrity of India."

The Assistant Returning Officer, Ludhiam. made an endorsement-

"Oath taken and sijmed in my presence today."

It is apparent that respondent No- 2 did not even delete the words 'Punjab Vidhan Sabha" from the typed fo'-m which It was necessary for him to do since he had been nominated as a candidate for the Lok Sabha- Similarly, he did not cross out one or the other of the alternatives, namoly, "swear in the rame of God" or "solemnly affirm" which it Vias been suggested on behalf of respondent No. 1

was clearly the result of inadvertence. The fact, however, remains and this in face of the finding in the order of the Returning Oflicer dated 21st January 1967 has not and cannot be controverted by respondent No. 1 that respondent No. 2 had made an oath as also a solemn affirmation simultaneously. According to the Returning Oiiicer, an oatii or affirmation was to be made by the candidate h.imsejf if literate or was to be accepted by him after it had been read out to him if illiterate by the Returning Officer or the Assistant Returning Officer and whatever was superfluous had to bs deleted by the Returning Officer or the Assistant Returning Officer vids paragraph 7 oi" Hand-Book for Returning Officers (General Elections 1967). In his opinion, since the oath/solemn affirmation had been taken/subscribed by the candidate so the omission was not of a substantial character as a result oi which the nomination papers could be rejected.

Now, Mr. Chawla's main argument is that there is a well recognised distinc- tion between an oath in the name of God and a solemn affirmation in Wharton's Law Lexicon which relers to English Law, it is stated that an affirmation is a solemn declaration without oath. At first people called quakers and Moravians were allowed to make it as an indulgence as also the separatists but it was after- wards extended to all persons objecting to taking an oath. By certain statutes and particularly the Evidence Amendment Act, 1869 solemn affirmation could be taken by persons having no religious belief, the former statutes having applied only to persons prevented by a religious belief from swearing. The Act of 1869, how- ever, did not apply to promissory oaths, e.g., to the oath directed by the Parlia- mentary Oaths Act, 1866, as amended by the Promissory Oaths Act, 1868 to be taken by members of Parliament. Fina'ly, the Oaths Act, 1888 had allowed every person objecting to be sworn to affirm, instead of taking an oath, in all places and for all purposes where an oath was required by law. As regards oath, Wharton savs that it i.-. an appeal to God to witness the truth OL a statement. AH who believe in a God. the avenger of falsehood, have always been admitted to give evi- dence, but the old rule was, that all witnesses rm.st take an oath of some kind. Vpry gradually, however, the Legislature relaxed this rule, and the privilege of affirming instead of taking an oath had been universally granted by the Oaths Act. 1888- In Stroud's Judicial Dictionary (Vol. Ill) the following statement appears:— "An oath is a religious asseveration, by which a person renounces the mercy and imprecates the vengeance of Heaven if he do not speak the truth (R.V. White, Leach, 430, 431). Sacrament."

In Corpus Juris Seeundum (Vol. 67). it is stated under the heading "Oaths and Affirmations" in article 4 that at common law a person cannot take a valid oath unless he entertains a belief in the existence of a God who will punish him if he swears falsely. In article 6(b) it is stated that where a statute prescribes a parti- cular form of oath or affirmation, that form shouM be followed and that substan- tial compliance therewith may be sufficient. In Wigmore's Treatise on F,vidence, Vol. 3, Sections 1816-1818, the following passage is quite illuminating:—

"The theory of the oath, in modern common law, may be termed a subjec- tive one, in contrast to the earlie- one. which, way be termed objec- tive. The oath is not a summoning, of Divine vengeance upon false swearing, whereby when the spectators see the witness standing un- harmed they knew thrt '-he Divine judgment has pronounced him to be a truth-teller, but a method of r"miidiiif> the witness strongly of the Divine minishment somewlierp in storp for fals^ swearing, and thus of pnttini? him in a frame cf mind calculated to speak only the truth as he saw it-"

The course of development of the Indian Law on the subiect has been succinctly pxplaired in. the following passage from the judgment of the Privy Council in Indar Pramcl v. Jaqmohan Das (A.I.R. 1927 P.C. 165 at page 172):

"That law was derived from the EngMsh law, ".vi:h some modifications sug- gested by Indian conditions. Just, as in England, FO also in India, it was at one time the rule that there could be no evidence without an oath in the strict sense oE the word, and only gradually were exceptions grafted by the statute upon that rule- Prior to 1840 the privilege of making an affirmation ir-stead of taking an oath was enjoyed only by quakers. Moravians and separatists. Bv that time it had been found that the taking of an oath was highly objection- able to Hindus and Mohamedans. and Act 5 of 1840 was passed for the ourpose of prohibiting the administration of oaths to persons be- longing to those communities, a form of affirmation being substi- tuted for an oath. With some extension in 1869 the law so remain- ed until the Act 6 of 1872 was passed. By that Act it was provided that every witness who objected to take an oath flight instead make

a simple affirmation, and in section 4 will be found the statutory provision which, prior to 1873, enabled volunteers to make oath* in special cases. Sections 8 to 13 of the present Act of 1873 corres- pond to and have taken the place of that section, and their Lordships can have no doubt that long before that time the Indian view, em- bodied afresh in the Act, had come to be that which may, briefly, be taken from the words of the Lord Chancellor in Omychand v. Barker (1 Atk. 21622), and quoted by the Judicial Commissioners:

The next thing Is the oath. It is laid down by all writers that the out- ward act is not essential to the oath. It has been the wisdom cf al) nations to administer such oaths as are agreeable lo the notion of the person taking."

The argument of Mr. Chawla is that the taking of an oath as also making affirmation with it are mutually destructive and render each other nugatory- According to him, oath can be taken and wIU be taken only if a person believes in God or has religious faith whereas an affirmation will be made by a peraon who either has no religious faith or does not believe in God or in the taking of an oath. I find it difficult to accede to the contention of Mr. Chawla which has the merit of ingenuity but has no substance. The Constitution has certainly prescribed by Article 84 that a person in order to be qualified for bcin# chosen to fill a seat in Parliament must make an oath or affirmation in the prescribed form but that does not mean that if a person takes an oath as also makes an affirmation, the result is reduced to zero, and that he can neither be said to have taken an oath nor made an affirmation. There is no such requirement that an affirmation can be made only if it is first declared that a person is an atheist or does not have any religious faith. It Is entirely left to the choice of a particular indivi- dual either to take an oath or make an affirmation irrespective of any declaration or asseveration of a religious belief. Therefore, when an oath is followed by an affirmation it cannot be said that belief in God is cancelled by disbelief or religious faith is wiped out by doing an act which normally would be done by a person who does not have such faith. It is a matter of common knowledge and occurrence that persons who have religious faith and belief in God will prefer to make a solemn affirmation instead of taking fin orath. It can even hap- pen that a person may by a genuine mistake take an oath and also make a solemn affirmation by way of abundant caution-

It seems to me, however, that in the present case respondent No- 2 simply did not realise that certain words in the prescribed form of the nomination papers required crossing out and that is why even the words "Punjab Vidhan Sabha" were not scored out- I am inclfned to the same view as Ihe Returning Officer that it was the duty of the Assistant Returning Officer to have called attention of respondent No. 2 to the question of either swearing in the name of God or making a solemn affirmation and scoring out one or the other which was appa- rently never done. According to paragraph 7 of the Hand-Book for Returning Officers which has been issued by the Election Commission an oath or affirmation has first to be made and then signed by the candidate before the authorised officer. It la further stated:—

"It should be borne in mind that mere signing on the paper on which the form of oath is written out is not sufficient. The candidate must make the oath before the authorised officer. Accordingly he will ask the candidate to read the oath or affirmation In English or Ihe Regional language and then to sign and dote the paper on which the oath or the affirmation is written."

Even if the Hand Book does not have any statutory -validity it only lays down what ought to be done as a matter of routine by the authorised officer -which is In consonance with normal practice and common sense. The Assistant ReturninR Officer has noted that the oath was taken and signed m his presence. He should have ensured that the words "Solemnly affirm" were crossed out and hp failed in his duty in the matter. I cannot sep in these circumstances how the nomina- tion papers of respondent No. ] were liable to be . ejected on the ground of the infirmity on which the petitioner has relief. On the second issue Mr. Chawla has referred to section 36(5) of the Representation of PeopTe Act which reads thus—

"The returning Officer shall hold the scrutiny on the date appointed in this behalf under clause (b) Of section 30 and shall not allow any adjourn- ment of the proceedings except when such proceedings are inter- rupted or obstructed by riot or open violence or by causes beyond his control:

Provided that in case an objection is raised by the Returning Officer or is made by any other person the candidate concerned may be allowed

time to rebut it not later than the next day but one following the date fixed for scrutiny, and the returning officer shall record his decision on the date to which the proceedings have been adjourned."

The petitioner did not produce any evidence to substantiate his allegations that when on the date of the scrutiny the Returning Oilicur ordered an adjournment of the proceedings till 2 r.M. and when they were resumed at 2-10 P.M. he heard further arguments and pulled out a paper, which had already been typed, from his file and read it out accepting the nomination papers of respondent No. 2. The only facts which stand admitted in the evidence of respondent No. 1 record- ed in Court are that the petitioner raised an objection before the Returning Officer at the time of scrutiny to the nomination paycrs> of respondent No. 2. The Beturning Officer wanted time to look into the matter and, therefore, he proceed- ed with the examination of the nomination papers of other candidates. He did not adjourn the proceedings to any other date but finished the scrutiny on that very day. In cross-examination it was admitted by him that S. Gurnam Singh addressed arguments on behalf of respondent No. 2 foi a few minutes jind the petitioner also argued for about half an hour. After hearing the arguments the Returning Officer said that he would give a decision after looking into the other nomination papers. Respondent No. 1 further stated thPt he went away after the Returning Officer accepted his nomination papers and before he decided the objections relating to respondent No. 2. In answer to a specific question as to the reason given by the Returning Officer for deferring the decision, respondent No. 1 stated that both sides had submitted their arguments and the Returning Offirer wanted some time in order to reach a decision- This was at 12-15 P.M. when respondent No- 1 went to the Returning Officer at 2 P.M. to collect his identity papers he was told by that officer that he had given a decision accepting the nomination papers of respondent No. 2. Mr. Kuug objected to the last ques- tion being asked on the ground that it was a hearsay,. It is to be found in the written statement of respondent No, 1 that there was adjournment of proceedings for some time and that arguments were heard on two occasions which shows that the Returning Officer took some time for giving a decision on the objection raised by the petitioner- Even on the assumption what the petitioner says is right that there was an interruption of proceedings before the Returning Officer between 12-15 P.M. to 2 P-M. It is difficult to see how there has been any contra- vention of section 36(5) of the Act. The words "shall not allow any adjourn- ment of the proceedings" quite clearly means that no adjournment would be allowed at the request of the parties. If for the purpose of deciding a point of law on an obisctlon which is of a complicated nature the Returning Officer takes a couple of hours, surely that cannot constitute an adjournment of the nature provided for by sub-section (5) of section 36.

In Dahu Sag v. Ranglal Chaiiflhary and others (22 E.L.R. 2991 an argument was raised that the Returning Officer had no lurisdiction to postpone the deci- sion as to the validity of the nominations to the following day as the candidate concerned had not asked for any time to rebut the objection which was raised in respect of his nomination papers. A Bench of the Patna High Court repelled the argument and held that although the holding of the scrutiny could not be postponed except when such proceedings were interrupted or obstructed by riot etc. but the scrutiny could be postponed for a day or two for further scrutiny in order to allow time to the candidate concerned whose nomination was object- ed to, but clear or express words were not to be found in the proviso to sub- section (5) from which it could be held that the Returning Officer could not reserve his decision to be given on the day following the scrutiny. It might well be that objections of a kind were raised which might require further consi- deration by the Returning Officer with reference to books, statutes or rules and in absence of clear and express provision the Court was not prepared to stifle the power of the Returning Officer to the extent suggested. Support for this view was found from another case reported as Parmeahwar Kumar y. Lahtan Chavdharn (14 E.L.R. 444). I find no force whatsoever in the contention raised by Mr. Chawla under issue No. 2 and I hold that tho postponement by the Returning Officer of the proceedings for a short period for making up his mind about the objection raised by the petitioner to the acceptance of the nomination papers of respondent No- 2 did not render the proceedings illegal and void.

As issue No. 1 has been decided against the petitioner, it is altogether unneces- sary to decide issue No. 3. Even then since the matter has been argued by both sides nrH an appeal lies to the Supreme Court. I propose to give my decision on the said issue. As stated before, Mr. Chawla has not led any evidence whatsoever on behalf of the petitioner from which it could be held that the result of the

election has been materially affected, so far as the returned candidate is con- cerned. He has, however, sought to establish his contention by relying rn cer- tain admitted and proved facts according to him, ii the nomination papers of respondent No. 2 had not been accepted^ the votes which were polled by the latter would have gone to the petitioner. He says that the votes were cast m favour of the Akali Dal and since the petitioner belonged to the Master Group most of the votes or majority of votes which were cast in favour of lespondent No. 2 who was also a candidate of the Akali Dal though of a different Group, namely, the Sant Group would have gone to the petitioner- Re-referred to the admission of respondent No. 1 in his cross-examination that the Akali candidates on two previous occasions had won the Lok Sabha sent from the Ludhiana Parliamentary Constituency. He could not say with certainty but, as iar sas he could recollect, the Congress had won two scats out of the Assembly Constituen- cies "whereas the Akali Dal won six seata in the elections held in 1962. Res- pondent No. 1 in his statement which stood unrebutted made it quite clear that there was a good deal of hostility between the two groups, namely, the Sant Group and the Master Group of the Akali Dal. The Sant Group had put up 58 candidates during the election of 1967 to the Punjab Assembly and the Master Group had probably put up more candidates. In no Constituency where the Sant Group did not put up its own candidate did that Group rapport (.he Master Group's candidate. The Master Group had put up a candidate against S, Gurnam Singh, the present Chief Minister of Punjab, who belonged to the Sant Group and who contested from the Raipur Constituency. Only two candidates had been returned from the Master Group to the Assembly and none was returned (,o the Parliament. He furLher stated that the petitioner had contested the election in 1962 from the Ludhiana Parliamentary Constituency RS an Akali candidate when he won with a majority of about 1800 votes but in the 1967 elections, so far as he knew, the petitioner did not nurse the Constituency and never went to the rural areas. In those areas Master Tara Singh had hardly .viy influence although he had some influence in the urban areas. All the candidates put uo by Ihe Master Group even for the Assembly Constituencies comprising the Ludhian;i Parliamentary Constituency had lost their security deposits with the exception of the candidate in the Ludhiana South Constituency. Respondent No. 1 had polled more than 21,000 votes in the Urban Constituencies of Ludhiana North and South. In the other six four seats were won by the congress and two were won by the Sant Group of'the Akali Dal. The Petitioner polled about 10,000 votes in the two urban Constituencies. The Congress had a common election programme and all the candidates in the various Assembly Constituencies as also the candidate for the Parliamentary Constituency were working in close colla- boration. Respondent No. 2 wielded certain amount of personal influence in the Lok Sabha Constituency as he belonged to Ludhiana District and had big busi- ness in various places in that District. He was also president of certain educa- tional institutions, tt is quite obvious that the petitioner has totally failed to establish that all or majority of the votes which were colled by respondent No. 2 would have been cast in bis favour if the nomination papers of the said res- pondent had not been accepted. The evidence of respondent No. 1 fully proves that out of the two groups, the Sant Group of the Akali Dal wielded predeminent influence in the Ludhiana Parliamentary Constituency. It is further established that the Sant and the Master Groups had sharp political differences and the Sant Group was not prepared and did not in fact support any candidate of the Master Group even whore n candidate Irom I]\P Sant Group did not contest an Assembly seat. Moreover, the election of a candidate does not depend entirely and completely iimm the community to which he belongs or the party which has put him up. Other factors llko personal influence also go along way in winning support for the candidate.

In Vashlst Narain Sharma v- Dev Chand (10 E-L-R. 30) it has been laid down that the words "the result of the election has been materially effected" in clause (e) of Section 100(11 of the Act indicate that the result should not be judged by the mere increase or decrease in the total number of votes secured by the returned candidate but by proof of the fact that the votes would have been distributed in such a manner between the contesting candidates as would have brought about the defeat of the returned candidate pnd that the language of the aforesaid provision clearlv places the burden of proving that the result SKC. 3(ii)J THK GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 21, 1967/ASVINA 29, 1889 3389.

be presumed that the wasted votes might have gone to the latter and that the result of the election has been materially affected. This is a matter which has to be proved and though it mast be recognised that the petitioner in .such a case is confronted with a difficult situation, he cannot be relieved of the duty imposed upon him by section 100(1) (c). The principle which was held applicable to (c) would be clearly applicable in the present case also. In Inayatullah Khan y. Diwanchand Mahajan (15 E.L.R. 210), in the election which took place in February 1957 in the Sehore Double-member Constituency to the Legislative Assembly of the State of Madhya Pradesh, Umraosingh and Mannulal contested the reserved seat, while the remaining three, Inayatullah, Mahajan and Nandlal contested the general seat. The resuR of the poll was—

"Umraosingh 23,757 Votes (Reserved) Inayatullah 20,696 D. C. Mahajan 26,G16 Mannulal 16,500 Nandlal 8,997

Votes Votes Votes Votes

(General) (General) (Reserved) (General)"

The election was questioned by Mahajan. fnayatullah's election was set aside by the Tribunal mainly because of certain irregularities and defects in the conduct of the election and the counting which followed and that the result of the election had been materially affected. After referring to the observations of their Lordships in the above case, it was said at page 235—

''From these observations it is, therefore, clear that general evidence of a likelihood, such as- has been tendered in this case, is not decisive of the matter under section 100 of the Representation of the people Act. What the party who wishes to get an election declared void has to establish is that the result uf the poll had in fact been mate- rially affected by the improper acceptance of a nomination paper. To do this, it has to be demonstrated that the votes would have been divided in such a way that the returned candidate would have been unsuccessful."

Applying the law paid down by their Lordships it was held that the evidence tendered was not sufficient to discharge the onus which was upon Mahajan. The result therefore, was that by allowing Nandlal to contest the election the result of the poll could not be said to have been materially affected. It is note- worthy that the difference between the votes of Mahajan and Inayatullah was only 80. Nandlal had polled 8,f-97 votes. It was found that Nandlal was dis- qualified and could not stand*for the election. It was contended that the margin of votes was small and that the result must be taken to have been materially affected because Nandlal had got 8,000 odd votes, which in the event of his not contesting would have gone to Mahajnn, Evidence was led by both sides to show kow the votes which went to Nandlal would have been divided and both sides claimed that if Nandlal had not contested the election, the votes would have gone to them. It was in that context that it was decided with reference to the law laid down by their Lordships that it had not been proved that the result of the election had been materially affected.

In Ragbunath Misra v. Kishore Chandra Deo Bhanj (17 E.L.R. 321), it was said at page 339—

'The case before us comes under the third category of cases, enumerated by the Supreme Court. The returned candidate, respondent No. 1, secured 17,700 votes, the appellant obtained 15,508 votes and res- pondent No. 3 obtained 3,589 votes. We are not concerned with the votes obtained by the other candidates. The number of wasted votes is 3589 in case the nomination of respondent No. 3 is improperly accepted. This number 3,589 of wasted votes is greater than the margin of votes between respondent No. 1 and the petitioner, the difference between them being only 2132 vo(es. In such a case, as laid down by the Supreme Court, it cannot be presumed that all these wasted votes might have gone to the petitioner."

All the above decisions are quite opposite pnd in the present rase there can be no escape from the conclusion that the essential requirement of section 10/(1)(d)(i) has not been satisfied even if it be assumed that ihe nomination papers of respondent No. 2 had been improperly accepted.

For all the reasons which have been given above, this petition fails and it is dismissed with costs which are assessed" at Rs. 631.30 (inclusive of Rs. 500 as counsel's fee) payable only to respondent No. 1. The 31st July, 1967.

(Sd.) A. N. GHOVER, Judge. tNo- 82/PB/2/67I

3890 T HE G A Z E T TE OF I N D IA : O C T O B ER i n, ¹⁰⁶⁷/ASV¹NA ²⁹, ¹⁸⁸³ [I'AIII I I-

New Delhi, the 6th October 1967

S.O. 3697.—In pursuance of section 106 of the Representation of the people Act, 1951. the Election Commission hereby publishes the Order, pronounced on the 29th August, 1957, by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in Election Petition No. 4 of 1967.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

Tuesday the 29th August, 1967/7th Bhadra, 1889.

PRESENT:

The Honourable Mr. Justice M. Madhavan Nair.

ELECTION PETITION NO. 4 or 1967.

Petitioner:

G. Chandrasekharan Pillai residing In Trivandram City. Bj Advs. M/s. K. V. Surlanarayana Iyer, T. L- Vlswanatha Iyer and

C- N. Devan.

-Respondents:

1. P. Viswambharan, residing in Charivuvila Veeclu, Vellar, Kovalam P.O.,

Trivandrum District.

2. Dr. J. J. Guruprakash residing in Parulhipara, Trivandrum. 3- E. V. Joseph residing in Seva Nivas, Trivandrum-3. Respondent No. 1. By Advs. M/a. K. Chandrasekharan, T. Chandrasekhara Menon, P. Kesavan Nair, Thampan Thomas ai:d C. Sankara Menon,

This Election Petition having been finally heard on 29th August, 10t)7 In the presence of Shri N. N. Venkitachalam on behalf of Shri K. V. Surianavayan Iyer, Advocate for the petitioner, and Shri K- Chandrasekharan, Advocate for the first respondent, the Court on the same day delivered the following;—

JUDGMENT

The petitioner and respondents 1 to 3 contested for a scat In the Lok Sabha

(1) "There was onlv one Returning Officer at one place for the counting In respect of the Parliamentary as well as Assembly elections, which ren- dered it not possible for him to discharge his duties under Sec. G4 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (Hereafter the Act).

(2) "There were for each table one supervisor and two assistance in charge of the above work of sorting, bundling, counting etc- while there was only one counting agent allowed for each of the candidates for each table-

(3) "..many ballot papers validly marked, for the petitioner were rejec- ted as invalid by those in charge of counting;

(4) "In the process of folding the ballot paper the ink on the stamp so affixed on the ballot paper appeared to have spread on the correspond- ing part of the folded ballot paper. This was a feature which was found in the several ballot papers which were dealt with by the supervisors and their assistants.... at the counting table by either treating them as Invalid or, in some cases, making them over to the 1st respondent though the intention of the election was clear from the ballot papers The position therefore was that manv votes marked for the petitioner and a few for respondents 2 and 3 were wrongly Included In the valid votes of the 1st respondent, or were declared Invalid-

(5) "As a matter of Tact the process of sorting, bundling up and counting, was not done properly or in accordance with the Act or the Rules, such as Section 64, Rule 51, Rule 5d(2) (d), the 2nd proviso to Rule 5C (2) and Rule 56 (3) among others.

(6) "....even invalid ballot papers, so far as the 1st respondent was concerned were treated as valid and counted along with his valid votes.

(7) ''The petitioner genuinely apprehends that, the non-gazetted officers... who were in charge as counting supervisors and assistants at the various tables in the counting places and who were dealing with the ballot papers as mentioned in the preceding paragraphs were doing so because of their grievances against the Indian National Congress in general and against the petitioner In particular Several non- gazetted officers were actually canvassing votes for the candidates put up by the United Front Actually the non-gazetted officers (herein- after the N.G.Os.) who were asked to do the work of sorting, bundl- ing and counting the ballot papers in tbe various counting places were some of those who were seen working before the elections for the 1st respondent and actively canvassing votes for him. The counting appears to have been done with the intention of depriving the petitioner of as many of the valfd votes cast in his favour end so as to defeat him, if possible, in the election.

(8) "The petitioner submits, that for the foregoing reasons the result of the election in so far as It con corns the lrst respondent, the returned candidate, has been materially affected by the improper reception and rejection of votes and also by reception of votes which arc void, as also by non-compliance with the provisions of the Constitution and of the Representation of the People Art, 1^51 and of the Rules and orders mark' under the said Art

(9> ''The petitioner further submits that if the votes polled in the said election are recounted, in accordance vith the provisions in the Act and the Rules thereunder, the petitioner would get a majority of the valid votes polled at the election- On the facts ar.d circumstances set forth herein the petitioner is entitled 1o have all the votes pUled in the con- cerned election recounted."

2. The 1st respondent contested the petition by a written statement denyinff the allegations made asainst his election and asserting that "it is wrong to suggest that either this respondent or the Parlies of the United Front were tm any way in a position of advantage so far as the sympathies of the N.G.Os, or the votes of the N. G. Os- were concerned. Far from thf'.t. it was the pptitioner and the other Congress candidates in the Assembly constituencies that could poll the votes of the N- G. Os- communiraterl by nost much mn7c than the petitioner (Sic. this respondent?¹) and his supporting Assembly candidates." and also stat- ing that the petitioner who hm not applied for a recount urdcr Rule 63(2") of 4he Conduct of Election- Rules. 1061—hereinafter.' the Rules—cannot claim it now. He has not recriminated under Section 97 of the Act.

3. Fifteen issues have been raised for trial in consultation with counsel on aither side- They read as follow :

1- Has IHe result oC the election been materially affected by improper- reception or rejection of valid votes or by contravention of any provi- sion in the concerned Act or Rules?

2. Has any hallnt paper valldly marked for the petitioner been rejected as.

invalid? If so, how many?

3- Has any ballot paper marked for the petitioner been wrongly counted for the 1st respondent? If so, how many?

4. Has any ballot paper which showed clearly that the elector meant to vote for the petitioner been counted for the 1st respondent or rejected as" invalid? If so, how many?

5- Has any ballot paper with two marks, one for the petitioner and the other for the 1st respondent, been counted as a vote for the 1st respon- dent? If so, how many?

6. Has any invalid ballot naper been counted as a valid vote for the 1st

respondent? If so, how many?

7. Has any ballot naper marked for the respondents 2 or 3 been counted⁷

for the 1st respondent? If so, how many?

8. Was the sorting, bundling or counting of votes done In violation of any Rule of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961? If so, what Is the effect thereof on the election?

9- Can. the election be challenged on the ground that certain electors folde* the ballot papers so carelessly that the ink of the mark of his vote caused a second mark in the column of another candidate? Are suck ballot papers validly marked? If they are valid, how many are they and how have they affected the result of the election?

10. Had not the counting agents sufficient opportunity to scrutinise the ballot papers while they were being counted?

H- Is the petitioner entitled to challenge the declaration of invalidity of all the rejected ballot papers without specification?

12- Is the petitioner entitled to a general recount of all the ballot papers polled? What is the effect of his having not made a written request under Rule 63(2) of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, on hie present claim for a general recount?

13- Is the election of the 1st respondent void? Is the petitioner entitled t" a declaration that he is duly elected?

14. Had any of the Non-gazetted Officers engaged in counting votes any mala fides towards the petitioner? If any had, has the counting "f votes been affected thereby?

15. To what relief is the petitioner entitled?

4. The petitioner examined 7 counting agents, one from each counting place, an P.W- 1 to 7, and himself as P. W. 8 and marked Ext. P. 1, an issue of a Daily "Viswamekhala" which reported the prejudice of the N. G. Os, against the peti- tioner The 1st respondent examined the Returning Officer of the Parliamentary constituency as R-W. 1 and the Returning Officer for the Assembly constituencies Trivandrum I and II as R.W. 2, Returning Officer for the Assembly constituency Kovalam as R. W. 3, and the Returning Officer for the Assembly constituencies Neyyattinkara and Parassala as R. W- 4—the Returning Officer for the Assembly constituencies Nemon and Vilappil was not available for examination as he was hospitalised when summons was issued to him—and himself as R. W. 5 and has marked the consolidated Final Result sheet as Ext. P 1, the postal ballot papers' account as Ext- R 2 and the Final Result Sheets of the Parliamentary ballot pa- pers in the component Assembly constituencies, Trivandrum I, Trivandrum II, Nemon, Kovalam, Vilappi], Neyyattinkara and Parassala as Exts. R 3 to R 9 and the Final Result Sheets of the Assembly ballot papers in those constituencies as Exts. R 10 to R 16.

5. Issues Nos- 12 and 14.—The main prayer of the petitioner Is for a general ins- pection and recount of the ballot papers. Though in the written statement the 1st respondent had a contention that the absence of an application for recount under Rule 63 (2) of the Rules would be a legal bar to such a motion in an election dispute, it is not pressed now; and counsel rests content by saying that its absence would be a circumstance militating against the allegation of large prevalence of deliberate miscounts by the counting officers. As has been observed in my judg- ment in Election Petition No- 3 of 1967 "the absence of an application for a recount under Rule 63(2) will not be a legal bar to a motion before the election Court for a recount if adequate proof is given that the counting has been materially affected "by miscounts"

It is observed by the Supreme Court In Ham Sewak Yadav V. Hussain Ka.mil Kldioal¹:

"An order for Inspection may not be granted as a matter of course: having regard to the insistence upon the secrecy of the ballot papers, the Court would be justified in granting an order for inspection provided two conditions are fulfilled:

(i) that the petition for setting aside an election contains an adequate statement of the material facta on which the petitioner relies in sup- port of his case; and

(II) the Tribunal is Prlma facie satisfied that in order to decide the dispute and to do complete justice between the parties Inspection of the ballot papers is necessary.

But an order for inspection of ballot papers cannot be granted to support vague pleas made in the petition not supported by material facts or tw

Mi .vnj J UK UA/MIE OV INDIA: OC'l OflER 2\, 1%7/ASVINA i.'i>, I88'J 3893

llh out evidence to upport uch pleas. The case of the petitioner must be set out with precision supported by averments of material facts. To establish a case so pleaded an order ior inspection may undoubtedly, if the interests of justice require, be granted. But a mere allegation that the petitioner suspects or believes that there has been an improper reception, refusal or rejection of votes will not be sullicient to support an order for inspection."

Again in Dr. Jagjit Singh V. Giani Kartar Singh' it is observed:

"Vague or general allegations that valid votes were improperly rejected, or invalid votes were improperly accepted, would not serve the pmpose which S- 83(1)(a) has in mind. An application made for the inspection of ballot boxes must give material facts which would enable the Tri- bunal to consider whether in the Interests of justice, the ballot boxes should be inspected or not. In dealing with this question, the import- ance of the secrecy of the ballot papers cannot be ignored, and it is always to be borne in mind that the statutory rules fiamed under the Act are Intended to provide adequate safeguard for the examination of the validity or invalidity of votes and for their proper counting- It may be that in some cases, the ends of justice would make it necessary for the Tribunal to allow a party to inspect the ballot boxes and con- sider his objections about the improper acceptance or improper rejec- tion of votes tendered by voters at any given election; but in consider- ing the requirements of justice, rare must be taken to see that election petitioners do not get a chance to make a roving or fishing enquiry in the bal'ot boxes so as to justify their claim that the returned candi- date's election is void

(After referring to Rules on counting in the Rules, their Lordships continued) we have referred broadly to the scheme of these Rules to emphasise the point that the election petitioner who is a defeated candidate, has ample opportunity to examine the voting papers before they are counted, and in case the objections raised by him or his election agent have been improperly over-ruled, he knows precisely the nature of the objections raised by him and the voting papers to which those objec- tions related. It is in the light of this background that S. 83(1) of the Act has to be applied to the petitions made for inspection of ballot boxes Such an application must contain a concise statement of the material facts

(Referring to the allegations made in the case before them, their Lordships continued further) In the application made by the appellant on the 7th March, 198:i, he urged that a very large number of votes purported to have been cast in favour of the appellant had been improperly rejected, and that has materially affected the result of the election; that a large number of votes which were invalid had been improperly accepted in favour of respondent No. 1 which has also materially affected the result of the election; .. ..(and) that the Roturing Officer disclosed a partisan attitude and the counting and examination of votes was done in a very irregular manner. The .Appellant pleaded that he had led some evidence regarding the mis- conduct of the Returning Officer at the time of the counting; and so, a prayer was made that the ballot papers may be allowed to be in- spected 'in order to enable the appellant to establish his case both regarding improper rejection and reception of ballot papers and the non-compliance with the rules under the Act on the cart of the Returning Officer which have materially affected the result of tV>e election in so far as respondent No- 1 is concerned'- It may be observed that at the time when the application for inspection wai made, evidence had already been led before the Tribunal: and Mr. Gary's contention is that the Tribunal, on considering the evidence in the light of the allegations made by the appellant, was satisfied that an Inspection should be ordered in the Interests of justice; and !>• argues that the High Court was in error In reversing this order on appeal.

We are not prepared to accept this contention. The order passsd by the Tribunal clearly shows that the Tribunal did not apply its mind to the question as to whether sufficient particulars had been mentioned by the appellant In his application for Inspection- All that the Tribunal

s. A.T.R. 1966 S.C. 773.

has observed is that a puma facie case has been made out lor examining the ballot papers; it has also referred to the fact that, the appellant has in his own statement supported the contention and that the evidence led by him prima facie justifies his prayer for Inspection of ballot papers- In dealing with this question, the Tribunal should have first enquired whether the application made by the appellant satisfied the requirements of S- 83(1) of the Act and, in our opinion, on the allegations made, there can be only one answer and that is against the appellant. We have carefully considered the allegations made by the appellant in his election petition as well as those made by him in his application for inspection, and we are satisfied that the said allegations are very vague and general, and the whole object of the appellant In asking for inspection was to make a fishing enquiry with a view to find out some material to support his case that respon- dent No. 1 had received some invalid votes and that the appellant had been denied some valid votes. Unless an application for inspection of ballot papers makes out a proper case for such Inspection, it would not be right for the Tribunal to open the ballot boxes and allow a party to inspect the ballot papers, and examine the validity or invalidity of the ballot papers contained in it- If such a course Is adopted, it would inevitably lead to the opening of the ballot boxes almost in every case, and that would plainly be inconsistent with the scheme of the statutory rules and with the object of keeping the ballot papers secret That is why we are satisfied that the High Court was right in coming to the conclusion that the appellant had failed to make out a ca"e for the Inspection of the ballot boxes In this case".

It is clear from the above quotes from Supremo Court decisions that to support a prayer for recount material facts in -justification thereof have to be disclosed in the very petition itself and if that has not been done the Court should not allow a recount. However, as has been observed in Bhaawan Datta Shastri V, Ram Ratanji Gupta, even if facts have not been furnished in the election petition, if they have been made out In the evidence given, the Court may act on the sam" unless such a course would cause material prejudice to the respondent. Detailed knues for trial have been framed in this case in consultation: with counsel on l"oth sides which cover all the allegations made In the election petition and both parties have adduced evidence in regard to them: Therefore the question now )9 whether mistakes in the counting of votes, sufficient to make out a prima facir. ease to think the return to be unreliable, have been disclosed in the case. I proceed to analyse the pleadings and evidence accordingly.

C. It is alleged that ballot papers validly marked for the petitioner have been rejected as invalid and ballot papers marked for the petitioner, the 2nd respondent or the 3rd respondent, as also invalid ballot papers like blank ones, lirve been counted as votes in favour of the 1st respondent by the counting supervisors and assistants who were biased against the petitioner, There cannot be much disputes that such allegations are vagun nnd general in their contents. There were admittedly 441 polling stations, distributed in seven assembly consti- tuencies under supervision of a Returning Officer and four Assistant Return- ing Officers, The ballot papers of each assembly constituency were counted In one hall under the immediate supervision of an Assistant Returning Officer. There were 7 counting tables—in Vilappil it was 8—for each constituency and at each counting table then- were three officers who werp N.G.Os, Thus, in all there were above 100 N.G.Os. employed for counting. It cannot be easily believed that every one of them had been miscounting with a designed purpose of defeating the petitioner and propping up the 1st respondent, unless positive nroof is given thereto. No N.G.O. who did so is named : and r""" is excluded. No exception is made 6f any counting station or any counting table or any ballot box which admittedly bears a specific number for identi- fication. And converselv, no particular counting station, counting table or ballot box is named as been the subject of such prejudicial counting, Admittedly the counting was had on two days, February 21 and 22. The allegation covers both the days alike. The allegation is therefore most general in its import.

The petitioner says he had not been at any counting place and that his infor- mation as to the biased counting was from his counting agents. He has examined one counting agent from every counting place. They admitted that they had never told the Reurning Officer or the Assistant Returlng Officers in charge of their counting places about the binsed conduct of the counting officers, though they in their present depositions said to have detected the bias and the deliberate miscounting within a short time of the commencement of counting

3. A.I.R. i960 S-C- 200 C.B.

R.W.I, the Returning Officer, has deposed to have gone to every counting place on both the counting days. He is an ouiccr of the I.A.S. cadre. Even to him no complaint wag made by any of the uuuming agents as to the biased conduct of the .N.G.Os. deputed to count the voics. It is also seen from the testimony of the counting agents that they iell no anxiety to intimate the petitioner about the prejudiced way in which the counting ofiioers have counted the ballot papers, which according to them has caused loss oi a large number of votes to the petitioner. It is freely conceded that the counting agents of the petitioner were all interested in his success and were party workers. They must have been aware that the counting would continue on February 22 and that the postal ballot papers would be counted and the result declared on February 23 : and therefore it is most surprising to hear that these counting agents, who have detected on February 21 the bias and delibrate miscounts by the N.G.Os., depriving the petitioner the benefit of a large number of his valid votes, and adding false votes in large numbers in favour of the 1st respondent, which, as anybody could see, would affect materially the result of the election, kept quiet without even informing the petitioner even on the close of the day $0 that measures might be taken to avoid it the next day, and if the total count went against the petitioner he might apply for a recount by the Returning Onicer. The petitioner and all his counting agents cited have stated that the petitioner was told of the biased miscount only when the couning agents met him casually 2 to 7 days after the event. This militates much against the weight of the general allegation made in the election petition, which spells out to be an after-thought.

It has been alleged in the petition, "Several non-gazetted officers were actually canvassing votes for the candidates put up by the United F r o n t .. . . . . .. Actually the non-gazetted officers who w<-\re asked to do the work of sorting, bundling and counting the ballot papers in the various counting places were some of those who were seen working befure the election for the 1st respondent and actively canvassing votes foj- him." The first respondent challenged the allegation as wrong and asserted the petitioner to have had more favour from the N.G.Os. than the 1st respondent coUld enlist, and illustrated it by the postal rotes of the N.G.Os. having been much more in favour of the petitioner than for him. Counsel for the 1st respondent invited my attention to Rule 53(2) of the Rules, which prohibited appointment for counting of any person who had been working for a candidate in the election, and contended that the fact that the petitioner made no attempt to prevent N.G.Os. from counting shows that there ie no truth in th? averment that they had worked fur the 1st respondent in the •lection. The contention appears forceful. Not an iota of evidence has been given of such a eanva&sing by any N.G.O. None of the witnesses examined by the petitioner nor the petitioner himself has said anything about such canvassing of the N.G.Os. Not one of the numerous N.G.Os. employed for counting has been examined to bring out the bias in them againt the petitioner. The peti- tioner is positive that he was never against their demand for a higher rate of dearness allowance and that he had said so in a public meeting at Trivandrum on February li 1C67, more than a week before, the poll. Ext. PI report in the Daily 'Viswamekhala' does not allege the petitioner to have worked against the cause of the N.G.Os. It is too much to believe that everyone among 1he N.G.Os. was under a delusion. In spite of the allegation in the election petition being vague and general, issue was raised thereon and evidence was taken. Even in the evidence no material fact has been brought forth. Witnesses examined by the petitioner have only spoken in terms as general and vague as the allegation in the* flection petition is. Their evidence has not advancd the case in the election petition.

In the circumstances I am constrained to hold that the conditions for an order to recount set by the Supreme Court have not been fulfilled and therefore the prayer for recount has to fall. Issues NOB. 12 and 14 go against the petitioner as not been substantiated in the case.

7. Issues Nos- 2, 4, 9 and 11.—These relate to allegations of loss of votes to the petitioner. It is stated that, on account of a smudge or an impression due to wrong folding, many ballot papers marked for the petitioner have been rejected by the counting supervisors and assistants. I am afraid that this allega- tion has arisen out of a misunderstanding of the functions of the counting officers who were instructed to assort such ballot papers as "doubtful" and place them before the Returning Officer or the Assistant Returning Officer for his inspection and decision. The counting supervisors nnd assistants at the counting tables had no authority to reject any ballot paper, however, clear their invalidity may be. Rule G8(2) of the Rules admits no ambiguity in this regard. Apart from the presumption of regularity of official oefs, which it is for the challenger to dispel, the Assistant Returning Officers, examined as R.W. 2, 3 and 4 have spoken categorically that the rejection of invalid papers was done by them. Thty have not b"en challenged seriously in cross-examination on such testimony. Even

P.W. 1, one of the counting agents examined by the petitioner, has spoken to have seen the Assistant Returning Oilicer of his hall inspecting the doubtful ballot papers placed before him by the counting officers, affixing seal thereto and initialling them. It is obvious that the seal thac wat. affixed by the Assistant Returning Oiilcer was the seal stating the lactum and ground of rejection in abbreviated form. The mere sorting of certain ballot papers as doubtful or invalid by the counting supervisors and assistants is therefore of no consequence. The averment is only that the counting supervisors and assistants did the counting prejudicially. No miscount on tiie part of the Assistant Returning Onlcers has been alleged jn this case. The ballot papers with the original mark in the column of me petitioner and an impression due to wrong folding hi the column of another are valid votes for the petitioner and must therefore have been counted as such by the Assistant Returning Officer concern- ed. It follows that the assortment of such ballot papers as "invalid" by the count- ing officers was not final and it meant only that they are doubtful and are to be inspected and counted by the Assistant Returning Officer. None of the count- tag agents of the petitioner who attended an Assistant Returning Officer's table has been cited to say that it was done any otherwise in this constituency. It must then follow that the averment that the papers which are validly marked for the petitioner have been rejected by the counting officers stands unproved in the case. Issues are found against the petitioner.

8- Issues Nos- 3, 5, 8 and 7-—These issues relate to the wrong counting of ballot papers in favour of the 1st respondent. It is alleged that papers which are marked for the petitioner, or for respondents 2 or 3 or are Invalid for multiple voting, or with no mark, have been counted as votes In favour of the 1st respon- dent. No specific Instance, by naming the polling station, or the counting officer, or the ballot papers connected with such counting, has been given In the election petition or in the testimony of the petitioner's witnesses. The allegation is vague and general within the meaning of the dictum in Dr. Jagjit Singh y- Giani Kartar Singh (³) cited supra. As proof even of a prirna facie case is wanting, these issues have to be held unsubstantiated In this case.

9- Issue No. 10.—It is urged that with one counting agent for a counting table, where three officers were scrutinising, sorting and counting ballot papers an elfectlve supervision of the counting could not be done by the candidate- It is not contended that such limitation in number of counting agents offends any statutory provision. Discussing the identical point raised In Election Petition No- 3 01 1967 I nave observed in my judgment therein :

"It Is clear from the procedure adpoted in counting that the counting agents £et one opportunity to pversee the ballot papers when they are sorted into different compartments as votes of the different candidates and doubtful papers, and a second opportunity when they are counted and bundled (and a third opportunity for the same is provided In recount which can be availed by any counting agent In the absence of the candidate If the poll ran aeck and neck.. it may be said that since three opportunities are afforded at different stages of the counting the allowance of one agent to watch three officers working on the same table appears reasonably adequate."

Counting is an official act done by public officers and the permission given to candidates and their agents to be present at the counting is only as a factual guarantee of the regularity of that official act—which is a normal legal presmp- tion in other cases. What Is afforded by the law is only an opportunity for the counting agents or the election agent or the candidate concerned to watch the counting of valid ballot papers and to inspect invalid ballot papers before the latter are finally rejected. The law does not envisage a facility to counting agents to Inspect every ballot paper. Section 64 of the Act contemplates only the presence of counting agents of candidates at the counting place to watch the counting as their very presence is likely to indue? care and circumspection In the work and, If any accidental error happens, to have it at once corrected- An Assistant Returning Officer is at tho spot to resolve any difference between the counting agents and the counting officers. Since rejection of ballot papers IF—as pointed out in my judgment in Election Petition No. 3 of 1067—a serious infraction of the Important constitutional right to participate in the formation of the majority for the governance of the State, the law allows H to be done only by officers of the status and responsibility of an Assistant Returning Officer in an election and Insists that to be done only after allowing "each counting agent present a reason- able opportunity to inspect the "ballot" pnoor" before it is finally reiected. As the Rules, framed with approval of the Parliament, stand, the prlvilage to inspect ballot papers conceded to counting agents is limited to ballot papers which are finally reiected; it does not extend to other ballot papers But they are given opportunities to watch the proceeding, and supervise them as best as they can,

utilising their presence at the counting table to point out mistakes to the counting officers themselves to get them rectified, or to carry their objections in the counting to the Assistant Returning Officer a1 the hall for immediate relief, or to avail of the information they gather there tor an application to recount under Rule 63(2) even after the total number of votes polled by every candidate is announced by the Returning Officer a^ter entering the same in the result sheet.

The contention that one countln , agent cuinot effectively see—which I think means almost 'Inspect'—every ballot paper handled by the officers at the counting table has therefore little merit. What is afforded is an opportunity to detect errors and not an unfailing certainty of avoidance of accidental errors. If the latter Is the case, a provision tor recount will be not only redundant but meaning- less- 'Opportunity' means only a chance tor an event. It cannot be said that a counting agent sitting or standing aL the counting table to see the ballot papers being counted before him does not get opportunity to sec any error in the counting that is carrried on the table; and that is all that is contemplated by law an\l meant by the Supreme Court in the dicta quoted above.

Contention has been advanced in regard to the place (seat) assigned to the counting agents at the counting table, Petitioner's witnesses 5 and 6, who attended counting In the constituencies Trivandi-um City I and II, deposed to have sat just behind the counting supervisor at one side of the table while the counting assistants were at the opposite skh' of the table. Petitioner's witnesses 1 to 4 and 7, who attended the counting in the other constituencies, testified to have been at a longer side of the table while the counting assistants were at the opposite side and the counting supervisors at a shorlsr side o{ the table." The contention that the place assigned to the counting agents at the counting tablj was not convenient Is urged in regard to both the above arangements alike. I am at a loss tu know which else would be a more avdanfageous nln'.'e : counsel has no suggestion for a better arrangement. Adverse criticism without a constructive pronosal for betterment often fails to convince and that is what T feel here- To me H appears that the utilisation of the opportunity afforded to a counting agent to watch and supervise the counting depends unon his perf'-yial ability and not on the place assigned to him at the counting table. I find litHe force in the contentions relating to this Issue. It is therefore found against I'-u* petitioner.

10- Issue No. 8-—It has been alleged that the counting had been in violation of the provisions of Section (>4 of "Ihe Act and of Rules 51, 56(2) (d), second proviso to Rule 56(2), and Rule 5G(U). Section fi4 provides for counting being cftne by officials under the supervision and direction of the Returning Oflirer, which term by virtue of Sections 22 and 23 of the Act would Include the Assistant Returning Officer. The contention Is that the Assistant Returning Officer, seated as he was at the head of the line of tables in which the counting was bad, could not have seen the marks in the ballot papers that were sorted r.nd countfd by the counting officers and that therefore there was no real supervision by him. Supervision does not mean a check of every act of th? officers concerned, The fact that the Assis- tant Returning Officer has been present at ihe hall throughout, accessible to the agents of the Interested candidates for hearinc their objections to the manner of counting done at the various, tables which thf-v are allowed to watch, and for affording immediate relief thereto^ is a sufficiently effective supervision in my view, and I do not think that more'lhan that is contemplated bv the election law- Even if the Assistant Returning Officer were to hover over the hall he could not have seen every hallot paper that were handled bv the counting officers at the various tables; and he had other functions to discViarRp during counting viz., scrutinising, sorting and counUn# of doubtful ballot papers, test checking of the bundles of valid votes brought to him from "every counting table and making necessary entries from time to time in the concerned hallot paper account and the result sheet. The contention has only to be repelled-

Rule 51 relates to formal intimation of the counting place and time to the candidates a week before date of counting. There is no specific allegation that this has not been done, either in the election petition or in the evidence on record. Sub-rule 2(d) and the second proviso to sub-rule (2) of Rule 56 are said to have been violated because ballot papers having nn original mark patently In the column of one candidate and an impression due to wrong folding In the column of another candidate have been either counted for the latter candidate or rejected, As mentioned already the allegation has been made generally and vaguely and no material fact in regard thereto has been p.iven cither in the elec- tion petition or in the evidence adduced. As regards Rule 56(3) it Is averred that the counting atrents, who are entitled to inspect ballot papers before thev are finally reiected. have not been .shown such papers. No proof has been adduced on f.hts allegation : no counting Rfent who was at the Assistant Returning Officer's or the Returning Officer's table has been cited- Challenge has not been delivered

to the Assistant Returning Officers cited in this regard when they spoke to their scrutiny and rejection of invalid papers- The allegation fails- Issue No. 8 therefore has to go against the petitioner.

11. Issue No. l.^-On the findings recorded above this issue has to go against the petitioner.

12- Issues Noa 13 and 15-—These issues relate to the reliefs which the petitioner Is entitled to in this case- On the findings recorded above It follows that no case has been made out to avoid the election of the 1st respondent and therefore also to declare the petitioner elected. The election petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.

Under Section 110 of the Act the 1st respondent, the returned candidate, has to get his costs, which shall include counsel's fee Rs. 500.

Judgment accordingly.

The 29th August," 1987. 7th Bhadra, 1889- Sd-/- M. MADHAVAN NAIR, Judge.

[No. 82/KL-4/67.I

ORDERS

New Delhi, the 29th September 1967

S.O. 54ML—Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Adsad Janar- dhan Eknath a contesting candidate for election to the House of the People from Arnravati 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 mad* thereunder;

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

Now, therefore, in pursuance of section 10A of the said Act, the Election Com- mission hereby declare* the §aid Shri Adsad Janardhan Eknath to be disqualified for being chosen as, and fos being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State for a period of three TMXf from the data of thii Order.

[No. MT-HP/19/67.]

Ntw Delhi, the 3Td October 1967

fl.O. S699.—Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Lavanprasad Shah a contesting candidate for election to the House of the People from Jamnagar constituency, has failed to lodge an account of his election expenses in the manner required by the Repreientation 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 justi- fication for the failure;

Now therefore in pursuance of section 10A of the said Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shri Lavanprasad Shah 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 y t an from the date of this order.

[No- GJ-HP/4/67]

New Delhi, the 4th October 1967

SO 8700 Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri I. Rama- rhander 218/219 Ward 3, Block" 2, Busareddiguda, Secunderabad, a contesting candidate for election to the House of the People from 32-Siddipet constituency, has failed to lodge an account of his election expenses as required by the Repre- ••ntatlon of the People Act, 1951, and the Rules made thereunder;

And whereat th" said candidate, "v"n tfi"r du" notlc* hai not glvmn any rea- son of explanation for th* failure

Now, therefore, in pursuance of section 10A of the said Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shri I. Ramachander 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. AP-HP/32/87.]

New Delhi, the 5th October 1967

S.O. 3701.—Whereas the Election Commission is satisfied that Shri Mohammed Malmi Pappada, Agaffi Island Post, H.P.O. Calicut, a contesting candidate for election to the House of the People from the Laccadive, Minicoy, Amindivi cons- tituency, has failed to lodge an account of his election expenses In the manner required by the Representation of the People Act, 1951, ind th" Rule* mad* thereunder;

And whereas the said candidate, even after du" nottc* ka> not glV*i any rm-

son or explanation for the failure;

Now, therefore, in pursuance of section 10A of the told Act, the Election Commission hereby declares the said Shri Mohammed Malmi Pappada to be dis- qualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Par- liament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of " State for a pariod of three years from the date of this order-

[No. LM-HP/S7-]

By Order,

K. S. KAJAGOPALAN, Secy.

MINISTRY Or HOME AFFAIRS

New Dalhi, the 4th October 1967

S.O. JW02 In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Goa, Daman and DIu (Absorbed Employees) Act, 1965 (50 of 1P65), the Central Govern- ment hereby makes the following rules to amend the Goa. Daman and Diu (Absorbed Employees Conditions of Service) Rules, 1905, namely:—

1. (1) These rules may be called the Goa, Daman and DIu (Absorbed Employees Conditions of Service) Amendment Rules, 1967-

(2) They shall be deemed to have come into force on the 1st day of February, 1988.

2- In the Goa, Daman and Din (Absorbed Employees Conditions of Service) Rules, 1965.—

(1) in clause (e) of rule 2, for the words and figures "and shall include complementary pay and the charge allowance granted under rule 15", the following shall be substituted, namely:—

"and shall include—

(1) camplementary pay; (ii) the charge allowance grafted u"der rule 15; (ill) compensatory pay or sjetial pay franted by the Portuguese Govern- ment to any of their employees In GOB, Daman and Diu with a view to protecting the reduction In their pay as a result of reorganisa- tion and revision of pay-scales; and

(iv) increment of ten per cent of pay granted by the Portuguese Govern- ment to any of their employees in Goa, Daman DIu on completion of a stipulated years of service on the ground that there was no scope of further promotion;"

(2) in rule 7,—

(I) in sub-rules (1) and (2), for the words "under ihe Portuguese Ad- ministration of Goa, Daman and Diu, the words "in Portugal or

under the Portuguese Administration of Goa, Daman and Dlu or in any other Portuguese colony" shall be substituted;

(II) after sub-rule (5), the following sub-rule shall be inserted, namely:— "(6) Subject to the provisions of sub-rule (7), the provisions of these rules shall apply to a person who, on the appointed day, attains the age of superannuation under the Central Rules without having any earned leave to his credit on that day and—

(a) who was permanent and making pensionary contribution under the

aforesaid Statute; or

(b) who was permanent but making no pensionary contribution under

the aforesaid Statute; or

(c) who was temporary,

(7) (a) In a case falling under clause (a) of sub-rule (6), the person referred to therein shall have the option to be governed either by the aforesaid Statute or by the Liberalised Pension RYiles.

(b) In a case falling under clause (b) of that sub-rule, the person referred to therein shall be governed by the Liberalised Pension Rules.

(c) In a case falling under clause (c) of that sub-rule, the person referred to therein shall be entitled only to the retirement benefits admissible to temporary Central Government employees.";

3- For rule 13, the following rule shall be substituted, namely: —

"13. Other matters:—The conditions of service of absorbed employees relat- ing to all matters other than "those for which provision has been made in the foregoing rules shall be governed by the Central rules, If any, on that matter, and save as aforesaid, nny right, privilege or conces- sion enjoyed by such employee immediately before the 1st day of February, 1966 shall stand abrogated with effect from that day.";

4- In rule 18, after Item 6 and the entries relating thereto, the following shall be inserted, namely:—

"7. Santa Casa de Miserlcordia (Administrative Body of Public Unity); 8. Caixa Economica de Goa.";

5. After rule 20, the following rule shall be inserted, namely:— "20A, Rules to apply to persona absorbed in Defence establishments.—The pre- visions of these rules shall apply to an absorbed employee who is serving on the appointed day in a Defence establ fshment subject to the following modifications, namely: —

(a) The reference to Central Rules shall be construed as references to the rules relating to conditions of service generally applicable to civilians In Defence Services; and

(b) the reference to the Revised Leave Rules, 1933, In rule 6 shall be con- strued as a reference to the Leave Rules for civilians in Defence Services.";

6. In rule 21, the words "Defence or" shall be omitted.

[No. 1/95/66-GP.}!

Y. D. SEHGAL, Under Secy.

New Delhi, the 7th October 1967

S.O. 3703.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) and sub- section (4) of section 4 of the Laccadive, Minicoy and Amlndivi Islands (Civil Courts) Regulation, 1965 (9 of 1965), the Central Government, after consultation with the High Court of Kerala, hereby appoints, with effect from the 1st day of November, 1967, the District Judge of Tellicherry, Kerala State as the district judge under the said Regulation, without prejudice to his functions as the District Judge of Tellicherry.

[No. F. 9/2/66-UTL-U).] K. R. PRABHU, Jt. Secy.

New Delhi, the 13th October 1967

8.O. 3704.—In exercise of the powers coiiferred by clause (1) of article 258 of the Constitution, the President, with the consent of the Government of Assam, hereby entrusts to that Government, the functions of the Central Government in relation to any matter specified in sub-clauses (c) and (d) of clause (8) of section 2 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923^, subject to the condition that not withstanding such entrustment the said functions may also be exercised by the Central Government.

[No. F. 21/28/67-P.oll. II.J

S. S. VARMA, Dy. Secy.

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department of Economic Affairs)

New Delhi, the Uh October 1967

S.O, 3705.—In exercise of the powers conferred by yection 53 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (10 of 1949), the Central Government, on the recommenda- tion of the Reserve Bank of India, hereby declares that the provisions of section 11 of the said Act shall not apply to the Punjab & Sind Bank Ltd., Amritsar for a period up to and including the 31st July 1968,

[No. F. 15(22)-BC/67.]

SI

s

u>

tfeio Dtlhi, the 7th October 1967

S O. 370S.—StatemeaL of the Aflain of ihe Ressrvc Baak of India u on the 29th September, 1967-

fiAHtiso DEPARTMENT

Ha w o 15

LjABILITIES

ASBTt

Rs.

R*.

o

19.19)37,030

C 1 i ui Paid Up

I-H

Nctes

Snfee Coin

. . . . ..

7i75,*"

3,40,000

e w ve Fund

Small Coin

-

Bills turcftased and Discounted—

"•National Agiioilrnrat Credit (Long

o Term Operations) Fond

( a) i i t f w r ni \**z 1 ••> • 1 • ••

. . .. . . . *

Cd W

• t) E x K i n al

. ..

-S3

362,23,06,000

(C) GoTemmeutTreasury Bilh

hjationa] Agricultural Credk

11.39,63,000

(S[ibilist.ticm*) Fcmd

25,oo^Orfx"

^alances Heid Abroad*

Nsliecftl Industrial Credit (Long Term

165,30,66,000

Orwutions) Food

1 nvesiments*'

. . ..

3o,oo,opjOoo

N—I

L o t st tnd Advanct* to : —

(1) Central GovetnmeJH

26,87,89,000

(it) Stlte Governments® .

.

CO

Deposits—

Loan* tad AdYincMTO1 —

3,19,50,000

(JJ Scheduled ComroeTCJil Backtt

?

I67,o<5,97,ooo

(tf) State Co-oper"rtTe Bankttt

fy) Go^ernmfDt—

2,56J55>OOO

("0Ott"TS

• TOij05.53.coo

CO Centra] Government

Loans- Advance* tind Investment! from N< ti uai Agricultural

S B C

.

Credit (Long Term Operations; Fund -

S (:t) State Governemnts

7,75>68,ooo

( i i ) ]

28,27,08,000

14,00,32,000

(a) Loans and Advaace? "<•• :— (0 State Govsttmiente (ji) State Co-operative Baai" (Ui) Cexstnl Laad Mortgage Banks

T H E

7,43,29,000 (•>> Bants—

(6) Investment in Central Land Mortgage Bank Debentures

Loans and Advances from National Agricultural Credi'

• (*) Scheduled Commercial Banks

136,96,39.000 (Stabilisation) Fund—

8,54.42,000

5.60,47,000

(it) Scheduled State Co-operative Banks

Loans and Advances to State Co-operative Bank s .

G A Z E T T E

(m) Non-Scheduled State Co-operative Bankn

76,03,00c

O F

(iv) Other Biife-

Loans, Advances scd Investments from National Industrial

15>59P°O

I

Credit (Long 7 eim Operations') Fund—,

N D

I

(c) Others

(a) Loans and Advances to the Development Bank

5,24,i5"ooo

262s23,63,ooo

A

:

(6) Investorent in bonoc/debentures issued bv the

Development Bank .

Bills payable

30,84,12,000

Other Liabilities

34J39,85,OOO

Other Asiets

39>46,95,f>o<"

O C T O B E R

Rupees

Pup;es

855,84>39,ooo

855.84,39,000

2 1

,

•Includes Cash and Short-term Securities.

1 9 6 7

/

•*Excluding Investments from the National A >ricu>tural Credit (Long Term Operations Fund and the National Industrial C-edit (Long Term

Ope"i'ons> Fund.

A S V

1

@ Exclu ling Lf^'.tv'i >rvi Alvances fnm the National Agriculture! CrjJit (Long Term Operations') Fund, but including temporary overdrafts to

N A

State Governments.

2

t ,

tlneludas Rs. NIL aivancei to scheiulei c^.nnsroial balks against usance bills under Section I7(4)(c) of the Reserve 8"nk of India Act.

1 8 8 9

ttExcluiing Loans aoJ Advances fram the National Agricultural Credit J(Loag]Term Operations) Fund and the National Agricultural Credit (Stabili-

sation) Fund.

Dated the 4th day of October, 1967.

3 9 0 3

u> An Acci-unt pursuant l the Re"cr" Ban* oT India j\a 1934 ,oi the week ended be 29th day of September 196?

ISSUB D"PA*TMBN7

I

LiABJLiriES R". R". Aasffrs Rs. Rs.

H w Notes held ia the Banking Depart- Gold Coin and Bullion :—

meat

19,19,87,000 {a) Held in India 115,89,25,000 Notes in Circulation 2894,69,5 5,000 (b) Held outiidt Indi*

S- Total Nstes issued 2913,89,42,000

Foreign Securitva

l66,42,cw,ooo

o

T0T4L . . 282,31,25 c-co

*—I

Rupte Coin

81,66 58,000

GoTernment of India Rupe? Securifac* 2549,91,59^000

o

tmefiial blll" of Exchange "n,i o her

^oraiaercial paper

o T O T AI LIABIUTIES

2913 S9,42,of>j TOTAL ASSETS

2913,89,4:2,000

q Dated the 4th da? Qt October 1967

B. N. ADARKAR,

o

Dy. Go?^rnor.

to

[No F. 3(3 -R."767 3

S3••ocr,

V. SWAMINATHAN, Tinker SFw.

>

CORB;G£JVDA

>

ha

s "In the Statement of Affairs of the Reserve Bank of India, Banking¹ Department as on the 1st September 1967 published in Gazette of India dated 23rd September 1967 at Part n—Section 3(ii) on pages 3504-3505, the figure against the item "Loans and Advances from National Agricultural Credit (Stabilisation) Fund—Loans and Advances to State Co-operative Banks" under Assets side should read as '8,56,11,000' instead of '56,11,000' "

"In the Statement of the Affairs of the Reserve Bank of India as on the 8th

>•"September, 1967, Banking Department, published in the Gazette of India dated 23rd September 1967 at Part n—Section 3(ii) on pages 3507-3508, the figure against the item "Deposits—fb)—Banks—(ii) Scheduled State Co-operative Banks" under Liabilities side should read as '5,03,07.000' instead of '6,03,07,000"- 7

(Department of Revenue & Insurant*)

STAMPS

New Delhi, the 14th October 1967

S.O. 3701.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 9 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899), the Central Govern- ment hereby remits the stamp duty with which the debentures of the value not exceeding 7-5 crores of rupees which may be Issued by the Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Limited, Bombay during the year 1967 and executed by that Corporation, are chargeable under the said Act.

[No. 10/G7-F- No. 1/62/67-Cua. VII/Stamps.]

CUSTOMS

New Delhi, the 14th October 1967

S.O. 31*8.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 25 of the Customs Art, 1962 (52 of 1982), the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts jute gooda when produced in Nepal and imported into India from the additional duty leviable thereon under section 2A of the Indian Tariff Act, 1934 (32 of 1934).

. ' [No. 107/F. No- 80/9/67-L.C.L]

G. P- DURAIRAJ, Dy. Secy.

(Department of Revenue and Insurance)

CUSTOMS

New Delhi, the 14th October 1967

S.O. 37O9.-^-In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1H62), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri G. Sankaran, Appellate Collector of Customs, Bombay, as the " Appellate Collector of Customs, Madras, also.

2. The appointment of Shrl Sankaran made under p&ragraph 1 shall be without prejudice to the appointment of Shri K. M- Mathew as the Appellate Collector of Customs, Madras.

[No. 106/F. No. 22/6/67-CusJV.]'

D. N, LAL, Deputy Secy.

(Department of Revenue and Insurance)

ORDER

F.E.RJV.

New Delhi, the 21st October 1967

S.O. 31(10.—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 2B of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Aft, 1947 (7 of 1947), the Central Government hereby autho- rises every Assistant Collector of Central Excise at Hyderabad and at Ahmedabad, to exercise the powers of an Assistant Director of Enforcement under section 19D of the said Act.

[No, 1/67-FERA/F. No. 1/3/67-Tech. Coord.l

R, C. MISRA, Dy. Secy.

(Department of Revenue and Insurance)

CORRIGENDUM

New Delhi, the 5th October 1967

S.O. 3711^Substitute 1-6-67 for 16-1-07 against the name of Shri V, B Joshi in this Ministry's Notification Income-tax "Establishments No. 224 dated 26-7-67.

[No, F. 57/20/67-Ad. VI,]

M. G. THOMAS, Under Secy.

ERRATA

In the Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs (Office of the Treasurer of Charitable Endowments for India) No. F. 1/1/87-SB-TCE, dated the l!5th June, 1967, published as SO. No 2124 In the Ga/ette of India, Part II, Section 3(11), dated the 24th June, 1967, "t pages 2141 to 8171—

1. at pane 2154—(i) against case No- 13, In column 4, for Re- '28,90.00' read '28,900,00'.

(II) against case No- 17, in column 4, for Rs- '1,65,000.' read '1,65,000.00' and far Ra. '58,000-00' read Rs. '1,58,000.00'.

2. at page 2156—against case No. 4, in column 8, for Rs- '10-46' read

•10-08'.

3- "t page J15S—(i) against Caw No. 13, In column 4, for the word *BornbayV

read 'Bombay'-

(ii) "galn"t case No. IT, In column 4, for the figure '1956' read '1B46'.

4. at pages 2158-59—against case No- II, In column 8, for Rs. '500-00' read

Ri- '3000'-

5. at pages 21B0-81—against case No. 27, (i) In column 3, line 2, for the

figure '200' read '209'.

(11) In column 11, against (Q)—Line 12 for '1.1.1967' read '31-1-1967'-

6. at page 2162—ajainst case No. 3, under Madras, In column 4, for the

word 'Loans' read 'Loan'.

7. at page 2163—against case No 2, under West Bengal, in column U, for

the word 'balanced' read 'balance'-

CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

INCOME TAX

New Delhi, the 1th October 1967

S.O. 3713.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 122 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) and of all other powers enabling it in that behalf the Central Board of Direct Taxes hereby makes the following amendment in the Schedule appended to its Notification No. 72 (F. No. 50/137/67-ITJ) dated 22nd August, 1967, namely: —

In the said Schedule against Range I. Range II and Range III, Kanpur under column 3 the following shall be substituted: —

Range I, Kanpur.

1. Circle I, Kanpur. 2, Central Circle III, Kanpur. 3. Central Circle IV, Kanpur. 4. Jhansi.

1. A, B, and C Wards, Circle II, Ranfe II, K*"pur.

Kanpur.

2, Special Circle, Kanpur. 3. Companies Circle, Kanpur. 4. Fatehgarh. 5. Project Circle, Kanpur.

1. D, E, F, G, H. J, K and L Wards, Range III, Kanpur.

Circle II, Kanpur. 2. Salary Circle, Kanpur. 3. Special Survey Circle, Kanpur. 4. Etawah. 5. Banda. 6. E.D. cum I.T. Circle, Kanpur.

7- I.T-O. Administration, Circle II,

Kanpur,

B. I.T.O., Collection, Circle II,

Kanpur.

The notification shall take effect from £th October, 1967.

Explanatory Note

The amendment has become necessary on account of transfer of one post of AAC from Kanpur to Delhi.

(The above note does not form part of the notification, but is intended to b* merely elariflcatory).

[No- 12"—T- No- M/187/67-IJT.]

New Dalhl, th" 10t7i Octob"r 1BB7

S.O. 8718.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 122 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) and of all other powers enabling it in that behalf, the Central Board of Direct Taxes hereby makes the following amendment in the Schedule appended to its Notification No. 98 (F. No. 50/167/67- ITJ) dated the 11th September, 1967, namely: —

In the said Schedule against B-Kange, New DeUbi, under column 2, the following shall be substituted:

B-Range, New Delhi. 1. Refund Circ¹e. New Delhi.

2. Special Survey Circles I, II III, IV, V, VI,

VII, VIII, and IX, New Delhi.

3. District III, Ward* A (I) C(I), E(I),

G(I), 1(1), K(I), and M(I), New Delhi.

4. District IV Wards A(I), B(I), C(I), and

C(II), New Delhi.

5. Special Assessment Circles I, II, III, IV, VI and '

VIII. New Delhi.

6. Companiea Circles I, III, XIX, XX, XXI and

XXII.

Explanatory Nott

The amendment has become necessary on account of the creation of four new Companies Circles known as Companies Circle XIX. XX, XXI and XXII in the Commissioners' charge.

(The above note does not form part of the notification, but is intended to be merely clarificatory).

[ No. 124 (F. No. 50/167/67-ITJ).] P. G. GANDHI, Under Secy.

OFFICE OF THE COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, HYDERABAD

Hyderabad, the 29th August, 1967

S.O.3714—.In exercise of the powers conferred upon me by Rule 5 of the Central Excise Rule, 1944 , Thereby delegate the powers under rules mentioned in Column 3 to the Officers mentioned in Column 4 of the Table below.

TABLE

Rule No.

Nature of powen conferred on

Collectors powers to be dele- gated to.

SI. No.

Collectors1 2 4 3 Superintendent 1 96ZA(i) To accept first A.S.P. application for full period for which "pecial procedure am bt tTtilcd of.

2

Supcrirtendenr

9fiZA(2)

To accept first A.S.P. application, for a period less than the prescribed period.

Asatt. Collector,

96ZA(3)

3 To 'determine the period for which a manufacturer may be precluded from working under the special procedure for failure to give proper nntiCd for not availing of such procedure during the period for which permission has been granted to him.

Superintendent

(a) To accept renewal applications in 96ZAC4)

4

form A.S.P.

Do,

(b) To condone dealy in submission

of A.S.P. application for renewal.

(i) Superintendent for con- doning delays not exceeding 15 days,

(ii) Asst'. Collector for condon-. ing delays exceeding 15 days.

96ZD(2)

To condone delBy in submission of appli-

5

(i) Superintendent for con- doning delays not exceeding 5 days.

cntion for removal in form A.R. 6 and to condone delays in making monthly deposits.

(ii) Ass't, Collector if the delay exceeds the limits under (i) above.

To impose following penalties for mis-

6

declaration etc.

~) Adjudicating Officers in ac- V cordance with their limits of

96ZF(0 9fiZF(ii) 96ZF(iv)

(i) To demand duty at full rate ^ii) To confiscate goods (lii) To impose penalty not exceeding

J powers.

Rs. 2000/-

[N0.6/67]

[File No. V / I 6 - B / 8 / I / 67 MP]

M. L. ROUTH,

Collector

COLLECXORATE OF CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE, COCHIN

CENTRAL EXCISE

Cochin, the 30th September 1967

S.O. 3715.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-Rule 5 of Central Excise Rules, 1944, I hereby makes the following amendment In this Collectorate's Noti- fication No. 7/1967-Central Excise dated 12th August 1967, namely: —

In Col. No. 4 against Serial No. 5 of the Table appended to ihe said noti- fication, for the letters and figures "A.R. 6," the letter and figure "A.R. 10", shall be substituted,

[No. 9/67-]

[No. 9/67 C.E.—V/16B/30/16/67 CXI.]

D. N. KOHLJ,

Collector.

MINISTRY OF COMMERCE

New Delhi, the 9th October 1967

S.O. 3716.—The Central Gov eminent, having considered in consultation with, the Forward Markets Commission, the application for renewal of recognition

made under section 5 of the Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1952 (74 of 1U52) by the Punjab Company Ltd., Kikar Bazar, Bhatinda and being .satisfied that it would be in the interest of the trade and also in the public interest so to do hereby grants, in exercise oi the powers conferred by section 6 of the said Act recognition to the said Company tor u further period from the 16th December, 1907 to the 5th November, 1970 (both days inclusive) in respect of forward contracts in cottonseed.

2. The recognition hereby granted is subject to the condition that the said Company shall comply with such directions as may from time to time be given by the Forward Markets Commission. ^ 3 4 ( 1 3 ).c Q / 67 j

• S O. 3717,—The Central Government having considered in consultation with the Forward Markets Commission, the application lor renewal of recognition made under section 3 of the Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1952 (74 of 1952) by the Punjab Company Ltd., Kikar Bazar, Bhatinda, and being sBtisfled that it would be in the interest of the trade and also in the public interest so to do, hereby grants, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 6 of the said Act recognition to the said Company for a further period of three years from the tith November, 1907 upto the 5th November, 1970 (both days inclusivej in respect of forward contracts in kapas.

2. The recognition hereby granted is subject to the condition that the said Company shall comply with such directions a⁵" may from time to time be given by the Forward Markets Commission.

[No- 34(13).-C.G./67-I-l

M. L. GUPTA, Under Secy.

TEA CONTROL

New Delhi, the 9th October 1967

SO. 3718.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 4 of the Tea Act, 1953 (29 of K63), read with rules 4 and 5 of the Tea Rules, 1954, the Central Government hereby appoints Shri P. C. Borooah as a member of the Tea Board until the 31st March, 1969, In the vacancy caused by the death of Shri P. V. Ramchandran and makes the following further amendment in the Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Commerce No. S.O. 1143, dated the 8Lh April, 1966, namely:—

In the said notification, for entry 25, the fallowing entry shall be substituted, namely:—

"25. Shri P. C. Borooah, Representing consumers and other

interests.

JAHNABI P.O. Sibsagar, Assam.

Representing consumers and other interests.

[No. 7(2)-Plant(A)/65,}

CORRIGENDUM

New Delhi, the 5£h October 19G7

S.O. 3719,—In the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Commerce S.O. 2962 dated the 18th August, 1967, published in sub-section (ii) of ,1 art II of Section 3 of the Gazette of India dated the 2nd September, ]9fi7, for the words ''a period of three years from the 18th August, 1967" read "the period ending with 18th April, 1968".

[No, 1 (1) Plant (B) 67,]

B, KRISHNAMURTHY, Under Secy.

MINISTRY OF STEEL, MINES AND METALS

(Department of Mines and Metals)

New Delhi, the 10th October 19(37

S.O. 3720—Whereas In pursuance of the notification of the Government of India in the late Ministry of Steel Mines and Fuel (Department of Mines and Fuel) No. S.O. 2839, dated the 15th December, 1959, under Section 9 of the Coal

Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 cf 1957), the Central Government has acquired lands measuring 88 • 75 acres in the villages Bhukbunkl and Government Forest ana the rightB to mine, quarry, bore, dig and search lor, win, work and carry away minerals in the lands measuring 10-75 acres in the villages Bhukbhuki and Government Forest in the District oJ! Surguja;

And whereas Shri Sunder Lai, S/o Shri Raghunandan Lai of village Bhukbhuki. Tahsil Mamndragarh, District Surguja (M.P.), the interested person, has under section 13 of the saia Act, preferred his cJaim lor compensation for acquisition of his land 3 00 Ac^es which form part of land so acquired to the competent authority;

And whereas the compensation offered by the competent authority has been accepted by him only under protest and there is a dispute as to the sufficiency of the amount of compensation offered;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section 14 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby constitutes a Tribunal consisting of Shri Padmakant Choudhary, Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, part-time Tribunal for the purpose of determining the amount of com- pensation payable to Shri Sundar Lai.

[No. C2-22(15)/83.1

8.O. 3721—-Whereas in pursuance of the notification of the Government of India in the late Ministry of Steel, Mines and Fuel (Department of Mines and Fuel) No. S.O. 2839, dated the 15th December, 1959, under Section 9 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957), the Central Government has acquired lands measuring 83 75 acres in the villages Bhukbhuki and Government Forest and the rights to mine, quarry, bore, dig and search for, win, work and carry away minerals in the lands measuring 10-75 acres is the villages Bhukbhuki and Government Forest in the District of Surguja;

And whereas Shri Rangu Ghore of village Bhukbhuki, Tahsil Manindragarh, District Surguja (M.P-), the Interested person, has under section 13 of the said Act, preferred his claim for compensation for acquisition of his land -40 Acres •which form part of land so acquired to the competent authority;

And whereas the compensation offered by the competent authority has been accepted by him only under protesL and there is a dispute as to the sufficiency of the amount of compensation offered;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) ol section 1-4 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby constitutes a Tribunal consisting of Shri Padmakant Choudhary, Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, part-time Tribunal for the purpose of determining the amount of com- pensation payable to Shri Rangu Ghore.

[No. C2-22(IS)/fl3.]

S.O. 3722.—Whereas In pursuance of the notification of the Government oi India in the late Ministry of Steel, Mines and Fuel (Department of Mines and Fuel) No. S.O. 2839, dated the 15th December, 1959. under Section 0 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957), the Central Government has acquired lands measuring 83"75 acres in the villages Bhukbhuki and Government Forest and the rights to mine, quarry, bore, dig and search for, win, work and carry away minerals in the lands measuring 1075 acres in th" villages Bhukbhukhi and Government Forest in the District of Surguja;

And whereas Shri Sheo Shankar Jaiswal S/o ShriDalsinger Jaiswal of viUne Bhukbhuki, Tahsil Manindragarh, District Surguja (MP-), the interested person, haa under section 13 of the said Act, preferred his claim for compensation for acquisition of his land 2072 Acres which form part of land so acquired to the competent authority;

And whereas the compensation offered by the competent authority has been accepted by him only under protest and there is a dispute as to the sufficiency of the amount of compensation offered;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (3) of section 14 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby constitutes a Tribunal consisting of Shri Padmakant Choudhary, Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, part-time Tribunal for the purpose of determining the amount of com- pensation payable to Shri Sheo Shankar Jaiswal.

[No. C2-22(18)/"3.]

U. 5. K. JU.UASWAMI, Dy. S"y.

MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT & SHIPPING

(Transport Wing)

JVeiu Delhi, the 4th October 1997

S.O- 3723.—In exercise of the powers conferred bv sub-section (1} ol section 63A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (4 of 1939), and' in supersession ol the noti- fication ol the Government of India in the late Ministry of Transport and Avia- tion, Department of Transport, Shipping and Tourism (Transport Wing) No. l-T(28)/53-VoMI, dated the 29th June, 1966, the Central Government hereby reconstitutes the Inter-State Transport Commission, an follows:

(1) Shri S. N. Sinha,

Additional Director General (Roads), Ministry of Shipping (Roads Wing). -Chairman.

Shri V. B- Ahuja, Joint Director,

Traffic (Rates) Ministry of Railways (Railway Board).—Member-

(3) Dr. V. G. Bhatia, Director, Transport Research, Ministry of Transport and Shipping-—Member.

[No. 23-T(ll)/67.]

B. M- MAZUMDAR, Under Secy.

(Transport Wins)

MERCHANT SHIPPING

New Delhi, the ith October 1967

S.O. 3724*—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 (44 of 1958), the Central Government hereby appoints with^fTect from the 14th August, 1987, Shri Govind H. Seth, Additional Director General of Shipping, Directorate General of Shipping, Bombay to be Director General of Shipping vice Shri K. C- Madappa, Joint Secretary and Director General of Shipping granted leave-

[No. l-MA(39)67).l

K. V. SANKARAN, Dy. Secy.

(Transport Wing)

MERCHANT SHIPPING

New Delhi, the 7th October 1967

S.O. 3725.—In pursuance of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section £83 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 (44 of 1958), the Central Government hereby declares that the Government of Czechoslovakia has accepted the safety con- vention as defined in clause (37) of section 3 of the said Act that is to say, the convention for the safety of Life at Sea, signed in London on the seventeenth day Of June Nineteen hundred and sixty, as amended from time to time.

[No. F. 46-MA(10)/68.]

B. B. LAL, Under Secy.

(Directorate General of Shipping)

CORRIGENDUM MERCHANT SHIPPING Bombay, the 10th October 1967

8.O. 8726.—In the Order of the Director General of Shipping No. S. O. 2821, dated the 7th June, 1967, published in the Gazette of India, Part II, Section 3,

Sub-sectton (11), dated the 15th July, 1967, In the first column under heading 'Section', for the figure "146(2)" the figure "146(2;" shall be substituted.

[No. 20-SLU7)/66.]

GOVIND H. SETH,

Director General of Shipping.

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION

New Delhi, the 10th October 1967

S.O. 3727.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-section (2) of Section 5 read with sub-section (3) of suction 6 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, the Central Government hereby appoints Shri P. B. Gajendragadkar, Vice-Chancellor, Bombay University, Bombay, as a member of the University Grants Commission vice Shri D. C. Pavate, since resigned. Shri Gajendragadkar shall hold office upto 30th November 1968 from the date of notification.

[No. F. 9-36/67-U2.]

G. K. CHANDIRAMANI. Addl. Secy.

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS

(P. & T. Board)

New Delhi, the 7th October 1967

S.O. 3728.—In pursuance of para (a) of Section III of Rule 434 of Indian Tele- graph Rules, 1951, as introduced by S-O. No- 627, dated 8th March, 1960, the Director General, Posts and Telegraphs, hereby specifies the 1st Ntovember 1967 as the date on which the Measured Rate System will be introduced in Kalimpong Telephone Exchange.

[No. 5-46/67-PHB,]

D. R. BAHL,

Assistant Director General (PHB).

MINISTRY OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & COMPANY AFFAIRS

(Department of Industrial Development)

New Delhi, the 9th October 1967

S.O- 3730JDRA/6/8/67—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 6 of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 (85 of 1051), read with rules 5(1) and 8 of the Development Councils (Procedural) Rules. 1952, the Central Government hereby appoints, till the 8th August, 1969, Shri Liladhar Kotaki, a Member of the Lok Sabha to be a member of the Development Council for Man-made Textiles established by the Order of the Government of India in this Ministry's Order No. S.O. IDRA/6/5/67, dated the 9th August, 1967, and directs that the following amendment shall be made in the said Order namely: —

In the said Order, after entry No. 28 relating to Shrl D. H. Vora, the follow- ing entry shall be inserted namely: —

"29. Shri Liladhar Kotaki,

Member (Lok Sabha), 144, South Avenue, New Delhi."

LNo. 2(1)-Dev. Council/68-L.C-l

ORDER

New Delhi, the 9th October 1967

S.O. 3731-DDRA/6/9/67.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 6 of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1051 (65 of 1951), rear! with rules 2, 5 and 8 of the Development Councils (Procedural) Rules, 1952, the Cer.tial Government hereby appoints, till the 16th October, 1968, Shri P. ,T. Manohar Rao tu carry on the functions of the Secretary of the Development Counci¹ for Sugar •established by the Order of the Government of India, in the late Ministry of Industry No. S.O. 307 IDRA/G/1/67 dated the 11th January, 1987 for the scheduled industries engaged in the manufacture or production of sugar and directs that the following amendment shall be made in the said order, namely; —

In the said Order, for the existing para 2, the following para shall be substi- tuted, namely:—

"2. Shri P. J. Manohar Rao, Deputy Director (Sugar Technical) in the Directorate of Sugar and Vanaspati (Department of Food) is hereby appointed to carry on the functions of Secretary to the said Develop- ment Council."

[No. 2(2)/Dev- Council/66-L.C]i

R. C. SETHI, Under Secy.

(Department of Industrial Development)

(India* Standards Institution)

New Delhi, the 4th October 1967

S.O. 2732,—In the title of licences No. CM-688 and CM/L-689, dated 17th June 1964 held by M/s. Shree Maharaja Steel Mills (P) Ltd., Kapurthala, the details of which are published under S.O. 2651 in the Gazette of India, Part II, Section 3, Sub-Section 3(ii) dated 5th August, 1967, the following changq has been made with effect from 28th September, 1967:

M/s. Shree Maharaja Steel Mills (P) Ltd., Lessee: M/s. Steel Corporation of Punjab, Industrial Area, Kapurthala.

[No- MD/55:8881

S . 0. 3733—In pursuance of sub-regulation (i) of Regulation 8 of the Indian Standards Institution (Certification Marks) Regulation*, 1955, as subsequently amended, the Indian Standards Institution hereby notifies that twenty-seven licences, particulars of which are given in l ie Schedule hereto annexed, have been granted authorizing the licensees to use the Standard Mark.

THB SCHEDULE

Period of

H Licence No. and Date

Serial No.

From

Validity To

Name and Address of the

Licensee

Article/Process Covered by the Licence

Relevant Indian Standard

A

i

2

4

6

3

5

7

w H H

I*S

i

31-8-68 M/s. Containers & Closures

1-9-67

O CM/L-1507 1-9-1967

Ungalvanized steel drums, grade Bj (20 and 25 litres capacity only)

IS :2552-i963 Specification for steel drums (galvanized and ungalvanized)

2

>

16-9-67 15-9-68

BHC dusting powders

CM/L-1508 6-9-1967

o

Ltd, Gorifa (Naihati), 24 Parganas, West Bengal having their office at 2 Faarlie Place, Calcutta-i. M/s. Metropole Industries, Pradhankhunta, Distt. Dhan- bad

IS : 561-1962 Specification for BHC dusting powders (second revision)

3

16-9-67 15-9-68

DDT dusting powders

IS : 564-1961 Specification for CM/L-1509 6-9-1967

M/s. Metropole Industries, Pradhankhunta, Distt.

DDT dusting powders (revised'i

XJliaH DoU.

o te

15-9-68

16-9-67

4 CM/L-1510 8-9-1967

J 0 M/s. Associated Wires & Conductors Co Pvt Ltd., Tanda Road, Jullnndnr City

Hard-drawn stranded all alu- minium conductors for over- head power transmission purposes

OS

IS : 398-1961 Specification for hard-drawn stranded alu- minium and steel-cored aluminium conductors for overhead power trans- mission purposes (revi- sed)

15-9-68

16-9-67

5

Mortice locks (verticle type)

CM/L-1511 8-9-1967

IS 12209-1966 Specification for mortice locks (verticle type)

> M/s. Hemu Productions India), Mammoobahva Street, Aligarh fU.P.)

1O JXJ 6

16-9-67 15-9-68

DDT dusting powders

CM/L-1512 12-9-1967

t—

M/s. Plava Chemicals, 3-C Nelson Manicfc Mudaliar Road, AmijikaraL Madras-29.

IS : 564-1961 Specification for DDT dusting powders (re- vised)

CK

7

16-9-67 15-9-68

BHC water dispersible powder concentrates

CM/L-1513 IZ-9-I967

>

IS : 562-1962 Specification for BHC water dispersit'e pow- der concentrate? Uecard revi- sion)

H

J—( M/s Tata Fison Industries Ltd, 431/4 Panchpakhadi Village, Bah^eshvrar Road, Muland, Bombay-80 having tbeir office at Ralli House, 21 Ravelin Street, Fort, Bombay-1.

I/L-1514

15-9-68

8 C*

16-9-67

CA W

Biscuit (excluding wafer bis- IS : 1011-1957 Specification for cuits) biscuits (excluding wafer

15-9-1967

n

M/s. Britannia Biscuit Co. Ltd., M.T.H. RoadjPadij Madras- 50.

30-9-68

1-10-67

CM/L-1515

9 <

M/s. Dashmesh Engg. Works,

Water meters, 15 mm size: dry-dial, inferential type A

15-9-1967

IS : 779E-1966 Specification for water meters (domestic type {third revision)

2614 Suhanwind Road, Amrit-

sar

Ce 10 CM/L-1516

1-10-67 30-9-68

Tea-chest metal fittings

15-9-1967

IS : 10-1964 Specification for plywood tea-chests (second revision)

II CM/L-1517

16-9-67 15-9-68

pi

15-9-1967

BHC dusting powders IS : 561-19(12 Specification for BHC dusting powders (se- cond revtsum)

M/s. Star Fitting Works, 17 Hurrochandra Mullick Street, Calcutta-5 haWng their Office at 64 Pathuria Ghata Street, Calcutta-6. Jayalakshmi Fertilizers, Ven- katarayapuram, Tanuku West Goda^ri DistL, An- dhra Pradesh)

o >

DDT water dispersible powder

15-9-68

16-9-67

12 CM/L-1518

N pi

15-9-1967

concentrates

IS : 565-1961 Specification for DDT water dispersible powder concentrates (revised)

H H M

M/s. Jayalakshi Fertilisers j Venkataiayapuram, Tanuku, West Godavari Disttt. i'Andhra PradesW

>

15-9-68

BHC water dispersible powder

16-9-67

CM/L-1519

13

concentrates

15-9-1967

o

IS : 562-1962 Specification for BHC water dispersible powder concentrates (se- cm\d revision)

M/s. Jayalakshmi Fertilizers, Venkatrayapuram, Tanuku West Godavari Distt., fAndhra Pradesh"!

Endrin emulsifiable concen-

CM/L-1520

16-9-67 15-9-6S

14

trates

iS-9-1967

[S : 1310-1958 Specification for endrin emubifiable conceatra- rates

H O W W ?3

M/s. Jayalakshmi Fertilizers, Venkatarayapuram, Tanuku, West Godavari Distt, (Andhra Pradeshl

£2

DDT water dipserisble powder

CM/L-1521

16-9-67 15-9-68

15

concentrates

15-9-1967

t—i

(S

IS : 565-1961 Specification for DDT water dispersible concentrates (revised)

M.'s. TataFisonlndu triesLtd., Plot No. 94, Industrial Estate, Ambattur.. Madras-58

CM/L-1522

16

16-9-67 I5-9-6S

BHC dusting powders

15-9-1967

IS : <;6i-i962 Specification for BHC dusting powder (second revision)

M/s. Deepak Pulverisers, Kolshet Road, Thana, (Near Power House)

Endrin emulsifiable concentra-

16-9-67 15-9-6S

CM/L-1523

*7

I

15-9-1967

tes

IS : 1310-1958 Specification for endrin emulsifiable con- trates

M/s. National Agro Chemicals Industrial Estate, Digha, Parana-1 (Bihar)

BHC water dispersible powder

CM/L-1524

IS

15-9-68

16-9-67

15-9-1967

concentrates

00

"

IS : 562-1962 Spccificaticn fcr BHC water dispersible powder concentrates (se- cond revision)

M/s. Tata Fison Industries Ltd., Plot No. 94, Indus- trial Estate, Ambattur, Mad- ras-5 8

CM/L-1525

16-9-67 15-9-68

15-9-1967

M/s. Bharat Pulverising Mills (Pvt)Ltd, 1074 Thiruvot- tiyur High Road, Madres-19

Copper oxy chloride water dispersible powder concen- trates

IS : 1507-1966 Specification for copper oxy chloride water dispersible powder con- centrates (first rtvision)

SO

2

I

6

7 4

5

O\ 3

15-9-68

20

16-9-67

CM/ L-1526

BHC dusting powders

15-9-1967

IS : 561-1962 Specification for BHC dusting powders (second revision)

SI p

M/s. Insecticides & Allied Chemicals, Narayanapuram.- Velacherry High Road, Medavakkam, P. O. Mad- ras-45

21

15-9-6S

16-9-67

DDT dusting powders

CM/L-1527

IS : 564-1961 Specification for DDT dusting powders {revised)

I5-9-I9G7

o

M/s. Insecticides & Allied Chemicals, Narayanapuram Velacherry High Road, Me- davakkam P. O. Mad- ras-45.

22

16-9-67 15-9-68

CM/L-1528

CoppeT oxychloride waterdis- persible powder concentrates

15-9-1967

a P

IS : 1507-1966 Specification for copper oxychloride water dispersible powder concen- trates (first revision)

M/s. Mysore Insecticides Co. Pvt. Ltd. No. 18 Vaidvana- tha Mudali Street, Ton'diar- pet, Madras-21 having their office at No. 6, LJnghi Chetty Street, Aladras-i.

CM/L-1529

30-9-68

1-10-67

23

20-9-1967

Copper oxychloride water dis- persible powder concentrates

o w

IS : 1507-1966 Specification for copper oxychloride water dispersible powder concen- trates (first revision)

M/s. New Chemi-Mineral Mills Pvt. Ltd, Chakravati Ashok Road, Kandivli Easr Bombay-67 having their office at 7A Dean Lane, Fort, Bombay-i.

§

CMjL-1530

1-10-67

30.9-68

Tea-chest metal fittings

26-9-1967

IS : 10-1964 Spec:fication for plywood tea-chests (metal fittings) (second revision)

!

M/s. Warren Metal Industries Pvt Ltd, 'H' Block, H;de Road, Kidderpore, Cal- cutta-43 having their office at 31 Chowringhee Road, Calcutta-16

CM/L-1531

1-10-67

I3CH9-68

Tea-chest metal fittings

26-9-1967

IS : 10-1964 Specification for plywood tea-chests (metal fittings) (.second revision)

M/s. KhaitanSons& Co. (Tea- Chest) Ltd., 34B.T. Road, Cossipore, Calcutta-2 having their office at 26 Chirtaranjan Avenue, Calcutta-12

CM/L-1532

[-10-67

30-9-6$ The Rashtriy Engg. Works Regd. G.T. Ro*d, Batak

Sand cast ironsoil pipet, 50mm 75mm and 100 mm sin* only

28-9-1967

18:1729-1964 Specification for sand cast iron spigot and socket soil, waste and ven- tilating pfpce, fitting* and

Un^lvaiiized steel drums,

27 CM/L-I533

i? 28-^-1967

grade B, (20-litre capacity only)

IS : 2552-1963 Specification for steel drams (galvanized and nngalvaoizcd).

OS 1-10-67 30-9-68 M/". Sanito Engg. Works, Hatlara Road Aswinnagore, Baguihatij 24 Parganas having tiieir ofBce at 35-H Raja Nabakrishna Street, Cal- cutta-5.

fNo MD/33.T6]

o

H H

hi

o

o S 13

I

I-H

New Delhi, the 5th October 1967

S. O- 3734-—In purs2ance of sub-regulations (a; and (3) of regulations 3 of the Indian Standards InsniuLions (Certificaion Murks) Regulations, 1955, ihe Indian Standards Institution hereby notifies that the Indiaa Standard(s), particulars of which arc given in the Schedule hereto annexed, have been established during the period 16 to 30 September, 1967.

THB SCHBDULE

No. and Title of the Indian Standard Establishedj SI. No.

Brief Particulars

No. and Title of the Indian Standard or Standards, if any, superseded by the new Indian Standard

1

2

3

1 18:1397-1967 Specification for

kraft paper (first revision)^

4

!S:i397-l96o Speci-

fication for kraft

paper

2 ISH753-1967" Specification" for aluminium conductors for insulated cables {first re- vision)

This standard prescribes the re- quirements and methods of sam- pling an

I S : I 7 S 3 - I 9 6I Speci- fication for alumi- nium conductors in insulated cables

3 18:1849-1967 Code of practice for design and installation of limekilns

4 IS .-2454-1967 Method for de- termination of colour fast- ness of textile materials to artificial light (xenon lamp)

5

i IS :262s (Part II)-i967 Speci- fication for rotary wafer switches (low current rating) Part II rotary wafer switche! with central mounting

IS 13681-1966 General plan for

spur and helical gears

IS .-3756-1966 Method for gear 7

correction

8 IS 13933-1966 Indian standard fo- colour identification of gas cylinders and related equipment intended for medical use

This standard specifics electrical and construction of solid or stranded circular and shaped aluminium conductors in insul- ated cables (Price Rs, 4.00)

This standard covers essentially the principles for design and in- stallation of vertical lime kilns of the mixed-feed type (Price Rs. 6.50)

This standard prescribes a method for determination of colour fastness of textile materials of all kinds (cotton, wool, silk, etc.) and in all forms (iibre, yarn or fabric) to the action of artificial light, namely xenon lamp (Price Rs. 3. 50)

This standard covers the require- mentf; including the dimensional requirements, for rotary wafer switches (low current rating) with central mounting used in elec- tronic and tele-communication equipment.

Rotary wafer switches with normal- duty and heavy duty index mechanisms are covered in this specification (Price Rs. 6.50) This standard covers the general plan for cylindrical gears of in- volute, modified involute-flank forms, comprising of gears with straight or inclined teeth for connecting parallel shafts Price Rs. 10.00)

This standard covers the method for gear corrections of spur and helical gears with basic profile according to 15:2535-1963 and with number of teeth more than 10 (Price Rs. 4.00)

Thin standard applies 1o the identi- fication of the contents of gas cylinders "intended for medical use (Price Rs. 2.00)

9 IS :4on-l967 Methods for de- rmatological tests for cosmetics

10 IS :4O45-I9u7 General require- ments for magnetic com- passes and binnacles, class A, for use in sea navigation

11 IS :4i29-l967 Methods of che- mical analysis of aluminium trifluorlde

12 IS:4i3o-i<)67 Safety code for demolition of buildings

13 IS 14113-1967 Specification for trolleys tor gas anaesthetic apparatus

IS :4i6}-i9fi7 Method for de- H

termination of inclusion con- tent in steel by microscopic method

IS IS :4i65-T967 Specification for thermostats for general pur- pose electric ovens

IS :42ox-i967 Application guide x6 :

for current transformer This standard prescribes methods —

for dennatological tests for cos- metics and their row materials (Price Rs. 5.00)

This standard deals with the general requirement of liquid magnetic compasses intended for maritime navigation, having a direct read- ing system which may be of re- flecting, projecting or trans- mitting types (Price Rs. 5.00) This siandard covers methods of chemical analysis for tiourine and other constituents of aluminium trifluoride, general limits for which are given below :—

Constituent Perc&'it Total water 0. 5 Max Fluorine aa alumini-

um fluoride 85 Min Silica 0. 5 Max Iron oxide 0.3 Max (Price Rs. 5*00)

This standard lays down the safety requirements for carrying out safety the demolition of all types of buildings, for example, resi- dential buildings (load bearing structure, multi-storcyed framed structure), public buildings, and factories (Price Rs. 4-oo)

This standard specifics the bagic requirements relating to material construction and electrical salety precautions for trolleys for gas nwesthctic apparatus (Price Rs. S"5°)

This standard prescribes the micro- scopic method for the determi- nation ol" inclusion conient in steel (Price Us. 6.00)

This sL'uidtird covers the require- ments and methods of tests of thermostats of the lluid filled or stem type, with an air-break switch intended for use in ac circuits at voltages not exceeding 250 volts, and having current ratings not exceeding 25 amperes (Price Rs. 5.00)

This guide covers application of current transformers for use with both electrical measuring instru- ment and meters (mcauuring current transformers) and electrical protective devices in non-balanced protective equip- ment, for example, for the ope- ration of ovcrcurrent devices both of the non-directional and directional types and for the operation of earthfault devices with time-lag characteristics (pro- tective current transformers) (Price Rs. 6.00)

17 IS: 4202-1967 Method for de- termination of chloride con- lent of textile materials

This standard prescribe* the methods for determination of water-soluble chloride in textile materials end the procedure for extracting the textile materials with water (Price Rs. 3. 50)

IS: 4206-1967 Dimensions for nominal length and thread lengths for bolts, screws and studs

This standard lays down the basic dimensions for the nominal length* and the corresponding thread lengths of bolts, screws and studs having the ISO metric screw threads in the diameter range 1.6 to 150 mm (Price Rs. 2. 00)

This standard prescribes the re- 19 IS: 4219E-1967 Specification for rice bran, oil, edible grades

quirements and methods of sampl~ ing and test for solvent-extracted rice bran oil used for edible purposes (Price Rs. 1. 50) 20 IS: 422OE-I967 Specification for solvent-extracted sesame oil

This standard prescribes the re- quirements and methods of sampl- ing and test for solvent-extracted sesame oil (Price Rs. 1. 50)

Copies of these Indian Stindnrds are available, for sale, with the Indian Standards Institu- tion, Manak Hhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Jafar Marg, New Deihi-i and also Its branch offices at (i) Bombay Mutual Terrace, Sandhurst Bridge, Bombay-7, (ii) Third and Fourth Floors, 5 Chow- ringhee Approach, Calcutta-1-} (iii) Second Floor, Sathymurthi Bhavan, 54 General Patters Road, Mairas-2, and (iv) JT7/418B, Sarvodaya Nagar, Kanpur,

[No. MD/i3:2]

S .O. 3735.—In pursuance of regulation 4 of the Indian Standard Institution (Ccrrfication Marks) Regulation 1955 the Indian Standards Institution hereby notifies that amendment (s) to the Indian Stand.ir i(s) given in the iC.icJ.ile acre to annexed nave Dcen issued under the powers conferred by the sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 3 of the said Regulations.

THE SCHIJDULE

No. and Date

No. and title of the Indian Standard

Brief particulars of the Amendment

SI. No.

Date from which the amendment amended

No. & Date

of the

Amendment

shall have effect of Gazette Notification in which the establishment of the Indian Standard was notified

1

2

5

6

3

4

1

S.O. 2595 dated 1 August 1964.

No. 2 September 1967.

IS : 203-1963 Speci- fication for dry late teries for flashlight (second revision).

(0 Table III has been amended. (if) Fig. 1 has been substituted by a new one.

(iii) A new clause 7.1 (g) has been added.

S.O. 1308 dated 30 April 1966.

Clauses 6.3, 6.3.1 and B-3.4 have been amended.

•30 Septem- ber, 67.

No. 3

September

1967

IS : 145H-1965 Speci- fication for railway bronze ingots and castings (revised).

Clause B-3.3 has been

3

S.O. 3593 dated 1 December 1962

amended.

IS : 2128-1962 Speci- fication forparathion technical.

4

S.O. 3865 dated 14 November 1964.

No. 2 September 1967. No. 2 September 1967.

Fig. 1 B has been substituted by a a new one.

IS : 2652-1964 Sche- dule of terminals for ledanche type pri- mary batteries.

5

S.O. 83 dated 2 January 1965.

No. 1 September 1967.

Clause 6.7.1 has . been amended.

6

S.O. 83 dated 2 January 1965.

No. 2 September 1967-

IS : 2654-1964 Me- thod for tensile test- ing of copper and copper alloys. IS : 2655-1964 Me- thod for tensile testing of copper and copper alloy tube.

7

S.O. 2246 dt. 30 July 1966.

No. 1 September 1967.

30 Septem- ber, 1967.

L Table 1 has been

IS : 3306-1965 Toler- ance Limits for in- dustrial effluents discharged into pub- lic sewers.

8

S.O. 664 dated 5 March 1966.

No. 1 September 1967.

f amended.J

IS : 3307-1965 Tol- erance limits for industrial effluents discharged on land fnr irrigation purposes.

9

A new clause 9.3 has

S.O. 1437 dated 14 May 1966.

been added.

No. 1 September 1967.

IS : 3387-1965 Speci- fication for tooth- brush.

10

S.O. 2177 dated 1 July 1967.

IS : 3990-1967 Speci- fication for combus- tion tubes.

No. 1 September 1967.

Clauses B-2.1 and B-2.3 have been amended.

Copies of these amendment slips are available, free of cost, with the Indian Standards Insti- tution , Manak Ehavan, q, llahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Dclhi-i, and also its branches at (i) Bom- bay Mutual Terrace, Sandhurst Undge, Bombay-7, (ii) Third and Fourth Floors, 5 Chowrinirhee Approach, Cak-utta-13, (

'

[No. MD/i3:"]

(DH.) SADGOPAL,

Deputy Director General.

MINISTRY OF WOBKS, HOUSING AND SUPPLY

(Department of Works and Housing)

New Delhi, the 10th. October 1967

S.O. 3736.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1SSB (32 of 1958) the Central Government hereby makes the following further amendment in the not£

In the Table below the said notification, add the following item at the end

THE TABLE

Categories of Public Premises Designation of the officer

and local lim ts of jur.sdiction.

18. Officcr-m-Charge,

Premises under the administrative control of the Mimsiry of Defence situated within the local limits of junsd ction of Ihe Ordnance Factory, TiruchlrapalU.

Estate Administration of a rant of Managcr/Depu'y Manager Assistant Manager/ Adm.mst- ration, Ordnance Factory, Tiruchlrapalli.

[No. F. 21012(9)/87-Pol.] V. P. AGNIHOTRI, Dy. Seey.

MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING

ORDERS

New Delhi, the 4th October 1967

S. O. 3737-—In pursuance of the directions issued under the provisions of each of the enactments specified in the First Schedule annexed hereto, the Central Government after considering the recommendations of the Film Advisory Board, Bombay hereby approves the films specified in column 2 of the Second Schedule annexed hereto in Gujarati to be of the description specified against each in column 6 of the said Second Schedule.

THE Frnsi SCHEDULE

1 Sub-Section 4 of the Section 12 and Section 16 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 (Central Act XXXVII of 1952).

2 Sub-Section (3) of Section 5 and Section 9 of the Saurashtra Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1953 (Saurashtra Act XVII of 1953).

3 Sub-Section (4) of Section 5 and Section 9 of the Bombay Cinemas (Regulation)TAct, 1953 (Saurashtra Act XVII of 1953).

THE SECOND SCHEDULE

Name of the

Applicant

LengthTj 35mm.

. Title of the to. film

•s. •N

2

1

3

274 32 M 1 Mahitichitra No. 85

Name of the Producer

Whether a Scientific film or a film intended for educational purposes or a film dealing with news and current events or a documentary film.

6

4

5

Information,

of Gujarat,

Director of Government Ahmedabad.

290.46 M 2 Gram Rakshak Dal (Home Guard).

Film dealing with news and current events (For release in Gujarat Circuit only).

Do.

Film intended for edu

cational purposes (Fof release in Gujarat Cir- cuit only).

[No. F. 24/1/67-FP App. 1203.]

New Delhi, the 10th October 1967

S.O. 3738.—Notification S£>. No. 3373 dated the 8th September, 1967, appearing in the Gazette of India, ParTO Section 3, Sub-Section (ii) Issue No. 38, dated the 53rd September, 1967 is hereby cancelled.

[No. F. 24/1/67-FP App. 1205.]

BAKU RAM AGGARWAL, Under Secy.

MINISTRY OF LABOUR, EMPLOYMENT AND REHABILITATION

(Department of Labour and Employment)

New Delhi, the 6th October 1967

S. O, 3739.—In excercise of the powers conferred by section 73F of the Employes State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948)) the Central Government hereby exempts, for a further

period of otic year with effect from the 1st day of October, 1967 from the payment of the em pluyer 3 special camrib'jition leviable unchr Chapt 1 V-A of the said Act, every factory:—

(a) which is engaged :-^_oi

(i) exclusively in one ui ^ _ the manufacturing processes specified in column 1 of the Table annexed o or any other manufacturing process which is inci- dental to or connected Witt! ty of the aforesaid processes, and

(ii) partly in one or more of th£ manufacturing processes aforesaid and partly in one or more of the manuf|[y,.ring processes specified in the definition of seasonal factory in clause (12) o^:*£/fon 2 of the said Act, and

(b) which is situated in any area specified in the corresponding entry In column 2 of the said Table subject to the condition, if any specified in the corresponding entry in column 3 of the said Table.

TABLE

Name of the manufacturing

Area where situated

Conditions process

1 Redrying .ni'ViFasturcd leaf

tobacco.

Who c of India except the State of Jammu and Kash- mir.

Da.

2 Rice Milling

Do.

. Cold SLorage

3.

Do.

. Salt Manufacture

4.

5, . Oil Mills

Do. Provided Lhat the process of oil milling is subsidiary to any other manufacturing process which is seasonal and so long as the num- ber of employees engaged in oi] milling ie less than fifty.

6. [c" manufacture The States of Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Haryana, Madhya Pra- desh, Punjab, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh and the Union Territories of Delhi, Hima- chal Pradeah and Chandigarh.

[No. F. 6 (4fi)/66-HI.]

S.O. 3740.—In exercise of the powera conferred by section 73F of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1949, (34 of 1948), and having regard to the location of tjie factory gamely, the Biological Products Section, PO- teterinary College, Hiasar, in an implemented area, the Central Government hereby exempts the said factory, from the payment of the employer's special contribution leviable under Chapter VA of the said Act for a further period of one year with effect from the 30th September, 1967.

[No. F. 6(63)/67-HI.]J

S.O. 3741 -In exercise of the powers conferred by section 73F oi the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, (34 of 1948), and having regard to the location of the factories namely, the Yeravda Prison Press and the Government Photozinco Press, Poona, in an implemented area, the Central Government hereby exempts the said factory, from the payment of the employer's special contribution leviable under Chapter VA of the said Act for a further period of one year with effect from the 30th September, 1967.

[No. F. 6<62)/67-HI.ll

New Delhi, the 9th October 1967

S-O 3742.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that the employer •and the majority of the employees In relatio the establishment known as Messrs D. P. Khandelwal and Sons Q . ~" 'Limited, 15, Loha Bhawan, P. D'Mello Road, Bombay-9, have agreed 'uie provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds Act. 1952 (19 of 1052), s i be made applicable to the said establishment;

£ ^*g

Now, therefore, In exercise of the powensXi" Jerred by sub-section (4) of Section 1 of the said Act, the Central Government ereby 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 June, 1967.

[No. 8/50/67/PF-IL]

S-O. 3743.—In pursuance of clause (c) of sub-paragraph (1) of paragraph 4 of the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, the Central Government hereby appoints Shrl R. V- Pant as a member of the Regional Committee for the State or Bihar and makes the following further amendment In the notifica- tion of the Government of India In the late Ministry of Labour No- S.R.O. 1380 dated the 4th July, 1953, namely:—

In the said notification, for the entry in the second column against aerial Number 4, the entry "Shri R- V. Pant, Messrs Harinagar Sugar Mills Limited, P. O- Harinagar, District Champaran" shall be substituted-

[No- 12(7)/64-PF.II.]

S.O. 3744.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-paragraph (1) of paragraph 4 of the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme, 1952, the Central Government hereby appoints the Deputy Secretary (I) to the Government of Uttar Pradesh, Labour Department, as the member of the Regional Committee Employees' Provident Fund for the State of Uttar Pradesh in the varancy caused by the resignation of Shrl H. S- Sharma, and makes the following further amendment In the notification of the Government of India in the late Ministry of Labour and Employment No- S.O- 1703 dated the 29th June, 1960, namely :—

In the said notification against item (2), for the entry "Shri H. S. Sharma, Deputy Secretary to the Government of Uttar Pradesh, Labour Department, Lucknow", the entry "The Deputy Secretary (I) to the Government of Uttar Pradesh, Labour Department. Lucknow" shall be substituted.

[No. 12/5/64/PF.II.]!

SO. 3745.-—In exercise of the powers conferred by the flrsf proviso to section 6 •of the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952 (19 of 1952), the Central Govern- ment, after making necessary enquiry into the matter, hereby specifies that, with effect from the 1st May, 1967, section 6 of the said Act shall, in its applica- tion to Messrs Rohit Mills Employees' Co-operative Supply and Credit Society Limited, Rohit Mills Premises, Khokhra, Mehemdabad, Ahmedabad-8, be subject "to the modification, that for the words "six and a quarter per cent", the words "eight per cent" shall be substituted.

[No. 8/83/67-PF.II.li

S.O. 3746.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that the employers and the majority of the employees in relation to the establishment known as Messrs Rohit Mills Employees' Co-operative Supply and Credit Society Limited, Rohit Mills Premises, Khokhra, Mahemdabad, Ahmedabad, have agreed that the provisions of the Employee^' 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 May, 1967-

[No. 8/83/67-PF.II1

HANS RAJ CHHABRA, Under Secy.

(Depaij Lit of Labour and Employment)

N fhi, the 6th October 1967

S.O. 3747—In pursuancff>^3ectl("-17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Addi- tiona¹ Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad in the industrial dispute between the employ- ers in relation to the Pootkee Colliery of Messrs Bhowra Kankanee Collieries Limited, Post Office Kusunda, District Dhanbad and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 27th September, 1967.

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ADDITIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT DHANBAD

In the matter of a reference under section 10(1) (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

REFERENCE NO. 30 or 1967

PAHTIES:

Employers in relation to the Pootkee Colliery of Messrs Bhowra Kankanee Collieries Limited, Post Office, Kusunda, DIst. Dhanbad.

AND

Their Workmen.

PRESENT :

Shri Nandagiri Venkata Rao, Presiding Officer.

APPEARANCES:

For the Employers—Shrl K. C. Nandkeolyar, Dy. Chief Personnel Officer. Ftyr the. Workm-en—Shri Gopal Chandra Munshi, General Secretary, Khan

Maadoor Congress.

STATE: Bihar.

INDUSTRY: Coal.

Dhanbad, dated, the 15th September 1967

AWARD

The Central Government, bcinK of opinion that an industrial dispute exists bet- ween the employers in relation to the Pootkee Colliery of Messrs Bhowra Kankanee Collieries Limited, Post Office, Kusunda, District Dhanbad and their workmen, by Its order No. 2/149/fi4-LRTT dated 3rd April 1965 referred to the Central Govern- ment Tn inytrial Tribunal, Dhanbad under section 10(1) (d) of the Industrial Dis- putes Act, 1947 for adjudication the dispute in respect of the matters specified in the schedule annexed thereto. The schedule is extracted below:

SCHEDULE

"Whether the dismissal of the workmen named below by the management of the Pootkee Co'liery of Messrs Bhowra Kankanee Collieries Limited, from the dates shown against each was Justified? If not, to what relief are the workmen entitled?

Name and designation

Date from which dismissed

1-10-1904 1-10-1964 1-1071964 30-9-1964 1-10-1964" 1. Rangoo Kora, Underground Trammer 2, Jagdish Bhuian, Undercround Trammer 3, Matar Bhuian, Surface Trammer 4, Soukhi Dusadh, Underground Trammer 5. Gobind Dusadh, C.C. Machine Helper

2. The Central Government Industrial Tribuna! Dhanbad registered the refer • ence as reference No. 54 of 1965 on its file. While it was pending before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhatrbnd the proceeding was trans- ferred to this Tribunal, by the Central Government by its order No. 8/25/67-LRH dated 8th May 1967 under section 33(B1(D of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1M7, Consequently, the reference is renumbered on the file of thL Tribunal as refer- ence No. 30 of 1967. Both the parties filed their statement of demands.

3. The workmen Rangoo, Kora, Jagdlsh Bhui ., Matar Bhuian, Soukhi Dusadh and Cobind Dusadh (hereinafter referred as the affected workmen) were workmen employed in different capiuiiiM- K colliery of the employers since a long time. On 6th August 1964 C L. it, Head Surveyor reported to the Manager of the colliery that the-"rfecicn—ivurkmen and six others had occupied unauthorisedly the new housing g a r t e rs still under construction, that inspite of his asking they refused +o vacate the quarters and thus disobeyed his orders and that they were causing damage, delay and obstruction in completion of the quarters. Shri J. S. Arora, Manager ordered on the report to ask thn affected workmen and others to vacate the quarters unauthorisedly occupied by them. The Labour Welfare Officer reported that he had repeatedly instructed the above persons to vacate the quarters but they had not obeyed. On this the Manager directed the Labour Welfare Officer to issue urgent notices to the un- authorised occupants to vacate the quarters. Accordingly the Manager issued notices to the affected workmen pointing out that their unauthorised occupation of the quarters under construction amounted to trespass, which was an offence and that they should vacate the quarters within 48 hours. On "their non-comp- liance the allected workmen and others were issued chargesheets, alleging tres- pass and disobedience of lawful order of a superior which was misconduct under the standing orders and asking them to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken against them. They were further directed through the chargesheets to vacate the quarters unauthorisedly occupied by them. Three of the affected workmen, Rangoo Kora, Matar Bhuian and Soukhi'Dusadh and four Others submitted a joint application to the Manager saying that they were living in the quarters for much more than six months with the consent of the Manager and that, as such, the chargesheets should be withdrawn- Again notices were issued to the three affected workmen stating that their statement thai they were living in the quarters with the consent of the Manager, was wrong and that they should vacate the quarter within 24 hours. Thereafter all the five affected workmen were issued charpesheets No. 175, 184, 183, 181 and 179 of 1964 respec- tively on 24th September 19G4 stating that lnspite of repeated Instructions they did not vacate the company's quarters unauthorisedly occupied by them and that they had committed misconduct under the standing orders. They were also Hiked to show cause why disciDlinary action should not be taken against them. To this chargesheets the five affected workmen and five others sent a joint reply stating that the action of the Manager in suspending and chargesheeting them was highly illegal and unjust as they were given the quarters by the previous Manager Agarwalia. Tt Is also stated that they were being harassed because they were members of Khan Mazdoor Congress. The Manager finding the" ex- planation not satisfactory ordered domestic enquiry. H. S. Soudhi. the adminis- trative officer was the enquirv officer. The enquiry officer recorded statements of J. S. Arora, Manager, S. N. P. Sinha, Labour Officer and G. L. Vashisht. Surveyor and submitted his report finding the five affected workmen and five others guilty of misconduct. On receipt of the report the Manager recommended dismissal of the affected workmen. The Agent, A. B. Shah approved the recorttmendation. Consequently, the five affected workman were dismissed from service through the letters of the Manager dated 9th October 1964. Except the affected workmen SOukhi Diisadh, who was dismissed with affect from 30th September 1964 the affected workmen were dismissed with effect from 1st October 1964. The other five workmen who were also chargesheeted a^ong with the fVye affected workmen and proceeded with the domestic enquirv vacated the quarters and, as such, no action was taken against them. These facta are not in dispute.

4. The case of the workmen is that the affected workmen occupied the quar- ters under constructions In question with the consent of the management Itself mid that the management decided to harass them because they had initiated the Khan Mazdoor Congress at the colliery. The stand taken by the employers is that the occupation of the quarters by the affected workmen was unauthorised, that they wilfully disobeyed the lawful order of their superior officer by not vacating the quarters Inspite of repeated directions and giving sufficient time, that the domestic enquiry against them was fair and in accordance with the principles of natural iustW, that the action taken bv the management was fair, lawful legal and justified ond 1hat to the knowledge of the management the union 'Khan Mazdoor Ccmur?^, w as not operating on the relevant date in the colliery and the affected workmen were not members of the said union prior to their dismissal.

5. The workmen were represented by Shri Gopal Chandra Munshi. General Secretary Khan Mazdoor Censi-ftf and the employers by Shri K. C. Nandkeolyar, Dy. Chief Personnel Officer. Oi behalf of the workmen two witnesses were examined. On behalf of thf> employers six witnesses are examined and Exts. Ml to M27 were marked. Exts Wl to W6 were also marked for the workmen.

6. I propose to see at the out-set if the action taken by the employers was with a view to victimise the affected workmen for their trade union acivities or there was any discrimination in treating workmen of the colliery on that account. The alleged unauthorised occupation is said to be on 6th August 1964 as per the report, Ext. Ml of the Surveyor, and the dismissal orders issued to the affected workmen were dated 9th October 1964. MW1, deposed that he had become a member of the branch union in 1994, without referring to any date. He /has also not stated when the other affected workmen joined the union. The counterfoil of his receipt for payment of his subscription, Ext. Wl is dated 16th August 1964. Hence, it is manifest that the action by the management against the affect- ed workmen has started before.WW1 became the members of the branch union of the Khan Mazdoor Congress. WW2 does not say when he became the member of the branch union of the Khan Mazdoor Congress. No counterfoil receipt is proved to show when he became a member. Neither of the witnesses has even whispered as to what prominent part of the affected workmen had taken in the trade union acti- vities to incur the displeasure of the employers. The case of the workmen is that no action was taken against the five workmen to whom notices and chargesheets were Issued because they were not members of the branch union of the Khan Mazdoor Congress. WW1 says that the workmen vacated the quarters, that the two workmen apart from the five affected workmen were not dismissed, that he did not know why only the affected workmen were dismissed and not the re- maining two and that it was owing to the sweet will and pleasure of the company. WW2, has stated that they dismissed the affected workmen because they were members of the Khan Mazdoor Congress branch while others were members of I.N.T.U.C. hut has conceded in the same branch that the five affected workmen were dismissed because they did not comply with the orders of the company while the rest were not dismissed because they complied with the orders of the company. MW5 and 6 are two of the other workmen to whom notices and chargesheet were Issued by the employers but no action was taken against them. MW5 has depos- ed that along with the five affected workmen he had also occupied unauthorisedly the quarter under construction along with four or five other workmen, but he was also chargesheeted in that connection, that ho was one of the workmen alone with the affected workmen who hud submitted a common explanation stating that they did not want quarters but wanted work, that during the enquiry he and the five affected workmen and others had submitted a letter to the Manager stating therein also that they did not want quarters but wanted work and that a day after the letter was submitted by them to the Manager the workmen other than the five affected workmen vacated the quarters. On behalf of the work- men no question is put to him to elicit that action by the management was dropped against him because he was not a member of the branch union of the Khan Mazdoor Congress. MW6 also deposed that along with the affected work- men he and others also had occupied unauthorisedly the quarters under construc- tion, that all of them had submitted a common explanation, that during the enquiry also he had submitted an explanation to the Manager stating therein that they were prepared to vacate the quarters and that he was not a member of the branch unipn when he was served with the chargesheet. To this witness also no question is put in the cross-examination to show that the action was dropped against him because he was not a member of the branch union of the Khan Mazdoor Congress. Exts. M24 and M25 are the two letters spoken to by the witnesses, MW5 and MW6. These letters are proved by Mwl. Through these two letters the workmen expressed regret for their occupying the quarters under construction unauthorisedly and promised to vacate them immediately and never to commit such offence in future. Of course, these two letters are not signed by the affected workmen. But the letters go to prove that further action against the workmen other than the affected workmen was dropped because they had agreed to obey the orders of their superiors and vacated the quarters in question and not because they were non-members of Khan Mazdoor Congress. This material does not even suggest that the employer sought to dismiss thfe affected workmen with the intention of damaging Khan Mazdoor Congress or with a view to victimise the affected workmen for their trade union activities. Thus, there is no substance in the allegation made by the workmen in this respect.

7. Now it is to be seen how far the departmental enquiry held by the emp- loyers against the affected workmen was in accordance with the principles of natu- ral justice, fair, lawful, legal and justified. The first chargesheets issued to the affected workmen on 11th September 1964 are Exts. M7 to Mil. It is clearly stated therein that the affected workmen, in not vacating the quarters in question in obedience to the orders issued by their superiors had committed misconduct under the Standing Orders. The reply of three affected workmen and other workmen to the above chargesheets was a common one and it is Ext. M12, In their reply they stated that they were living in the quarters with "your consent" (the Manager,

J. S. Arora). On this the Manager, J. S. Arora issued the letters dated 15th Sep- tember 1964, Exts. M13, M14 and M15 stating therein that the affected workmen 'were not living in the quarters with his consent, that they were occupying the same unauthorisedly and that they should vacate them within 24 hours. On non-compliance with the direction the Manager issued fresh chargesheets on 24th September 1964 to the affected workmen, Exts. M16 to M20 alleging again that the affected workmen had committed misconduct under the standing orders and calling upon them to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken against them. To this the affected workmen and others sub- mitted a common explanation, Exts. M21 changing their stand and staling that they were in occupation of the quarters in questioft with the consent of the previous Manager, Agarwalla. The management finding the explanation not satisfactory started the domestic enquiry. The enquiry was conducted by H. S. Soudhi and his enquiry report is Ext. M23. During the enquiry three prosecution witnesses were examined whose statements are Exts. M22, M27, and M28. All these state- ments contained the endorsement signed by the Enquiry Officer and the con- cerned deponants', that the workmen chargesheeted refused to cross examine the witnesses. All the three prosecution witnesses MWs. 1, 2 and 4 and the Enquiry Officer MW3 have come into the witness box, and proved their statements Exts. M22, M27 and M28 and the enquiry report is Ext, M23. During the cross-examina- tion the workmen did not even put a suggestion to the witnesses that the affected workmen did not participate in the domestic enquiry, were not given sufficient opportunity to cross examine the prosecution witnesses or were refused the facility of adducing defence evidence. It is now argued that the prosecution did not exa- mine Agarwalla, the previous Manager, But it was the case of the affected work- men that they were in occupation of the quarters under permission of Agarwalla and, as such, it was their duty to examine him. Under these circumstances, I do not find any fault with the domestic enquiry. It was correctly held and, as such, does not require any interference. On the report of the enquirv the Manager, J. S. Arora recommended dismissal of the affected workmen and it was approved by the Agent, A, B. Shah, as spoken to by the Manager, MW1 and seen from the chargesheets, Exts. M16 to M20. AH per the standing order 27(1) of the standing orders wilful disobedience of any lawful or reasonable order of a superior consti- tutes misconduct, The case of the affected workmen was that they were in occupa- tion of the quarters in question with the permission of the previous Manager, Agarwalla. They have failed to substantiate it. Even if it is assumed to be proved, that cannot come to their rescue. Because Standing Order No, 33 states,—

"The company shall have the right to transfer an employee from quarters allotted to him for use, to other quarter, and also the right to require him to give up such quarters when so required by the company.'

It follows that even if the affected workmen were in occupation of the quarters in question under permission of the previous Manager, Agarwalla. the present Manager, J. S. Arora could order the affected workmen to vacate them and the affected workmen not complying with the order should be deemed to have commit- ted misconduct under standing orders No. 35 and exposing themselves to the punish- ment. As I have already pointed out, before issuing the chargesheets dated 24th September 1964, Ext. Ml6 to M20, the management had asked orally and aJso Issued written notices Exts. M2 to M6 dated 8th September 1964, Exts. M7 to Mil dated 11th September 1964i and Exts. M13 to M15 dated 15th September 1964. But persistently the affected workmen refused to comply with the order of the Mana-

§er. For the reasons mentioned above, it cannot be said that the order issued y the Manager were not lawful or reasonable.

8- For the above reasons I hold that the dismissal of the five affected workmen from the dates shown against each in the schedule of the reference, by the manage- ment of Pootkee Colliery of M/s. Bhowra Kankanoe Collieries Ltd., was justified and, consequently, they are not entitled to any relief. Considering circumstances of the case no order is passed as to costs. The award is made accordingly and submitted under section 15 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Sd/-

(N. Venkata Rao).

Presiding Officer,

Centra] Government Additional Industrial

Tribunal, Dhanbad.

APPENDIX I

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ADDITIONAL INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL AT Dt-IANBAD

RP.F.RFNCI1 No.. 30 of 19S7

Parlies

:—Emplovers in rela-oin to the Poolkcc Coollicry of Messeri Bhowra Kankunee Col-

lieries Limited, Post Office, : KusunJa, Dist. Dbanbad.

The/r Workmen

List of Documents Admitted in Evidence for Employer

Distinguishing Description of document &

Whether

Proved by

mark or

date

Date of admission admitted or

number

proved

Leii -T dt. 6-S-64 10 Manager by the

t-8-fi7

M Wt lixt. Mi

Proved

Surveyor G. L. Vashisht reg. unauthorised occupation by TO workmen.

Letter dt. 8-9-44 from Manager to Do.

Do.

Do.

Ext. Mi

Rangoo Koru.

D o.

Do.

Laner dt. 8.0.64 from Manager D o.

Ext. M3

to Jagdish Bhuita.

D o.

Letter dt. S-9-(S4 from Manager to D o.

Do.

Ext. M4

Matar Bhuian.

Letter Jt. 8-i)-64 from Minager '

D i.

:o D J.

Do.

Ext. Ms

Soukhi DusaJh.

Do.

Letter dt. 8-9-44 from Manager to Do.

Do.

12x1. M 6

Gobind Dusadh

Do.

Charsesheet to Rangoo Kora.

Do.

D o.

Ext. M?

D J.

Do.

Do.

Ch.arg"-lT;;t to Jdftdish Bhjian.

Ext. M 8

Do.

Do.

Chergcshect to Matar Bhuian

D o.

Ext. Mo

Do Chargesheet to Soukhi Dusadh.

Do.

Do

Ext. Mio

Do.

Do.

Chargeshect to Gobind Du';ndh.

. Ext. M il

D o.

Do.

Joint petition of workmen ilt.

Ext. M T2

14-O-64 to Manager.

D o.

Do.

Do.

Notice dt. 15-S-64 to Rungoo Koru.

Ext. MT3

Do.

Do.

Do.

Notice dt. 15*9-64 to Soukhi Dusadh.

Ext. Mi4

D o.

Do.

Do.

Notice dt, 15-5-64 to Matar Bhuian.

Ext. M15

Do.

Do.

Do.

Chargesheet to Rangoo Kora

Ext. M16

Do.

Do.

D o.

Chargesheet to Jagdish Bhuian.

Ext. M17

Do.

D o.

Chargeshect to Matar Bhuian.

'Do.

Ext. MiS

Do.

Do.

Do,

Chargcsheet to Soukhi Dusadh.

Ext. M19

Do.

Do.

Do.

Chargesheet to Gobind Dusadh.

Ext. Mao

Distinguishing

Description of document &

whether Proved by

da:e 1

Date of idmiasion

mark or number

admitted or proved

I

Joint petition dt. 1-10-64 by work- 1-8-67

Ext, M21

M Wi

proved

men to Manager. ta

Do.

Ext. M22

Do..,

Do.

Statement dr. 7-TO-64 of Sri J. S. Arora in respect of chargesheets No. 175 to 185/64 dt. 24-9-64.

Do.

Do.

Enquiry report dt. 7-10-64

Do.

Ext. M23

D o.

Letter dt. 3-10-64 from Ramphal

Do.

Ext. M24

Do.

Joint application dt. 3-10-64 from

D o.

Do.

Do.

Ext. M25

Kali Dusadh. and 3 others.

D o. Ext. M26

Do.

Do.

Form of agreement between manage- ment & C. M. L.W. 0. reg. Hous- ing Scheme.

M W2 Statement of Shri S.N.P. Sinha L.W.

Do.

•Do.

Ext. M27

O. dt. 7-10-64

Ext. M28

Statement of Shri Vashisht Surveyor.

9-X-67 Do.

M W3

List of Documents Admitted in Evidence for Workmen

Dittinguishing

Dcscriprion of document &

Proved by

date

Date of admission

mark or number

Whether admitted or proved

Counterfoil receipt dt, 16-8-64

l i t. Wl

20-7-67 Proved

WWi

Copy of letter dt. 9-10-64 to Rangoo

Rxt. W2

Do.

1-8-67

MWi

Kora.

Do.

Ext. 3

Copy of letter dt. 9-10-64 to Jagdish

Do.

Do.

Bhuian.¹

Copy of letter dt. 9-10-64 to Matar Do.

Ext. W4

Do.

Do.

Hhuian.

Ext. W5

Copy of letter dt. 9-10-64 to Sri Do.

Do.

Do.

Soukhi Dusadh.

Hxt. W<5

Copy of letter dt. 9-10-64 to Gobind Do.

Do.

Do.

Dusadh.

(Sd.)N. VENK/YTARAO,

Presiding officer Central Government Industrial Tribunal Additional Dhanbad

APPENDIX II

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ADDITIONAL INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL AT DHANBAD

REFERENCE N O. 30 op 1967,

PARTIES :

Employers in relation to the Pootkcc Colliery of Messrs. Bhowra" Kankace Collieries Limited, Post Office : Kusunda, Dist. Dhanbad.

Vs.

Their Workmen

List of Witnesses Examined for the Employers

No. of Witness

N a me of t he w i t n e ss

D a te of e x a m i n a t i on

MW i

J. S. A r o ra

1-8-1967

MW 2

Do.

S h ym N a n d an P r a s ad S i n ha

MW 3

H a r r a t an S i n gh S o u d hi . . . ..

9-8-1967

MW 4

Do.

G a n d h a ri L ai V a s h i s ht . . . ..

Do.

MW 5

K a l i D u s a dh

Do.

MW 6

M a t h u ra D u s a dh . . . ..

List of Witnesses Examined for the Workmmen

D a te of examination N a me of t he witnesses

N o. of witnesse

20-7-67

Jagdish Bhuia . . . ..

W 1

20-7-67 G o b i nd D u s a dh . . . ..

WW 2

(Sd.) N. VENKATA KAO,

Presiding Officer,

Central Govt. Additional Industrial Tribunal,

at Dhanbtd.

[No. 2/H9/64-LBII.]

New Delhi, the 1th October 1967

S.O 3748.^In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Acf, 1941 "(14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the following award oi the Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta, in the industrial dispute between the employer* In relation to the Western Kajora Colliery, Post Office Raniganj, District Burdwam and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 30th September, 1967.

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, CALCUTTA

REFERENCE NO. 41 OF 1967.

PARTIES:

Employers In relation to the Western Kajora Colliery,

AND

Their Workmen

PRESENT :

Shri S. K. Sen—Presiding Officer.

APPEARANCES ;

On behalf of Employers—Shri A. K. Basu, Advocate. On behalf of workmen—Shri Bankey Singh, Org. Secretary, Colliery Mazdoor Union.

STATE: West Bengal

INDUSTRY: Coal Mines

AWARD

By Order No. fl/105/66-LRII dated the 18th May, 1967 the Central Government referred for adjudication an industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Western Kajora Colliery, P.O. Raniganj, Dist. Burdwan, and their workmen In respect of the matter specified in the following schedule :

"Whether the stoppage of work of Shri Nathuni Singh, Pick Miner with effect from the 9th December, 1965 to 24th March, 1SG6 and Shri Sitaram Bin, S/Trarhmer, with effect from the 4th February, 1966 to 22nd February, 1966 (both inclusive) by tfhe management of Western Kajora Colliery, Post Office Raniganj, District Burdwan was justified? If not, to what relief are the workmen entitled?"

2. According to the union, Nathuni Singh was an Organiser and active member if the branch of the Colliery Mazdoor Union at Western Kajora colliery and epresented the grievances of other workmen before the manager and so the manager was displeased with him. There was another recognised union at the colliery and the management did not want a branch of the Colliery Mazdoor Union to function. The management was therefore harassing the workmen who were taking active part in the newly formed branch of the Colliery Mazdoor Union. Nathuni Singh, Pick Miner, was suffering from a painful tooth ache from 6th to 8th December, 1965 and got himself treated by the Colliery Medical Officer and could not attend to his duties on those days. On 9Lh December, 1965 he went to join his duty, but was not permitted by the manager to join and he was told that he would be served with a chargesheet for unauthorised absence from fith December. JJe received the chargeshcet by post on the 11th or 12th December and sent a reply by registered post. As he did not hear from the manager for some time and was not permitted to join. his duty, he brought the matter to the nptice of the Organising Secretary of the Union, Shri Bankey Singh who wrote to the A.L.C., Central, Raniganj seeking his intervention- A conciliation proceeding was held by the A-L.C, Central, Raniganj and it was agreed by a settlement made before the A.L.C-, Central, Ranleanj on 22nd March, 1R6B that Nathuni Singh would be allowed to join his job by 25th March, 1966 and that if no enquiry, had been held on the chargesheet on Nathuni Singh, the matter would be finalised by 15th April, 1966. Nathuni Singh was permitted to join his duty on 25th March, 1966 but no enquiry was held and he was not paid his wages for the period from 9th December ]965 to 24th March, 1966. This matter of non-payment Of wages for the period of absence was then raised before the A.L.C. Central Raniganj who held another conciliation proceeding but that proceeding ended in failure' According to the union Sitaram Bin, S/Trammer, was also not permitted to loin his duty by the management between 4th anr] 22nd February, 1966 and that case also was brought to the notice of the A.L.C, Central, Raniganj but there was no settlement.

3. According to the written statement of the management, when Nathuni Singh appeared before the manager on 9th December, 1965 after absence from itn December, he was sought to be served with a chargesheet but he did not accept the chargesheet, and so the chargesheet had to be sent by post and Nathum Singh also sent a reply by post; during the period from 9th December, 1965 Nathum Singh was absent from the colliery and did not try to join his

duty; the management, did not suspend him and never prevented him from joining his duty. According to the management, therefore, Nathuni Singh was not entitled to any payment for the period of absence from 9th December, 1965 to 24th March, 1966. As regards Sltaram Bin, according to the management, be was absent voluntarily from 4th February, 1966 to 22nd February 1966 and so there could be no claim for wages by Sltaram Bin for that period-

4. So far as Sitaram Bin is concerned, he has not appeared before the tribunal at the hearing and Sri Bankey Singh who appeared for the union has not pressed his case. Regarding Sltaram Bin therefore it must be held that there is no dispute at present.

5- Regarding Nathuni Singh, he has appeared before the tribunal and given evidence stating that because of his illness, namely painful tooth ache he appeared before the colliery medical officer on 6th, 7th and 8th December, 1965 and stayed away from duty with the approval of the Medical Officer ; that on 9th December when he was fit he asked for a fit certificate from the MedicaL Officer but the Medical Officer did not give him such a certificate, and thereafter he appeared before the manager and asked for permission to join his duty, but the manager refused permission and asked him to get work from the Conciliation Officer, and also told him that he would be chargesheeted for unauthorised absence. According to Nathuni Singh he asked for a copy of the chargesheet but the manager told him that it would be sent by post. Nathuni Singh received a copy of the chargesheet on 11th or 12th December and sent a reply in Hindi but thereafter no enquiry was held, and therefore the Union leader, Shri Bunkey Singh, started a case before the Conciliation Officer ; and at the intervention of me Conciliation Officer he was taken back from 25th March, 19G6, but no enquiry was held even thereafter and he was not paid any wages for the period between 9th December, 1965 and 24th March, 1966. He claims the wages for that period.

8. According to Shri A. K. Basu appearing for the management Nathuni Singh was guilty of misconduct because he was absent for 3 days from 6th to 8th December without any intimation to the management and without taking leave. Nathuni Singh made a claim in cross examination that on 6th December after his treatment by the doctor, he did go to the manager and showed him his swollen face, but this evidence does not appear to be worthy o£ credit, as no .•such case was made out in the written statement of the union or by Nalhuni Singh his examination-in-chief- Nathuni Singh's demeanour during cross examination did not appear to be satisfactory. Shri A. K. Basu also has pointed out that in reply to the chargesheet, Ext- A, Nathuni Singh cast aspersions on the manager, saying that he had never met such a liar as the Manager before, and that for his conduct in relation to the manager, the management could have started a proceeding. It is true that the tone of the reply to the chargesheet, Ext. A, is unsatisfactory. But no proceeding was started for rudeness to the manager or for insubordination. The chargesheet was onl.yt for unauthorised absence from fith December 196r>, but the absence was only for 3 days ; and there is no evidence to contradict the evidence of Nathuni Singh that he was suffering from a painful tooth arhc during those 3 days and that he went to the Colliery Medical Officer for Irentment. Moreover, under the model Standing Orders, unauthorised absence for 10 days or more is a misconduct for which an order of dismissal may be passed. Absence for 3 days only is not such misconduct, although if the absence is without sufficient reason the workman may forfeit his wages for the days- The evidence of Nathuni Singh, that on 9th December, 19G5 as soon as he went to see the manager, the manager told him that he would not be permitted to join his work and that subsequently he attempted to join his duty and was not allowed to do so, stands practically unchallenged, because neither the manager;_nor any other witness fiom the colliery itself has appeared on behalf of the management. The only witness examined for the management is one Blswanath Bhuwalka who is an Assistant in-cbarfie of the Head office at Calcutta, and whose knowledge about the case is derived from the papers sent to him about a week before the date of hearing before the tribunal- There is Nathuni Singh's evidence that as he took an active part In organising the branch of the Colliery Mazdc-or Union at the colliery and represented grievances of other workinen to the manager, the manager was not pleased with him; that the relationship between Nathuni Singh and the manager was strained is clear from the tone of Nathuni Singh's written reply to the chargesheet. It appears that because the management was displeased with him the management used the 3 days' absence by the workman to initiate proceedings against him, although such absence did not ordinarily call for a chargesheet. It must also be found in the absence of evidence to the contrary that the manage- ment wrongfully kept Nathuni Singh out of work between 9th December, 196& a'nd 24th March, 1966 and therefore Nathuni Singh is entitled to wages for that

period. In view of the tone of his reply to the chargesheet and the attitude he took up during cross examination, I think that Nathunl Singh should not bo allowed the costs which he has also claimed in addition to the wages.

7. My award therefore is that so far as Sitaram Bin, S/Trammer is concerned, there is no dispute subsisting, and so far as Sri Nathuni Singh, Pick Miner is concerned, the action of the management in stopping him from work from 9th December, 1965 to 24th March, 1966 was not justified; Nathuni Singh is, there- fore, entitled to wages for that period.

No order is made aa to costs.

Dated the 26th September, 1987.

(Sd-) S- K. SEN,

Presiding Officer.

[No. 6/105/66-LHILJ

SO. 3749.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award o£ the Industrial Tribunal, Jabalpur, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Sljua Colliery of Messrs Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited, Post Office Sijua, District Dhanbad and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 30th September 1067.

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUK

COURT, JABALPUR.

Camp at Dhanbad

Dated, the 1th September, 1967

PRESENT:

Sri G. C Agarwala—Presiding Officer.

REFERENCE NO- 76 OF 1964 (DHANBAD- TRIBUNAL) REFERENCE NO. CGIT/LC(R)(ll)/67 (JABALPUR TRIBUNAL)

PARTIES :

Employers In relation to Sijua Colliery of Messrs Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited, Post Office Sijua, District Dhanbad.

Versus

Their workmen through the Congress Mazdoor Sangh, Camp Jorapokhw No. 1, PO. Jealgora, District Dhanbad.

APPEARANCES:

For employers—Sri S- N. Singh, Asstt. Chief Personnel & Welfare Officer.

For workmen-—Sri B- N. Sharma, President Congress Mazdoor Sangh, Dhanbad.

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

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment, by Notification No. 2/52/fi4-LR-II dated 26-6-1964 referred the following matter of dispute under Sec. 10 ID. Act for Adjudication to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad:—

Matter of Dispute

Whether the action of the management of the Sijua Colliery of Messrs Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited, Post Office Sijua, District Dhsnbad, in suspending Shri Laloo Mahato, Pump Khalasl, for ten days with effect from the 9th December, 1963 and subsequently dismissing him from service with effect from the 30th January 1004 was justified; if not, to what relief is the workman entitled?

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

The written statement on behalf of the workmen was filed before the Dhanbad Tribunal on 29th August 1966. The management filed their written satement on 30th July 1B67. No rejoinder was filed by the workmen.

Before taking up the dispute under reference a preliminary objection raised on behalf of the employers in para 1 of their written statemnt may first be dis- posed of. It was stated that as "the present reference arises out of the individual dispute and is neither supported by a substantial number of workmen nor their Union and as such outside the purview of the Industrial Disputes Act-" The plea has no merit. The dispute has been sponsored by a Union, Congress Mazdoor Sangh- It was for the employers to have proved that this was not the representa- tive of their workmen (vide Aligarh Electric Supply Co. vs- Its workmen, report- ed in 196fl(II)LLJ p. 839-High Court, Allahabad). This they have failed to show. It is pertinent to observe that this Union raised the dispute in conciliation and the conciliation failure report appended with the order of reference shows that no such plea was taken by the management before the Conciliation Officer. As s matter of fact, in their letter dated 20/21st May, 1964 which is also a part of the conciliation proceedings, the management did not challenge representative capacity of this Union- That being so, there is no substance plea and the dis- pute is an industrial dispute.

Coming to the facts, they are short and simple. The workman concerned, r_,alluo Mahato a Pump Khalnsi, had been in the service of the Sijua Colliery belonging to employers, M/s Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd., for a number of years. He has been residing in village Sijua in his house. One Sri U. A, Singh Deo, A Gumastha of the Colliery submitted a report on 19th October 1963 that Lalloo Mahato was erecting a boundary wall on plot no. 966 belonging to the Comp- any (Ex. E/3). In consequence of this, a charge-sheet (Ex. E/UO was issued to Lalloo Mahato- He submitted an explanation stating that the said wall was a part of an old existing wall of his house which had fallen down in rains and he had just repaired it. He stated that nothing new had been done- The management was not satisfied with this explanation and Sri J. Lai, Labour Welfare Officer (Personnel) was appointed Enquiry Officer. The Enquiry Officer commenced the enquiry on 20th Novrmbcr 196.3 (Series Ex.E/4). Prior to this Lalloo Mahato had filed an application dated 18th November, 1963 (Ex.E/1) requesting the manage- ment to allow him tune to collect necessary papers in order to show hia title to the land. The Enquiry Officer on 20th November 1983 passed an order requiring him to file papers within two days- Sri Lalloo Mahato participated in this enquiry but could not produce documentary evidence. The Enquiry Officer submitted a finding on 27th November 1963 holding that Sri Lalloo could not prove his title and found him guilty of the charge which was considered as a misconduct under Cl. 19(1) and Cl. 27 of the Standing Orders, He was thereafter suspended for 10 days by way of punishment on the same date i.e., 27th November 1983. Sri Lalloo Mahato did not demolish the wall and the management commenced another pro- ceeding by means of charge-sheet dated 25/27th December, 1963. He was required to show ctmse why he should not be dismissed for the continuance of the offence of unauthorised construction. The same Officer, Sri J. Lai, was appointed the Enquiry Officer. The enquiry commenced on 8th January 1964 and the record of proceedings (Ex. E/9 series) would show that Lalloo Mahato appeared and wanted adjournment- This was not granted- He did not participate in the enquiry and as Enquiry Officer found him guilty, he was dismissed from service.

From the above facts, admitted or proved by documents, it is clear that Sri Lalloo Mahato had been dismissed for an assumed misconduct that he had encroach- ed on the land of the Company by erecting a wall and not complying with the order of the management to demolish the same. This is a wanton abuse of coercive powers of the management which is against all cannons of social justice and is not covered by any of the provisions of the Standing Orders- Sri Lalloo had raised a bnna fide claim of title for the land from the very beginning. He •wanted time to file documents In support of his claim but for which reasonably sufficient opportunity was not given either by the management or the Enquiry Officer. He claimed, the land through his forefathers and an Appellate Court judgment has been filed by him which shows that there was litigation between his father Haradhan Mahato and another Plaintiff-Respondent versus Bigha Mahato Defendant-Appellant. The management has als6 filed a certified copy of the Appellate Cnurt "Judgment in a title suit between State of Bihar and the Company, Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. It Is indeed true that In none of the litigations the other side was a party. If the litigation of land between Haradhan

Mahato and others, the company was not a party. That may be so, but the bond fides in the claim of Sri Lalloo for the title of the land is abundantly established. The Company had no right to resort to disciplinary action and achieve by coercive method the fulfilment of their right and title over the land. C1.19(l) of the Standing Orders under which Sri Lalloo Mahato has been found guilty and punish- ed aa follows:—

"Wilful insubordination or disobedience, whether alone or in combination with another or others, of any lawful or reasonable order of a superior,"

The order to demolish the wall which Sri Lalloo Mahato bona fide believed to be on his own land and which was a dispute of title between the Company and Sri Lalloo Mahato was neither lawful nor reasonable- The subsequent words "of a superior" denote that the order should have some connection or nexus with his employment and the discharge of duties. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Tata Oil Mills Co- Ltd., vs. Its Workmen, reported in 1964-II-LLJ p. 113 there should be a rational connection between the misconduct and the employment of the concerned workman. In the instant case no such question was involved and it was entirely an independent dispute between the Company and Sri Lalloo Mahato with regard to the title of the land and which is wholly a private affair. It has nothing to do with his employment with the Company. Obviously, if an encroach- ment had been done by an outsider the Company could not have resorted to this process for getting the encroachment vacated. Just because the trespasser assum- ing him to be so, happened to be an employee of the Company would not entitle the Company to use its advantageous position as an employer and by taking discip- linary action dismiss him. Standing Orders govern the relationship of an employer and employee in regard to matters concerning employment and not conferring a right to the employer for achieving an object wholly unconnected with the emp- loyment, Clause 19(1) is, therefore, not at all attracted. The other clause whirh is referred to in the charge-sheet is Cl. 27 of the Standing Orders. This has absolutely no bearing as it states that breach of any of the above orders concerning quarters shall be deemed misconduct. Sri Lalloo was not occupying any quarter of the Company and therefore this clause was wholly inapplicable. Sri Lalloo was, therefore, wrongly punished initially for suspension for 10 days and subse- quently was dismissed unjustifiably. He is, therefore, entitled to reinstatement.

Decision :

The order of suspension for 10 days on the first charge-sheet dated 12.11.19G3 and his subsequent dismissal on charge-sheet dated 27.12.1963 being unjustified are set aside. He shall be, reinstated with back wages and attendant benefits. The Union will also get Rs. 100/as costs of proceedings from the Company.

(Sd.) G, C- AGARWALA,

Presiding Officer.

7-9-67.

LNo. 2/52/G4-LRII.]

New Delhi, the 9th October 1967

S.O. 3750—In pursuance of section 17 of the Inudstrial 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 Sarpl Kajora Colliery, Post Office Ukhra, District Burdwan and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 28th September, 1967.

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, CALCUUTA.

REFERENCE NO, 30 OP 196"?

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the Sarpl Kajora Colliery,

AND

Their Workmen

PRESENT:

Shri S. K. Sen Presiding Officer.

APPEARANCES:

On behalf of Employers.—Shri K. P. Mukherjee, Bar-at-Law. On behalf of Workmen— Shri K. C. Mitra, Advocate.

STATE: West Bengal

INDUSTRY; Coal Mines-

AWARD

By Order No. 6/3O/67-LR1I dated 22nd April 67, the Central Government referred for adjudication an industrial dispute between the employers in relation to Sarpi Kajora Colliery, P.O. Ukhra Dist. Burdwan, and their workmen in respect of the matter specified in the following schedule :

"Whether the refusal to employ Shri Chhattu Bhuiya, General Mazdoor, with effect from the 18th January, 1&67 by the management of Sarpi Kajora Colliery, Post Office Ukhra District Burdwan was justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?"

2. According to the written statement of the Colliery Mazdoor Union on behalf of the workman, Chhattu Bhuiya, the management did not recognise the branch of the Colliery Mazdoor Union formed, at Sarpi Kajora Colliery and the manage- ment was annoyed with the workman who took an active part in forming their branch committee, and Chattu Bhuiya was a person who took an active part in organising the branch of the Colliery Mazdoc-r Union at the colliery. As the workman refused to sever his connection with the union though asked to do so by the management, the management suddenly stopped Chhattu Bhuiya from work with effect from 18th January 67. The union approached the A.L.C., Central Raniganj for relief and the A.L.C. tried conciliation but no scttlment could be arrived at. The Union wants reinstatement of Chhattu Bhuiya with back wages.

3. According to the written statement of the management, the management was not aware of the opening of a branch of Colliery Mazdoor Union at Sarpi Kajora Colliery and did not know whether Chhattu Bhuiya look any active part in organising a branch of that union at the colliery. According to the manage- ment Chhattu Bhuiya was not stopped from work, but he wanted to leave his job at the colliery and had voluntarily submitted a letter of resignation, and the re- signation was accepted and the outstanding dues of Chattu Bhuiya were paid to him. In the circumstances, according to the management, the claim for reinstate- ment must fail.

4. At the hearing although the union has been represented by Shri K, C. Mitra, Advocate, the workman Chattu Bhuiya has not appeared. There is the evidence of two witnesses for the management, namely Sri B. D. Singh, Manager and Shri R. C. Thacker, Agent that Chhattu Bhuiya voluntarily resigned with effect from 19th January 67 after having worked upto 18th January 67, and that he was not stoped from work by the management, but the management merely accepted his resignation and gave him his dues and permitted him to leave. This evidence has not been shaken by cross examination. The agent has stated that before the Conciliation Officer he wanted to meet the workman personally to confront him with the letter of resignation, but the Organising Secretary 61 the Union could not or did not produce tho workman before the Conciliation Officer.

5. In view of the above evidence it must be held that there was no refusal to employ Chhattu Bhuiya at the colliery but that he had resigned voluntarily. My award, therefore, is that Shri Chhattu Bhuiya, General Mazdoor, is not entitled to reinstatement or any other relief because he was not stopped from work by the management of Sarpi Kajora Colliery but had resigned voluntarily.

Sd./- S. K. SEN,

Dated, 23rd September, 1967.

Presiding Officer.

[No. S/30/67-LRII.]

S.O. 3751-—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 Jamadoba Colliery of Messrs Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited, Jamadoba, Post Office Jealgora, Dhanbad and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 30th September, 1967.

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

CAMP AT DHANBAD. Dated September 6, 1967.

PRESENT:

Sri G. C. Agarwala.—Presiding Officer.

REFERENCE NO- LCGIT/LC (R) (90)/67 (JABALPTJR TRIBUNAL). REFERENCE NO. LCGIT7LC (R) (90)/67 (JABALFUR TMBUNAL).

PARTIES:

Employers In relation the Jamadoba Colliery of M/s. Tata Iron and Steet¹ Company Limited, Jamadoba, P.O. Jealgora, Dhanbad (Bihar).

Versus

Their workmen through the Congress Mazdoor Sangh, Camp Jorapckhar No. 1, P.O. Jealgora, District Dhanbad (Bihar).

APPEARANCES:

For employers.—Sri S. N. Singh, Asstt. Chief Personnel and Welfare Officer. For the workmen.—Sri B. N". Sharma, President, Congress Mazdoor Sangh,,

Dhanbad.

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

AWARD

By Notification No. 2/65/63-LRII dated 14th August, 1964, the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, referred the following matter of dispute to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad, for adjudication:

Matter of Dispute

Whether the management of Jamadoba Colliery of Messrs Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited, Jamadoba, P.O. Jealgora, District Dhanbad, were justified in dismissing Shri Bansraj Pandey Watchman Ticket No 3193 Watch and Ward Department, with effect from -Mth Decem- ber, 1961? If not, to what relief Is the workman entitled?

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

For the workman Congress Mazdoor Sangh, the sponsoring Union filed a written statementbefore the Dhanbad Tribunal on 2nd June, 1966 The employers fUed their written statement-cum-rejoinder on 27th June, 1967. The Union, how- ever did nSt fill any rejoinder. Hearing wa.s rendered at Asansol on 1st Septcm- ter 1967. The parties filed certain documents which were admitted and a-cepted. No'oral evidence was produced in the case.

As the issue under reference would show, the dispute relates to the termina- tion of a sinele workman Sri Bansraj Pandey, Watchman Watch and Ward DepartmentThefact™ot the case are short and simple this workman Sri S S S a f f i m d ev along with an other person was arrested by the police on 14th October 1961 for attempting to steal a bicycle of a hawaldar. He remained jn

MHHBBHHl

S . ' ^ r t S Sr Tpr^iWBOrr.?dK.?"apSr?e?"S>.he En**, Office

on 7th December, 1961, but Bent an application that he had not received a copy of the charge-sheet. He, however, appeared before the Enquiry Officer on 8th December, 1961, and gave his statement. On receipt of his application that he had not received a copy of the charge-sheet, the management furnished a copy of -the char^eshcet by letter dated 8th December, 1961, (Ex. E/7) and he was required to stnte if he had anything further to add to his statement within 48 hours if so desired. Sri Bansraj did not appear and therefore the Enquiry Officer. Sri M. Singh, recorded a finding on 14th December, 1961, (Ex, E/8) finding him guilty of the charge. The management accepting the finding dismissed him by an order dated 26th December, 1961, (Ex. E/10) with effect from 29th December, 1961. Since an industrial dispute was pending before the Tribunal in respect of another matter, the management after paying him wages for one month appHed for approval under Section 33 (2) (b) ID. Act. The workman, Sri Bansrai Pandey, also filed an application under Section 33A I.D. Act before the said Tribunal for Violation of Section 33. Both the management and the workman, Sri Eansraj Pandey, however, got their applications dismissed on the ground that Sri BaMraj was not a concerned workman, The Congress Mazdoor Sangh took up the dispute in conciliation which ultimately resulted in this reference.

A preliminary objection has been raised on behalf of the employers that the dispute is not an industrial dispute as it relates to an individual matter of a single workman and the management was not aware whether Sri Bansraj Pandey was or was not a member of the Union before his dismissal. When the case has been sponsored by the Union, the burden of proof lay on the employers to show how the dispute was not an industrial dispute (Aligarh Electric Supply Com- pany Vs. Its workmen, reported in 1966 (II) LLJ p, 839 Allahabad High Court). "This the employers have failed to discharge. In the conciliation proceedings no objection was taken about the competency of the Union to establish and re- present. They did not summon the Membership Register for the relevant year from the Union and therefore the Union was not bound to prove membership of Sri Bansraj and other workers at the relevant time so as to be a representative Union competent to espouse the dispute. The management relied on copy of nn award of Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbnd in Ref. No. 67/63 between the same employers and the same Union, Congress Mazdoor Sangh. The award shows that it related to dismissal of one workman, Sri Tulsi, on 7th August, 1962. The Learned Presiding Officer did not believe the register of membership produced in that case for the year 1P62-63 and on that basis held that the dispute was not an industrial dispute. The judgement in another case which did not rc^te to this workman would be of no avail to show that the Union is not representative of the workmen. Ench case is determined on the issues and merits of that case. Even assuming that since the parties were the same and the issue was also identical, it may be noted that the relevant year in that case was 1962-63, whereas in this case the relevant vear is 1961-62. The Union may not have had representative character in 1962-63 but. it does not necessarily follow that it had no such capacity in 1961-62. When the issue and the years ere different no inference enn be drawn from this award and me employers should have established the fact by evidence in this case, The plea Ss, therefore, rejected.

Coming to the merits of the case, with the admitted position that Sri Bansraj had been absent for 10 days without permission, the Company was justified in charge-sheeting the workman for the misconduct. After arrest on 14th October 1961 it was incombent on Sri Bansraj Pandey to have communicated the tad immediately to the management and to have applied for leave. He took no steps •kill 1st November, 1961 when he sent an application from jail. Before that he had already absented for 10 days and the company had taken cognizance of his continued absence for more than 10 days so as to charge-sheet him. There was no malaHdp on their part in sending the charge-sheet by his home address be- cause they were not aware of his arrest an<3 whereabouts- The management came to know of it only on receint of the letter of the Superintendent of Police dated 3rd November, 1961 (Ex. E/4) and the own application sent from jail by Sri Bunsraj Pandey dated 1st November, 1961. After release from jail when Sri Bansrai appeared on 18th November, 1961 and applied to management on 20th November. 1961, the management reopened Hie enquiry. Fullest altitude was given in the enquiry to Sri Bansrai and when he demanded a copy of charge- sheet by his application dated 7th December, 1961 he was furnished with the same and his own statement was recorded on 8th December, 1961. The facts were sirrrole and admitted and therefore Sri Bansrai could not supplement by further stntement. There is no allegation of malafides or victimisation. The mere fact that Sri Bansraj had subsequently been acquitted by the Criminal

Court on the charge of theft is no ground for holding that there was satisfactory 5 ? u loV⁰r hlL- &Psen.ce- , Jt 's not the charge of theft but his continued absence without permission for leave over ten days which was material. The Company chargesheeted and dismissed him for this absence. There wag no satisfactory reason lor his not having informed the management about his arrest from jail till 1st November, 1901. Persumably he wanted to supress the fact and keep the management m the dark about it. That being so, the management was justified m dismissing the workman concerned, Sri Bansraj Pandey.

Decision

The result is that the reference is answered in affirmative. The management was justified in dismissing Sri Bansraj Pandey with effect from 29th December, 1981 and he is not entited to any relief.

Sd./- G. C. AGABWALA,

Presiding Officer.

6-9-1967.

[No. 2/65/63-LRII. |

New Delhi, the 10th October 1967

SO. 3753-— In pursuance of section 17 of the Inustrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following awarrl of the- Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Parasca Colliery, Post Office Kajoragram, District Burdwan and¹ their workmen which was received by the Central Government on fhe 4th Octo- ber, 1967.

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL. CALCUTTA

REFERENCE NO. 33 OF 1967

PARTIES :

Employers In relation to the Parasea Colliery,

AND

Their workmen.

PRESENT:

Shri S. K. Sen.—Presiding Officer.

APPEARANCES:

On behalf of Employers.—Shri S. S. Mukherjee, Executive Member, Rani-

ganj Chamber of Commerce.

On behalf of Workmen,—Shri O, P. Dubey, Executive Member, Parasea and

South Parasea Colliery Mazdoor Congress.

STATE: West Bengal

INDUSTRY: Coal Mines.

AWARD

By Order No. 6/13/67-LRII dated 16th May, 1967, the Central. Government referred for adjudication an industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Parasea Colliery, P.O. Kajoragram, Dist., Burdwan and their workmen in respect of the matter specified in the following schedule:

"Whether the refusal of the management of the .Parasca Colliery to employ Shri Harendra Prasad, Loading Clerk with effect from the 3rd Octo- ber, 1966, was justified? If not, to what relief is he entitled?"

2 Under a contract dated 5th December, 1961, between Parasea Collieries Limited and Messrs Union Construction Company, the Union Construction Company became the managing contractors of quarry No. 1 of Jambad Top seam at Parasea colliery. Under the contract, a copy of which is Ext. E, it was for the contrac- tors' firm, namely Union Construction Company, to engage the required labour and pay them in accordance with various awards. The workmen "onr:ei ned in this case namely Harendra Prasad, was engaged as a loading clerk by the Union- Construction Company in April, 1963. The Parasca and South Parasca Colliery Mazdoor Congress complained to the R.L.C., Central, Dhanbad, about the em- ployment of a contractor in contravention of the findings of Shri L. P. Dave Court of Enquiry The R L.C., Central, Dhanbad, accordingly paid a visit to parasea

Colliery on 27th November, 1965, and thereafter by a letter dated 17th December 1965, (Ext. 1A) requested the management to abolish the system of contractors immediately and to take the workmen under direct employment Thereupon the management served notice of termination of the contract on Messrs Union Con- struction Company on 3rd January, 1966, a copy of the notice of termination in Ext. F. The work at the quarry was suspended from 8th December, i%5. Some months were required in settling accounts between the management o£ Parasca Collieries Limited and the contractors' firm, namely the Union Construction Com- pany, After the accounts had been settled the management decided to start work at quarry No. 1 of Jambad Top seam from June, 1966. A notice in the form Ext A was hung up on the mam Notice Board of the Parasea Colliery and another at the quarry site, stating that workmen of the quarry who were employed under Messrs Union Construction Company might contact the Welfare Officer oi the Group Agent of Parasea Colliery on or before 7 A.M. 23rd June. 196(5 in order to obtain employment under the management of the company for work at the quarry, and that in case of failure to report bv the time mentioned the manage- ment would not be responsible for employing the workmen. A number of work- men who used to work under the contractors' firm at the quarry reported by the due date and they were employed by the management.

3. According to the management, Harendra Prasad who was engaged as a loading clerk under the contractors' firm did not report until 3rd October, 1966; on 3rd October. 1966, he asked for employment but at that time there was no vacancy in the loading and despatch section or indeed in any category of thp cleri- cal cadre at Parasea Colliery and the management rould not therefore, employ him- He had not been given employment by 16th May, 19fl7 which is the date of order of reference. In the meantime however, in accordance with an agree- ment for reference to arbitration signed between the employers and the work- men represented hy the Parasea and South Parasea Colliery Ma/door Congress before the R.L.C., Central, Asansol on 10th April, 1967, certain matters in dispute had been referred to Sri D. P. Swaika for arbitration. To the arbitrator tho management gave an undertaking to employ two of the clerks who had been in service under the Union Construction Company, namely Harendra Prasnd and Gouri Shankar Banerjee and the management accordingly issued letters of appointment to these clerks on 1st September, 1967, i.e., a d.iv before the date of the award by Sri D. P. Swaika. Harendra Prasad actuallv joined his new post as Assistant Bonus Clerk at Parasea Colliery on 3rd September, 1967. Thereafter the Group Agent of Parasea Co^ieries Limited wrote to the General Secretary, Parasea and South Parasea Mazdoor Congress (Ext. 2) on 17th September, 1967, that a memorandum of settlement might he fllrd before the tribunal in the case concerning Harendra Prasad. The General Secretary replied by a letter dated 21st September, "1967 (Ext. 3) that Harendra Prasad should be deemed to have been employed with effect from .3rd October, 1966 when he reported for duty and as on leave without pav from 3rd October, 1966 to 31st August. 1967 (or 2nd September. 1967). An the suggestion was not acceptable to the management the memorandum of settlement was not signed by the parties.

4 According to the case of the union, the management had wrongfullv emp- loyed a contractors' firm to do raising work from the quarrv and after abolition of the contract in persuance of the direction given by the R.L.C., Dhanbad, the management was hound to take into their direct service all the workmen emp- loyed" under the contractors firm as soon as they reported for duty and that, therefore ' the management was wrong in not giving employment to Harendra Prasad as soon as he reported. The claim of the union is for back wages from the date on which the workman concerned first reported for duty.

5. The case of the management is that the management was not under any obligation to give employment to the workers employed by the contractors' firm, though as a matter of generosity and good will the management offered employ- ment to all workers employed under the contractors' firm who reported by 23rd June, 1966 and the management was not, therefore, bound to give employment to Harendra Prasad who did not report by that day, On behalf of the manage- ment it has also been urged that in view of the arbitration award m which the settlement regarding Harendra Prasad is also mentioned, it is no longer open to the union to press the dispute in respect of Harendra Prasad.

fi. Under the terms of the contract it was for the contractors firm to engage such workmen as might be required for performance of their raising contract for quarry No. 1. When the contract was terminated there could be no legal obligation' on the Parasea Collieries Limited to give employment to all the work- men of the contractors' firm. It is no doubt true that the R.L.C-, Central, Dhan- bad In the letter dated 17th December 1965, Ext- 1A, requested that tho contract

be abolished and the workmen under the contractors taken under the direct employment of the colliery company but that was only a request which could not be a legal obligation. Thereafter negotiation between the Group Agent of Parasea Collieries Limited and the R.L.C., Dhanbad took place. Ext. D encloses the minutes of the discussion between the Group Agent and the representatives of the Union and the R.L.C., Dhanbad. It appears from the minutes of the pro- ceedings which took place before the R.L.C., Implementation, Dhanbad on 19th July 1967 that the management of Parasea Collieries Limited undertook the responsibility for paying any dues of the workers under the contractors' firm if the contractors' firm did not pay the same. There Is nothing in the minutes to show that the management took the liability of employing everybody who had been employed under the contractors firm. It is also clear from the items of disputes which were referred to the arbitrator under the arbitration agreement that there was no dispute as to employment of workmen who had been employees of Messrs Union Construction Company. Ext. Cl is an original copy of the award by Sri D. P. Swaika and copies of all relevant documents which were produced before the arbitrator are enclosed with the award as annexures, Annexure A is the list of disputes submitted by the union to the arbitrator. Item 5(iii) of the list of disputes mentions non-payment of certain dues to the workmen under the contractors, Messrs Union Construction Company. But there is no demand relating to the non-employment of workmen under the contractors, Messrs Union Construction Company. Item 2 in the list of disputes mentions reinstatement of certain dismissed workers. The list of dismissed workers contains the name of Harcndra Prasad, loading clerk, but it is difficult to understand how this could be included as Harendra Prasad was a loading clerk under Union Construction Company and not under the Parasea Colliery. Before he made his final award, Sri D. P. Swaika wrote a letter suggesting certain terms and asked for comments of both parties; regarding item No. 2 of the disputes, he suggested therein that as the cases involving dismissal were pending before various tribunals, the manage- ment and the union would be free to persue any line of action provided by law and that the decision of the tribunal would be binding. In other words, Sri Swaika wanted to make no award relating to the cases of dismissal, Letters -containing the comments of both the parties are also included in the annexures. It appears that the Group Agent of the Parasea Colliery agreed to the proposed award relating to dispute No. 2, but the General Secretary of the Parasea and South Parasea Mazdoor Congress in his letter dated 22nd August 1967 stated that 2 cases of refusal of employment would be settled at local level namely the cases of Harendra Prasad, Loading clerk and Gouri Shankar Banerji, Provident Fund clerk and the union requested the arbitrator to include their cases m his award In the award therefore relating to item No. 1, the arbitrator included the cases of Harendra Prasad and Gouri Shankar Bancrji stating that ihe parties would persue the line of action provided by law in the cases pending before the Tribunals but in the special cases of Harendra Prasad and Gouri Shankar Banerjl it was agreed by the management to give fresh appointments in any post that may be available in either of their collieries. I have already stated that in persuance of the undertaking which was given by the Group Agent to the arbi- trator to give fresh appointment to Harendra Prasad and Gpuri Shankar Banerji, on 1st September, 1967 a day before the award was signed, he issued letters of fresh appointment to Harendra Prasad and Gouri Shankar Banerjee In view of the award, it is difficult to understand how the union can still claim that the appointment of Harendra Prasad should be given retrospective effect and that he should be paid wages for the period of non-employment. Harendra .Prasad in hi° deposition before the tribunal has said that he first reported before the management on 7th !uly, 1966 and again on 9th September, 19fifl but no such case was made in the written statement of the union and m the order of reference the Question propounded is whether the refusal of the management to employ HarendraPPrasad with effect from 3rd October 1966 was justified. This shows that the case before the Conciliation Officer was that Harendra Prasad had reported on 3rd October 1966 and not on any earlier date. In view of all the circumstances I must hold that the management was not bound to Rive employment to Harendra Prasad when he first reported on 3rd October 1966, long after the date mentioned- in the notice, Ext. A hJ expired; and having been given a fresh employment from 1st September lC67/3rd September. 1967 as Assistant Bonus Clerk he is not entitled to an order that the appointment shall take effect retrospectively from 3rd October 1966 or that he shall Ret wages for the period of non employment from 3rd October,1966 I make my award accordingly. ^ f_ g K g^ Presiding Officer.

•Dated, 28th September, 1967.

[ NQ 6 / 1 3 / 6 7.L R n >]

S.O. 3^3.—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 Jote Dhemo Colliery, Post Office Ukhra, District Burdwan and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 4th October, 1967.

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, CALCUTTA

REFERENCE NO. 19 OF 1967

PARTIES :

Employers in relation to the Jote Dhemo Colliery,

AND

Their Workmen

PRESENT :

Shri S- K. Sen, Presiding Officer-

APPEARANCES :

On behalf of Employers-—Absent On behalf of Workmen—Shri Madhusudan Roy, General Secretary, Asansol Coal Field Workers' Union,

STATE: West Bengal-

INDUSTRY: Coal Mines.

AWARD

By Order No- 6/16/67-LR'II dated 24th July 1967, the Central Government referred for adjudication an industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Jote Dhemo Colliery, P-O- Ukhra, Dist. Burdwan and their workmen In respect of the matters specified in the following Schedule;

"Whether refusal of the Management of Jote Dhemo Colliery to employ Shri Nemal Mochi as Fitter Helper from the 7th December, 1966 was justified? If not, to what relief is he entitled?"

2. This case has been taken up ex-parte as no representative of the management has appeared on the date of hearing. The management did not even file its written statement. After the written statement of the union on behalf of the workman had been filed and after waiting for some time for the written statement of the man- agement which had at one stage asked for one month's time to file the written statement, the date 7th July 1967 was fixed for 'fixing date of hearing'- On that date one Shri G. C- Ojha appeared for the management and he was asked to file the written statement of the management within 10 days and the date of hearing was fixed as 26th August 1967. The date of hearing was shifted thereafter to 28th September 1967 and notice of the adjourned date was given to the management by registered post and was acknowledged by the management on 6th September 1967- But on 2flth September 1967 no representative of the management appeared- The General Secretary of the union was present with some 01 his witnesses. After waiting for.an hour and a half for the management the case was called for hearing and then the General Secretary of the Union stated that the workman concerned, Nemai Mochi, had gone to the 'KALI' temple and had not come back. Accordingly the hearing was adjourned to 29th September 1967 when it was taken up ex-parte.'

3 According to the workman, Nemai Mochi, he was originally appointed as a fitter mazdoor and worked at Jote Dhemo Colliery for 6 or 7 years and was working as fitter helper. One day he went to the manager and asked for payment of over- time at double the daily rate for working on holidays as he was being paid wages at single rate for work on holidays. The manager enquired about the designation of the workman but the workman was unable to state his designation- Then from the office clerk the manager ascertained that Nemai Mochi.was described as General Mazdoor and the manager then asked him to work as a general mazdoor to repair breaches in the tramming line by filling up the breaches with stone and earth- The workman protested that he was working as a fitter helper and he could not be asked to work as an ordinary mazdoor or track packing mazdoor- Next day when Nemai Mochi went to do his usual work he was not allowed to join his work. He was thus refused work for 2 or 3 days. Then he Informed his Union Secretary, Sri Madhusudan Roy, who brought the matter to the notfce of the A.L-C, Central, Ranlganj. The workman has produced a certificate granted by an outgoing Assist- ant Manager, Shri R- N. Sinha, on 20th October 1963 wherein it Is stated that Nemai Mochi was working in the colliery as an assistant mechanical fitter and had good knowledge In repairing pumps, haulage and steam engines.

4, It appears from the failure report that before A.L.C., Central, Raniganj a representative of the management appeared and before the A.L-C, Central, Rani- ganj also .the certificate granted by Sri R. N. Slnha was produced but the re- presentative of the management said that the Assistant Manager had no authority to issue such a certificate- The management's representative also stated before the A.L.C. that Nemai Mochi was a general mazdoor and there was no work to justify his appointment a& a fitter helper.

5- According to Appendix XII of the Colliery Award a general mazdoor and a track packing mazdoor and a fitter mazdoor all belong to category I. A fitter helper belongs to category III. From the certificate which was granted by the Assistant Manager, R. N. Sinha, It may be presumed that Nemai Mochi was doing work as a fitter helper at least from time to time- But admittedly he was drawing the wages of category I I.e. formally he did not receive promotion from a fitter mazdoor to a fitter helper. In the circumstances, the workman cannot claim to be taken by the management as a fitter helper but can claim to be taken back only as a fitter mazdoor. It may be that in the B form register maintained at the colliery Nemai Mochi's description is a General Mazdoor, but his evidence that he started as a fitter mazdoor and all along did work as flttermazdRpj: and as fitter helper Is supported by the Certificate, Ext- 1 which he ohtalneS from the Assistant Manager Accordingly, when he protested to the manager that he could not be asked to do the work of a track packing mazdoor he was justified and the management was wrong In keeping him out of work for the next 2 or 3 days and in fact from the date on which he had made the protest to ,the manager about his overtime pay for work on holidays. It does not appear from the representations made by the management's representative before the Conciliation Officer that there was any proceeding against Nemai Mochi when he was stopped from work. Accordingly the stopping must be held to be unjustified.

fl. My award therefore Is that the refusal of the management of Jote Dhemo Colliery to employ Nemai Mochi as a fitter helper from 7th December 1966 was justified, but the refusal ito employ him altogether from 7th December, 1966 was not justified and that he should npt have been stopped from work but kept In his post as fitter mazdoor until he could earn formal promotion to the post of a fitter helper. I direct therefore that Nemai Mochi be taken back as a fitter mazdoor within one month of the publication' of the award and that he be paid his wages for the period from 7th December 1966 to the date when he is taken back.

Sd./-, S- K- SEN, Dated, 29th September, 1967-

Presiding Officer. [No- 6/16/67-LRII.]

ORDERS

New Delhi, the 10th October 1067

S.O. 3754.—Whereas the Central Government is of opinion that an industrial dispute foists between the employers in relation to the Sial Ghogri Colliery (owned by M/s. Sial Ghogri Group, Nelson Square. Nagpur) and their workmen in respect of the matters specified in the Schedule hereto annexed;

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

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by c⁷ause (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 Indus- trial Tribunal, Jabalpur, constituted under section 7A of the said Act.

SCHEDULE

Whether the man^errient of the Sial Ghogri Colliery was justified in stop- ping Shri Matin, Clerk. Sial Ghofiri Colliery from work with effect from the 5th June, 1967 and subsequently retrenching him from service by their letter dated the 19th July, 1967? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?

[No. 5/41/67-LRIL]

New Delhi, the 13th October 1967

SO. 3755.—Whereas the Central Government is of opinion that an industrial dispute exists between the employers in relation to the East Bhuggatdih Colliery Post Office Jharia, District DhanbaS ancT"their workmen in respect of the matter 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 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 Indus- trial Tribunal, Dhanbad, constituted under section 7A of the said Act.

SCHEDULE

Whether the management of East Bhuggatdih Colliery, Post Office Jharia, District Dhanbad, was justified in terminating the services of their workman Shri Ahmad Mian, Trammer, with effect from the 20th June, 1967; If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?

[No, 2/98/67-LRIL]

CORRIGENDUM

New Delhi, the 10th. October 1967

S-O. 3756—In the Order of the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, Employment and Rehabilitation (Department of Labour and Employment) No. SO. 2514, dated the 22nd July, 1967, published at page 2554 of the Gazette of India, Part II—Section 3—Sub-section (II), dated the 29th July, 1967—

In line 4 of the Schedule, for "Oaltan Mahato'" read "Paltan Mahato".

[No. P. 2/79/67-LRIL1

BALWANT SINGH, Under Secy-

(Department of Labour and Employment)

New Delhi, the 9th October 1967

S.O. 3757.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section, (1) of section 5 of the Mines Act, 1952 (35 of 1952), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Prakash Kumar Singh as Inspector of Mines subordinate to the Chief Inspector of Mines and makes the following further amendment in the notifica- tion of the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour and Employment S.O. No. 431 dated the 2nd March, 1961, namely:—

In the said notification the following entry shall be added at the end namely :—

"(104) Shri Prakash Kumar Singh"

[No, F. 8/76/66-M.L1

J. D. TEWARI, Under Secy.

(Department of Labour and Employment)

New Delhi, the 9th October 1967

SO. 3758—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 employera in relation to the Mnkundi Mica Mines of Messrs, Chretien Mica Industries Limited and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 30th September, 1967.

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR

COURT, JABALPUR.

Camp at Dhanbad.

Dated September 6. 1967

PRESENT:

Sri G. C. Agarwala Presiding Officer.

REFERENCE NO. 158 OF 1966 (DHANBAD TRIBUNAL)

REFERENCE NO. CGIT/LC (R)' (90) /67 (JABALPUR TRIBUNAL)

Employers In relation to the Makundi Mica Mine of Messrs Chrestien Mica Industries Ltd., and their workmen, through the Secretary, Mica Labour Union, P.O. Domchanch, District Hazaribagh (Bihar¹).

APPEARANCES:

For Employers.—Sri Girdhar Gopal, Labour Officer. For workmen.—S/STI Surya Narain Sinha, President, Nanhku Rana General Secretary and Ramdharl Singh, Secretary, Mica Labour Union.

INDUSTRY: Mica Mine DISTRICT: Hazaribagh (Bihar).

AWARD

i C b a d S- '• '" a d j u < i t a't t o> *> t he C e" ™l O o v e r n m e M t a &K T r i t a K .'

Matter of Dispute

1. Whether the management of Messrs Chrestien Mica Industries Limited la justified m dismissing Sarvashri Durgi Gope Pati G r m e a n r t T ^ , 7, A &S l°^fakUndi *** MnQ frOm "^ ShGefeitairoBmha8tUh 2. If not, to what relief are they entitled?

The proceedings remained pending before the Dhanbad Tribunal till transferred to tins Tribunal by Notification No. 8/25/67-LRII dated April 25, 1967 c r a n s l e r r ea

At the .same time the whole disciplinary proceedings are vitiated for a number of reasons. The first obvious infirmity is the vagueness of the charge-sheet. It runs as follows:—

"It has been brought to our notice that you had concealed mica inside the mine for the purpose of theft.

Please show cause within 24 hours as to why you should not be dismissed from the service."

The above charge-sheet does not give any particulars of the charge. All that was stated is that it had come to the notice of the management that some mica had been concealed inside the mine for the purposes of theft. How the fact came to the notice of the management as the basis of the charge had not been indicated, nor the date, time and place when these workers were found to have concealed the mica with an intent to comit theft. A charge need not fulfil the technical re- quirements of criminal trials, but considerations of fair play and natural justice must govern the conduct of the Enquiry Officer, vide Associated Cement Compa- nies Ltd. vs. Their Workmen and another, reported in 1363 (II)LLJ. p. 396). Further as held in Sur Enamel and Stamping Works, Ltd. Vs. Their Workmen reported in 1963(II)LLJ p. 367 an enquiry cannot be said to have been properly held unless the employee proceeded against has been informed clearly of the charges levelled against him. Ip Powari Tea Estate Vs- M. K. Barkataki and others 1&65(II)LLJ p. 102, it was clearly laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that where an employer proposes to hold an enquiry into the conduct of a work- man with a view to take disciplinary action, it is not enough merely to serve a charge-sheet. The charge must be carefully worded and should not indicate that the management had already made up its mind. The vagueness of the charge is, therefore, first infirmity in the enquiry.

The second infirmity lies in the findings of the Enquiry Officer. It is a brief report (Ex.E/15) and curiously does not bear any date. It would be pertinent to reproduce this report:—•

To The General Manager, M/s. Chrestien Mica Industries Ltd., rjomchpnch.

SUB' Report of the enquiry In connection to charge-sheet No. 245/66m (CMI) dated 22nd July, 1966 In respect to Sarvashn Bahadur Mahato, Pnti, Gope and Durgi Gope.

Sir,

I am to submit before you that I have made an enquiry in the above case as

directed by you.

It has been established that mica was concealed inside the mine. This was no

doubt with intent to commit theft.

In course of making enquiry we found that there were only these three work- ers picking the mica and packing them in that face. Their own evidences some times differ and further the statements given by Sarvashree Kailu Gope, S.ardar, and Sukar Dusadh and Itwari Singh make it clear that it were none but these Bahadur Mahato, Pati Gope and Durgi Gope who had concealed the mica with intent to steal it when convenient.

Therefore they are guilty of the misconduct.

Yours faithfully, Sd/- GIHDHAR GOPAL, Labour Officer.

The enquiry proceedings show that a number of witnesses were examined for the management and they were Itwari Singh, Sukar Dusadh, Kailu Gope, Dhani Dhobl, Degan Chasa and Leelo Shah. The finding of the Enquiry Officer does not disclose how the evidence of Kailu Gope, Sukar and Itwari out of the management witnesses established the charge- Nor did he mention how the statement of the con- cerned workmen differed. It is a brief cryptic document which does not reveal lhat he actually applied his mind to the evidence produced before him. As held in Powari Tea Estate (supra) one of the requirements and an esssential require- ment of natural justice in a domestic enquiry Is that the report of the Enquiry Officer should not contain only his conclusion but also the reasons therefor. It is not necessary that the report should be elaborate but It must clearly indicate the conclusion reached and the reasons therefor. Without this, it becomes impossible for the Tribunal to consider the question whether the conclusion reached by tho

Enquiry Officer was perverse or not. (See also Khandah and Co., Ltd., v. Its workmen, reported in 1963 (II)LLJ p. 452). The above finding of the Enquiry Officer is merely a fulfilment of an empty formality. It has been suggested on behalf of the workmen that this document was made up later on to meet the requirement of empty formality. The inference is drawn by the order of dis- missal (Ex, E/16) which makes no mention of the finding of the Enquiry OTBcer. The absence of the date on the report of the Enquiry Officer is also a circum- stance raising suspicion.

The finding for whatever worth it was is also patently perverse. I have gone- through the evidence of all the witnesses examined bv the management before the Enquiry Officer the only incriminatinff evidence is reflected in one part of lengthy statement of Kailu Gope in which he stated that Durgi Gope and Bahadur Mahato represented before the Manager that they had kept the material. Pati Gope was absent that day. This part of the alleged admission of the two work- men does not necessarily referred to the concealment of the material fpr the purpose of committing the theft. As a matter of fact, the entire evidence pointed to the complicity of the Manager in an attempt with a view to smuggle out some .mica and concealment was for that purpose. Tit bits picked up in the evidence on mere suspicion will not fasten any guilt on the workmen, particularly when the theory of estoppel has no application in industrial adjudication. There is nothing direct or circumstantial to connect the three workmen with any atfempt to commit theft. Consequently, the finding is on the face of it a perverse one.

Lastly, even if it be assumed that these workmen had really concealed somtt mica with a view to commit theft at some later stage^ the action was merely an intention for future commission of an act of theft. There was even no attempt to commit theft because the mica which was found covered by some earth had ntft been packed and no attempt was being made to take it out. On discovery that some mica was found at one place it was mixed up with the, rest under the- orders of the Manager. It is an admitted case that before fnica is taken out it iff packed and sealed and checked by the Durban. Sri Girdhar Gopal (E.W. 1) admitted that no theft is possible without th" conspiracy of the Durban and either the Sirdar or the Shift Incharge or the Manager- It is therefor*, most unreasonable to fix the liability for attempt to theft on these workers when some mica was found concealed and at one time these workers were found working ne&r that place- It is significant to note that neither In the charge-sheet nor In th'er dismissal order the basic clause of the Standing Orders under which the work- men have been found guilty of the misconduct has been stated- CX 14 of the- Standing Orders enumerates various misconduct and Sub-clause (b) states "theft, dishonesty in connection with the employer's property or business," as a mis- conduct. There was no theft committed. The concealment was merely a pre- paration for the commission of theft. It had not even reached the stage of attempt. In the charge-sheet itself, the management has not charged the workmen for theft but only for the conduct of concealing the mica inside the mine "for the purposes of theft." The dismissal order also does not state that they have b"en found guilty for theft or attempt to commit theft. It merely states that the workmen have been found guilty of the misconduct. What that misconduct was and under which clause of the Standing Orders it was covered has convenient- ly been omitted. Consequently, the misconduct even if it be assumed to have been proved was not at all theft and was not stated to be so by the management. It was merely preparatory conduct with an intention to commit theft and had not even reached the stage of an attempt to commit theft, By the wordings of the Standing Orders even an attempt would not be a misconduct unless the offence of theft as is commonly understood under general law was completed. In any view of the matter the workmen have been wrongly dismissed on mere suspicion and without a proper enquiry conforming to principles of natural jus- tice- The employers had a right to justify the punishment by adducing evidence before this Tribunal which they did not avail.

Decision:

It is therefore, held that the management was not justified In dismissing the three workmen Durgi Gope Pati Gope and Bahadur Mahato. They shall, there- fore, be reinstated with back wages and all attendant benefits- The Union will get Rs. 100/- as costs of the proceedings-

Sd/- G- C. AGARWALA,

Presiding Officer,

6th September, 1967-

[No, F. 20/8/a6-LRI.T GANGESH MISRA, Dy, Secy.

MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department of Revenue and Insurance)

INCOME-TAX

New Delhi, the 12th September 106?

SiO. 3759.—In pursuance of sub-section (I) of section 287 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government, being of opinion that it is expedient in the public interest so to do, hereby publishes tbc names of assessed),—

(a) being individuals or Hindu undivided families who have been assessed on an income

more than a lakh of rupees

(b) being firms, associations of persons or Companies who have been assessed on an income

of more than ten lakhs of rupees;

duringthe financial yeai 1964-65.

I. Individuals and Hindu undivided families who have been a"aessed on an incomo of more than a lath of rupees during the financial year 1964-65.

Status

Name and address of I he assessec

Assmt. year

SLNo.

Income assested undir thelfT. Afct, 1961

(3)

(4)

(")

CO

. C5>

II. FirniS) associations of persons and companies who have been assessed on an income Of more than ten lakhs of rupees during the financial year 1964-65.

Status

Name and address of the assess ee

Assmt. year

SI. No.

Income assessed under t h e l . T. Act, 1961

(3)

(4)

CD

(a)

(5)

Namts of all individuals and Hindu undivided familits assessed on an income of over Rs. l lakh

in the financial, year 1964-65.

Status

Assessment year

Name and address of the asscssee

S. No.

Income assessed under I.T .Act,

1961

1

2

5

3

4

Andhra Pradesh

Indl.

I 2

33

Sry. Anikincedu Prasad, Challapalli Ablda Khatoon, Hyderabad . • . Nb. Imdad Jah, Hyderabad Sri Kowtha Poornanandam, s/o Late K.

3 4

Subba Rao, Poomanandampet, Vijayawada. HUF Ind.

HliF

1963-64 1963-64 1962-63 1964- 65 1963-64 1960-61 1962-63 1964-65

Do".

1,61,675 IJ97.643 1,03,001 1,03,909 1,00,399 1,08,279 1,85.987 1,21,463 1,30,207 i.4°>55° 5 6 7 " 9

)>

JO

Murarilal Goverdhanlal, Hyderabad Maripudi Venkateswara Rao, Guntur . Maddi Satyanarayana, Pasamarru Maddi Lakshmaiah, Pasamarru . Maddi Venkataratnam, Pasamarru Sri Narla Hanumanla, Banswada, Nizamabad

3-

DisL

)1

11

Ind.

12 13 14

N. V. Ganspathi Rao, Vijianagaram . Sri Prasangi Someswara Rao, MasuHpatnam . Sry. Padmanabha Piasad, Challapalli . P. Sitayamma, Giteru, Tanuku Tq. Smt. P. Atchayamma, Dommeru, Kowur Tq. Shri P. V. G. Raju, Vijianagaiam Prlnge Azam Jah Bahadur, Hyderabad .

317

"

18 Prince Moazam Jah Bahadur, Hyderabad

Princess Durreshavarj Hyderabad.

"

19

. 11

20 31

22 23 24

1960-61 i955-5<5 1956-57 1963-64 1964-65 1963-64 1962-63 1960-61 1964-65 1959-60 1960-61 1961-62 1964-65 1960-61 1964-65 1960-61 1960-61 1964-65 1960-61 1963-64

Do.

HUF Ind. HUF Ind.

>>

27 28

JJ

Prince Mukarram Jah Bahadur., Hyderadad . Prince Mufakkam Jah Bahadur, Hyderabad . Raja Ramdev Rao, Begumpet, Hyderabad R, B. Motilal Bansilal, Hyderabad Sry. Sivarama Prasad, Challapalli Srv. Sivarama Prasad, ChallapaUi Salar Jung Estate, Dlwan Devdi, Hyderabad . Sahebzada Basalat Jah Bahadur, Hyderabad . Sahebzadi Shahzadi Begum, Hyderabad

1960-61 1960-61 1958-59 1962-63 1964-65

1,05,864 1,46,701 1,14,700 1.43.977 1,06,172 I , 7IJI49 3,90,102 12,60,178 11,01,862 9>54>555 9,16,712 ii.49.643 10,00,773 3,00,275 3.573373 8,07,131 8,63,402 1,133846 3.61,417 1360,433 3,29,274 2,64,451 4.07.442 1,52,538 I,63>i9° 1,54,349

Smt. Thotal Venkata Bharathamma, Masuh-

29

patnam . . . . . .. „

1964-65

1,82,709

Shri Vusirikala Soma Satyanarayana, Vijia-

30

1,11429

1962-63

nagaram . . . , . . "

Assam

1,03,833

JJ

1398.724

1,01,042

1964-65 1960-61 1964-65A. C. Gowan C/o A.O.C. Ltd., Digboi B. N. Singh, Digboi ChandmaTSarawaji, Fancy Bazar, Gauhati , D. A. Cummlng, Kanjikhowa, T.E. (Budla 31 33 33 34 Beta T.E. Co. Ltd.) P.O. Penitola . . „ 1964-65 ij°3393i Mr. F. L. Knights, Dhekari T.E. P.O.Raj- 35 1,17,212 mal 1963-64

Assam—contd"

36 G. N. S. Robertson, C/o The B.O.C. fl.T.) Ltd., 2/113, Parliament St., New Delhi-1 . Indl.

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 1960-61

" HUF

M5,238 1,56,572 1,03,901 4,91,188 1,08,166

Do.

Ganpatrai Sarawji Fancy Bazar, Gauhati . Girdharllal Sardarmal, Dibrugarh M/s. Hanutram Ramprasad, Dibrugarh J. A. Lys. Seleng T . E. P . O. Selenghat (c/o

37 38 39 40

B. L. & Co. Ltd.) Calcutta-1 .

1964-65 1960-61

Indl. a

it

Do.

1,02,183 1,29,473 2,84,684 41 42 43

Lalchand Todl Haibrgaon, Nowgong . R. G. Saharia, Dibrugarh . . .. M r. R. F. Gregory (Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd.) 2 1, NctajL Subhash Marg, Calcutta .

"

HUF

1962-63 1964-65 1960-61

1,08,032 1,13,887 3,26,584 44 45

M / B. Rameswarlal Sonwarwal, Dibrugarh M/8. Ramjidas Ganpatrai Partner of M / s. Shree Mahaluxmi Mills, Fancy Bazar, G a u- hati

V. P. Kapoor, Ruknong T.E., Naharkatia

1964-65 1960-61

46

1,54,072

1,07,046

Bihar & On'wa

Indl.

1963-64

⁴Z

ij

Do. Do.

J>

it

3-

>)

1962-63 1963-64 1962-63 1963-64

1,72,026

1,10,947

1,69,317

1,90,190

1,41,489

1,20,391

1,45,000

48 49 50 51 52 53 . 54

Do.

"J

,,

1964-65 1964-65

bo.1963-64

Shri Brahma Dutt, Ranchi . . .. B. P. Jain, Kharkhati B i j a li K a n ti R oy B a l d y n a th R oy K a r t as . . .. B. S i n g h, J a m a h e d p ur . . .. D c o ji S h l v j i, J h a r ia D. K. A g a r w a l la & P. K. A g a r w a l la G. G. S p a n d l e, H e c k et E n g i n e e r i n g, J a m- a h e d p ur . . . . .. G y a n c h a nd J a i n, R a n c hi . . .. H. C. V e r s n e i, K a n d ra . . .. H a r kh C h a nd J a i n, R a n c hi . I n d ra M o h a n, R a n c hi . . .. K i s b u n l al A g a r w a l la . . .. K. S i n g h, B h u i y a d i h, J a m s h e d p ur M i s r i l ai D h a r a m c h a n d, C h a i b a sa . .

• 55 56 57 58 59 <5o <5l

H UF Indl. HUF Indl. HUF

Indl.

Misrilal J a i n, C h a i b a sa . . .. N. A. B. Hill, I . C . C. L t d ., G h a t s i la .

•)i

. P. K. Agarwalla

33

HUF Ind.

H

ho. Do. 1962-63 1963-64 1962-63 1962-63 1963-64 1963-64 1963-64 1964-65 1963-64

1,00,603 1,41,102 2,14,111 140,283 1,72,025 1,12,612 1,41,485 2,50,625 2,37,377 3,45,131 I , 6 I , S IO 1,45, boo i, 12,612 1,72,525 1,36,534 1.48,160 62 63 64 65 66 67 63 69

Raghunath Agarwalla, Kharkhari Som Dutt, Ranchi S. C. V e r s h n e i, K a n d ra . . .. S h i v r am S i n g h, K h a r k h a ri . . .. S a r d ar S u r j an S i n g h, S u n d e r n a g a r, J a m s h e d- p ur . . . . . ..

Jj

1964-65

i"O5>355 1,22,165

Do. Do.

S. N. G a n g u l y, R a n c hi . . .. T a r a c h a nd J a i n, R a n c hi . . .. V i r j ee R a t a n s hi S a n g h v i, J h a r ia . ,

70 71 72

Do. HUF Indl.

1374,985

T.80,845

1962-63 1963-64

Bom bay City I

Smt. Allu D. Cowasji, c/o M/s. D. Cowasji &

73

ii

Co., 123 M. G. Road, Bombay

1963-64

' UJJTJJ

Arvindprasad N. Mafat Lai, Mafat Lai House,

74

Bombay

1964-65

4^7^723

Arvindprasad N. Mafatlal, Mafat Lai House,

75

Bombay

HUF

1961-62

VJ J1 tjj *

A. F. L. Theoijar, 9' Wallace St., Fort, Bom-

76

bay

[Indl.

1964-65

3i42,l2O

7 A. G. B. Davidson, c/o Burmah Shell Storage

7'

& Dist., Co., Ltd., Ballard Eatatc, Bom- bay

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65

Ii46,9IO

1^59)786

T>24,542

Bombay City I—contd.

A. W, Sckus, c/o Firestone & Tyre & Rubber

78

^25,777

Indl.

Co., Haybunder Rd., Bombay .

1964-65

s,

79 Maj. A. G. Gray, Layfleld, Ashampstead, Berk England or c/o Wilfred T. Fry|Ltd., 13 Buckingham Palace Gardens London

3,794

1963-64

1,28,541

80 A. H. Bakerj Burleigh House Charing S. Kent, England, c/o A. F. Ferguson & Co., Allaha- bad Bank Building, Appollo St., Fort, Bombay

ts

5^504

1964-65

IJ73>09<>

81

2,43,966 Executors to the estate of Smt. Anns Evans, c/o Lloyds Bank Ltd., 71 Lambard Street, London B.C. 3 c/o A. F. Ferguson & Co., Appollo Street) Fort, Bombay-1

1963-64

2 J 5 7 J 9 °5

Jj

1964-65

1,17,285 B. S. BillirpQtiflj 113 N.G. Road, Bombay Beni PrasaiSinghij Industry House, 159 Chur-

83 83

U

1963-64

1,00,427 chgate Rpcli^ation, Bombay .

84

B a l l a rd E s t a t e, B o m b ay . . ..

HUF I"% HUF

19*2-63 19*4-65 1960-61

1,68,868 1^7^77 1,08,288.

85 Brijlal Ramjidas, 401 E.I.C.A., Bombay, Bilasrai Jaurmal, Agakhart Bldg., Dalai Street,

it

1960-61

I J 3 " J 5 53 Fort, Bombay

C. P. Shah, M^kmilanBldg., Dr. D. N. Road,

87

Indl.

Bombay

JJ

1960-61 1960-62 1960-61

1,24,993 1,19,899' 1,55,860 C. R. S. Prakash, 201 D. N. Road, Bombay . C. H. Bhabha, 49 Cuffee Parade, Colaba, Bom-

88 89

bay

1963-64 1964-65

1,99)638 i,44>739

90

1963-64

1,79,741 Trustees of Clara Evelyne Trust No. II Naville House, Ballard Estate, Bombay or c/o Nanubhai & Co., 51 M. G. Road, Bom- bay

9*

1963-64

Trustees of Clara Evelyne Trust No. I Naville House, Ballard Estate, Bombay or c/o Nanubhai & Co., 51 M. G. Road, Bom- bay

1,09,267

D. P. Gupta, c/o M/s. Bombay Premier Trad

92

it

1962-63

1,09,688 ing Co., Dr. D. N. Rd., Bombay .

D. R. D. Tata, Bombay Hpuse, Bruce Street,

93

3}

1962-63

2,00,127 Fort, Bombay

D. P. Romer, c/o R. D. Sethna & Co., 14-K,

94

1959-60

33

1,12,920 Hamam Street, Fort, Bombay .

D. P. Ajagaonkar, c/o New India Assurance Co.

95

f3

1963-64

1,00,566 Ltd., Bombay

96

Si

1959-60

[ 6,262 D- S. Carmlchd, Roundleze, Kingsley, Green Haselmare, Surrey, England c/o The Char- tered Bank Post Box No. 40, 4-N. S. Road, Cal

1,11,670-D. M. Dahanukar, Industrial Ass. Buildjngj 97 F3"93i6o6 1964-65 Bombay

Bothbay city I —conid.

98 Mrs. D. M. Turner, Hill House Farm, Blare Green, Nr. Dorking Surrey, England c/o A. N. F. Harvey Ltd., Panyan Building, West Vely Street, P.O. Box No, 73, Madras -1 or Ford Rhodes Parkes & Co., Post Box No. 307, Bank of Baroda Building, Appolo St., Fort, Bombay

1964-65

1,23,780

Indl.

E. 0. Austin c/o George Oaks, Swadeshi Mills

99

Estate, New Queens Road, Bombay .

"

1 00

1957-58 1958-59 1959-60 1960-61 1961-62 1959-60

I>57J694 1=57.694 1,29,676 1,23.684 1,15,098 1,00,839

„

I OI

E. Parker c/o Ice India Fvt. Ltd., Bombay . Mrs. E, M. Phillips, c/o H. Waissen Wilson Co., 20 Copthall Avenue, London, B.C. 2. England or Cambre House Broadway Wor- cestershire England . . ..

44.975

1956-57

1,02,196.

1 02 E. A. Guhl, La Fiorita Chemln, St., George Clarcns (Vaud) Switzerland c/o National & Grindlays Blank, Ltd., Bombay-i

j)

I.05.843

1963-64

1,19,070 1.05,403

1964-65

1,05^403

103 Lt. Col. E. A. D. Smith, 1 Suffok St. Heles

Burry, Scotland . .

2,200

J*

1963-64

1,06,720'

1 04 E. P. Austin, c/o George Oakes Swadeshi Mills Estate, New Queens Road, Bombay-i .

1,23,178 1,14,829 1,20,405

1962-63 i963-"4 1964-65

F. H. Kemple, c/o M/s. Forbes Campbell &

105

Co., Ltd., Forbes Bldg., Fort, Bombay

"r

1,16,423 1,16,093 1,19,252'

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65

F. Edward, c/o W. H. Brady & Co., Bom-

106

bay

1962-63 1963-64

1,02,920 1.01,787

F. De Mathews, c/o First National City Bank,

107

Dr. D. N. Road, Bombay

Si

1963-64 1964-65

1,36,223 1.35^353

108 Gopaldas Gupta, 230 Dr. D. N. Rd., Bom-

1962-63

bay

1.48,463

109 Gurudas Gupta, 230 Dr. D. N. Rd., Bom-

1962-63

bay

1,23,707

" "!

Glysi Jones, C/o Gammon India Ltd., Ballard

no

Estate, Bombay

1,78,462

1960-61

T TC ,m I 3 / 5 3^{2 01}

G. L. Anderson, c/o Firestone Tyre & Rubber

I II

2,27,316 Co., Haybunder Bombay

1964-65

"1

G. T. Warner, c/o Firestone Tyre & Rubber

112

Co., Haybunder Bombay

i,44."3

1964-65

"1

G. Wilheld c/o Protos Engg. Co. Ltd., 173 J.

113

1960-61

1,10,356 Tata Road, Bombay . . .. H. D. Dennis, c/o Caltex India Ltd., Caltex

1 14

House, Bombay

1963-64

3.55.13°

"5H. J. Vacha c/o M/s. A. F. Ferguson* do., Allahabad Bank Building, Appollo Street, Bombay. . . 1964-65 H.U.F. 2,04,724

Bombay city I —contd.

116 Mrs. H. L, Gorley, Moncoliffe Aims Hotel, Bridge of Earn, Pertshire, Scotland, c/o M/a. Spicer & Pegler St. Mary An House, 56/60 St. Mary Axe House, London E.C. 3

Ind.

1964-65

6,852 Indian In- come

1,00,000

T.WT.

117 H. O. Harris, c/o Burmah Shell Storage & Dist. Co. Ltd., Bollard Estate, Bombay .

1)

1,09,716

1,06,941

1963-64 1964-65

H. P. Mody c/o A. F. Ferguson & Co., Appollo

1 18

St., Bombay

1.04,479

1962-63

H. P. Wallace c/o J. P. Wallace & Co., Shah

119

1,40,498 Bldg., 28-32 Bank St Fort, Bombay

tt

1962-63

1 20 H. R. Batliwalla c/o M/s. Nowrosjee Wadia& Sons Ltd., Naville House Ballard Estate, Bombay

3t

1,15,490

1964-65

Hemant Bhagubhai Mafatlal, Mafat Lai

121

House, Bombay

6,62,968

1964-65

Hemant Bhagubhai, Mafiat Lai House, Bom-

1 22

bay

HOT

1964-65

4.05.707

1 23 I. M. Ogg, c/o M/s. A. F. Ferguson & Co., Allahabad Bank Building, Appollo Street, Bombay

HUF

2,06,263

1964-65

I. R. D. Tata, Bombay House, Bruce Street,

1 24

Fort, Bombay

Ind.

2,41,992

1962-63

J. B, Mecartrey, c/o Caltex India Ltd., Caltex

125

House, Bombay

3,

1,14,000

1963-64

1 26 J. B. Stedart, c/o Mercantile Bank Ltd.,

Bombay

,,

1.35,206 1,25.678 1.45.533

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65

1 27 J. B. A. Turnwull, 13 Albert Terrace Edin- burgh, 10-Scotland, c/o Gillespie & Patter- son w.S. & Hope Todd & Kirk W.S. 31 Melville St, Edinburgh

11

15,000

1964-65

ijO3,572

J 28 J. D. Balfour, Roscolie Bamchary Kincordine Shire Scotland, c/o National & Grindlays Bank Ltd., P.B. No. 218, 19 N. S. Rd., Cal- cutta . . . . . ..

>>

1961-62

1962-63

1,00,379 1.5L753

1 29 J. D. Choksij Bombay House, Bruce Street,

Bombay. . . . . ..

1963-64

1.39.053

J. H. Brubakar, c/o Caltex India Ltd., Caltex

House, Bombay

1963-64

2,87.627

J. J. Keane, c/o Parks Davis (India) Ltd., Saki

1 31

Naka, Bombay

"

1962-63 • 1963-64

I.I5.73I 1,05,009

1 32 J. K. Saraf, Prop. Asian Advertising Agency,

Dr. D. N. Rd., Bombay . . .. 1962-63 1962-63 1963-64

2.I&6I3

2,13,703

J. K. Shute, c/o National & Grindlays Bank

J33

Ltd., Bombay

>)

1963-64 1964-65

1,13.404

i,r 1,319

J. L. Bhatia, c/o M/s. A. F. Ferguson & Co.,

134Allahabad Bank Building, Appollo St., Bom- bay ij 1964-65 I3i 1.653 135 Trustees of J. M. Lubineff, Trust Navelle House, Ballard Estate, Bombay-1 or c/o Nanubhgi & Co., 51 M.G. Road, Bombay . 1963-64 11 I.6/.843

Bombay city I—contd.

136 J. W. Algea c/o Firestone Tyro & Rubber Co.,

it

1,19,688 Ltd., Haybunder Rd., Bombay

1964-65

J. Anderson, c/o M/s A. F. Ferguson & Co.,

137

Allahabad Bank Building, Appollo Street, Bombay. . . . . ..

1964-65

1,14,615

H.U.F.

133

1,24,684

1962-63

Ind.

James Balis, c/o M /s Gammcn India, Worli, Bombay. . . . . ..

K. C. Bakle, Bombay House, Bruce Street,

139

Hi

Fort, Bombay. . . . ..

1963-64 1964-65

1,15,419 1,17,437

1 40 Kali D. Cowasji c/o M/s. D. Cowasji & Co.,

123 M . G. Rd., Bombay . . ..

a

1963-64

1,73,3-16

141 K. Salem, Mafatlal House, Backbay Reclama-

tion, Bombay . . . ..

1963-64

1.97)873

:42 K. Zeiglcr, c/o Caltex India Ltd., Caltex

1962-63

H o u s e, B o m b ay . . . ..

i,57,94i

Mrs. K a s t u r b ai W a l c h a n d, C o n s t. H o u s e,

i43

D u l l a rd E s t a t e, B o m b ay . . ..

1,24,14a

a

1964-65

144 KantikumarR, Podar, Podar Chambers, Bom-

1,11,849

jt

1964-65

bay . . . . . ..

Kanaihya Lai Taparia, 171 St. Menon Street,

i 45

it

Bombay

i,i2,441

1964-65

Kusumben D. Mahadcvia, Mafat Lai House,

146

Bombay . . . . .. HUF

•

3,18,809* 3,08,844 1,24,010

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65

147

1963-64

Laldas Tribbavandas Mehta, c/o Khatau Makanji Spng. & Wvg. Co., Ballard Estate, Bombay. . .

Ind.

i,O9,588

148 Mrs. M. B. Binny, 8 Palace Gardens Terrace, London, W.S. England, c/o R. N. Desai & Co. Dr. D. N. Road, Bombay .

1962-63

1,53.648

"

149

1962-63

1,53.628 Lt. Col. M. B. Mockct, 7 Edith Grove, Chelsea, London, S.W. 10 England, c/o R. H. Desai & Co., 187 Dr. D.N. Road, Bombay .

1 50

i,49,67& Mrs. M. D. Schelfield, Charmandean, Gander Hill, Hayward Heath, Sussex, England c/o Fraiser & Bros", Borrow House, 12 Maclean S t. Madras

1959-60

i,77,62£

1,18,112

1964-65

"

151 152

2,01,416

1964-65

M. D. Mistry, 37 Muraban Road, Bombay . M. G. R. Aitken, c/o M/s. Crawford Baylay & Co., State Bank Bldg., Bank Street, Bom- bay

>,

M. K. Shah, Forbes Building, Home Street,

153

1,00,684.

1964-65

Bombay. . . . . ..

M. L. Dahanukar, Industrial Assurance Build-

154

ing, Church Gate, Bombay

"

4,33,96r 3,87,i it 3,78,124

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65

15S

1964 -65

M. W. Lawndes, Gardens Close, Ringwood Hants, England, U . K. c/o T he Bombay Co. Pvt., Ltd., P.B. No. 108 T, 9 Wallace St., Fort, Bombay. . . . ..

4At99

)"

i,oo^7>Margrett Turnbridgc c/o M/s, Eastern Watch 156 T964-65 ,1 ., 123 M . G. Road, Bombay . 2,54,954

Bombay city I—;ontd.

Smt. Maltibqi D- Dahanukar, Industrial As-

157

Ind.

surance Building, BombaV

>i

1964-65

1964-65

2,18,981

7ii8,3OO

Miss Mala Sinha, Bombay Mahavirpraaad Badriprasad, 401 E.I.C.A.

158 159

1,08,289

1960-61

HUF

BombaV

160

Ind. u

1,03,402

iiO5,i33

1964-65

1964-65

161 162

Mohemcd All Bassam, 293 Nagdcvi Street, Bombay u • • N. G. Motwani, 127 M.G. Road, Bombay . N. H. Tata, Bombay House, Bruce Street, Fort

Bombay

11

Ii37,328

1,42,170

1963-64

1964-65

N. K. Jhaveri, c/o M/s Nanubhal Jewellers,

163

1963-64

1.59,213

„

M.G. Road, Bombay . . .. N. D. Sirur, c/o N. Sirur & Co., Ltd., Bom-

164

1959-60

1,

bay

1.07,477

^5

1963-64

N. D. Campbell, c/o National & Grindlftys Bank Ltd., 54 Parliament Street, London .

4.408

u

1,03,141

Mrs. N. M. Dale, Cleave House, Pdrd Cambc,

166

1959-60

15.130

Jl

Cent, England, c/o Lovelock & Lewes, 4 Lyons Range, Calcutta-1 . . ..

1964-65

I,i3i3i8

, 17.500

1.13.123

167.

N. M. Desai, c/o Larsen & Toubro Ballard Estate, Bombay . . . . . n

1,50,419

1,04,623

I963-64

1964-65

N. R. Mody c/o M/s A. F. Ferguson & Co,.,

168

1^64-65

2,22,156

Allahabad Bank Building, Appollo Street, Bombay.

HUF

Executors of thelateShrlNavinchflndraMflfat-

1964-65

Ind.

lal, Mafatlal House, Bombay .

2,51.381

1 70 P. A. Narialwala, Bombay Houge, Bruce Street,

*i

3}

ii

1^63-64

1964-65

1964-65

i.34>599

1,11,763

1,04,159

171 172 173

Fort, Bombay . . . .. P. B. Kini, c/o Kodak Ltd., Fort, Borntfay . Dr. P. B. Banaji, Dr. D.N, Road, Bonibay. . P. K. Jhaveri, 9/0 M/B Na nubhai Jcwellert; M.G. Road, Bombay . . ..

1.05)679

11

1964-65

174 Misi P. M. Gamble, P.B. No. 1017 Nassu Bahamas c/o Ford Rhodes Parks & Co., P.B. No. 307 Bank of Baroda Bldg., Appollo Street, Bombay-i

1964-65

,1

1131,421

P. R. Irani, c/o New Roshan Talkies, Cdmer

1 75

of Grant Road, Bombay

1,01,040

1960-61

Pratapsingh Mathuradas, 9 Wallace Street,

176

1964-65

2,06,408

Bombay

Pratap E. Sariaya, Navaari Chambers, Outram

177

Road, Bombay

1.52,926

1964-65

Persival David, c/o A. F. Ferguson & Co.,

178

3,69,645

1964-65

i>

Allahabad Bank Building, Appollo Street, Bombay

Shri R. B. Brown c/o Caltex India Ltd., Caltex

179

1963-64

House, Bombay

3,62,592

1 80

3,

Do.

2.59.964

181T960-6I 1, 1.25,191 Shri R. C. Worrcl, c/o Caltex India Ltd,, Caltex House, Bombay . . .. Shri R. C. Lalliwala, C/J Caltex India Ltd., , Caltex House, Bombay . . .. R. E. Grant, c/o First National City Bant, 183 1963-64 F o r t, B o m b a y -i . . .. 1, I.I4.537 R. G. Sariya, Navsari Chambers, Outram 183 j) Road, Bombay 1963-64 1964-65 2.39.979 1.55.364

Bombay City /—contd.

184

I963-£4

2,4^545

Indl.

R. J. Bondrican, c/o Caltex India L t d ., Cakex House, Bombay . . . .. R. J. Valco, c/o Caltex India L t d ., Caltex

185

1963-64

3"34>349 House, Bombay

186 R. L. Goldsack, c/o Burmah Shell Refineries Ltd., P.B. 1765 Bombay . . ..

MM

196^-63 1963-64 1964-65

1.35.534 1,253843 1.51*3"

187

1,26,600

yj

1963-64

188'

R. M, H. Evans, Wyken House, Shropshire, England, or c/o A. F. Ferguson & Co., Allahabad Bank Building, Appollo Street, Bombav. . . . . .. R. M. H.' Evans, Wyken House, Shropshire, Englandj or c/o A. F. Ferguson & Co., Allahabad Bank Building Appollo Street, Bombay

1963-64

JJ

1,75^83

R. N. Jacob, c/o B. N. Ellas & Co., Pvt. Limi-

189

3,50,062

1962-63

JJ

ted., National Tobacco Building, 1 & 2 Court House Comer, Calcutta-i

1 90 R. R. Saraiaya, Navsari Chambers, Ottrarn

Road, Bombay

it

2,00,272

1,92,204

1963-64 1964-65

Raseah N. Mafatlal, Mafatlal House, Bom-

19*

4,45,611

i j

bay

1964-65

192 Ratanchand Hirachand, Const., House, Ballard

Etate, Bombay

1964-65 1964-65 1964-65

1,89.729 1,113843 2,10,749

HUF Ind. a

Ramnath A. Podar, Fodar Chambers, Bombay Rajendra Kumar, Bombay . . .. Ravi shank ar Sharma, Wachhan, Meerabaug,

193 194 i"5

1,89,288

1964-65

MM

196

1,42,842 Santacruz, Bombay . . .. Rustom Jal Vakil, Standard Building, D r. D. N. Road, Bombay . . ..

}S

1964-65

S. J. PJcsted, c/o Mackinon Meckcnzie Ltd.,

1 9 7.

SM

Bombay-I

JJ

1963-64 1964-65

1,27.130 2,73.969 S. K. Kalbur, 3 Bastion Road, Bombay S. Moolgaonkar, Bombay House, Bruce Street)

198 199

>M

Fort, Bombay

1963-64 1974-65

I.I7.7I9 1.34.849

S. Kf. DesaTc/o M/s Nanbhai & Co. 51 M. G.

2 00

Ind.

1964-65 1963-64

1,08,526 1,03,021 Road, Bombay S. P. Irani, Bombay Smt. Sakuntla S. Parckh,New Pack Industries,

3 01 2 02

New Marine Lines, Bombay.

J3

1963-64

3>4°3793

Smt. Shardaben Bhagubai, Mafat Lai House,

1964-65

Bombay. . . . . ..

2,73*721

Sitaram Dwarkadas Morarka, 29, Napeansea,

2 04

J?

Road, Bomhay.

3>

1960-61 1963-64

335I3768

1.01,992

205 2 06

1960-61

T. C. Gicl, 261/63, D N. Road, Bombay. Tekchand Hcmandas deed., by legal heir Smt. Gopi Mchta c/o Premier Electric Co. Ltd., Appollo Street, Bombay, ,

1.13.637

Tribhavandas Bhimji, 241-43 Sk. Memon

2 07

1960-61 1964-65

21,81,575

1,21,853

HUF. Ind.

208 2 09

1964-65

2,15.575

2 10

1964-65

Street, Bombay. . . . .. V. G. Motwani, 127 M.G. Road, Bombay. Lady Vcra David c/o A.F. Ferguson & Co., Allahabad Bank Building, Appollo Stfeet, B o m b a y. . . . . .. S m t. V i j a y l a x mi N. M a f at L a i, M a f at L ai H o u s e, B o m b a y. . . . ..

1,48,154

„

2 111,18,991 1963-64 Mrs. W. M. Jonson, Gardens House Hotel, Sandgute Road, Folkcshore, Kent, England c/o Nasmith Colts & Co., Fountain House, 81 Fountain Street, Madras-1. 2 12 Yogindraprasad N. Mafatlal, Mafat Lai House, Bombay. . . . . .. ,J 1964-65 4.49.798

Bombay City I—concld.

213 "Ifogindraprasnd N, Mafat Lai, Mnfat Lai

House, Bombay. _

1961-62

6,81,54?

HUF.

Bombay City II

214 J taibalal K la Chand, 45-47, Appollo Street,

Bombay. . . , . .,

Indl.

2,92,072 ij7i5o53

1956-57 1957-58

Ashok B. Birla, 1 Churchgate Reclamation,

215 •

Bombay. . . . . ..

2,28,693

1Q63-64

216 . Arun D. Dahanukar, Industrial Assurance Building, Church Gate, Reclamation, Bom- bay. . . . . . ..

1964-65

}1

1,19,716

Ardcshri H. C, jehangir, Ready Money Man-

2 17

sion, N. N. Road, Bombay

5J

jj

1963-64 1963-64

1,17 M3 1,21,506- 2 18 219

Adie P. Wadia, 70 Forbes Street, Bombay. A. B. Billimoria, C/o M/s. Batliwala &

2,9"6,5O9- Karani, Share Bazar, Bombay, ,

1962-63

3J

2 20 A. P. Thakcrsey, Natural Guardian P. M. D.

Thakcrsey, 10, Appollo Street, Bombay.

1,03,074 1,36,871

1962-63 1963-64

Adi F. Gazdar, Stock Exchange, Building,

221

Appollo St., Bombay

J3

r

2 22

1964-65 1965-66

1,03,176 1,02,400 Abdulkadar Parkar, 7-11, Kolsa Street, Bombaj Abdul Samad Haji Alimohammed, 223 Chskla

2 23

Street, Bombay

1963-64

i,56;87i

2 24 Abdul Wahab Haji Alimohammed 233 Chakla

1963-64

31

Street, Bombay

1,56,791

A. J. Mody c/o J. D. Mody & Company, 319/

2 25

1,46,740-

1964-65

)'

21 N. N. Street, Bombay.

2 26 A. J. Shah (deed), Ganpat Bhavan Chowpatty,

2 , 7 8 J 5 42

1960-61

33

Bombay, . . . . ..

2 27 B. V. Daruwalla c/o M / s. Daruwala Bros., P. Ltd., Shroff Mansion 40 Princess Street, Bombay. . . . . ..

3?

1,88,091 2,29,730-

1962-63 1963-64

Bhogilal R a i c h a nd c/o M / s. I w a c om P v t.

2 28

1964-65

i,o8,479 L i m i t e d, 204 D a d a b h oy N a o r o ji R o a d, B o m b a y - i. . . . . ..

. B h u p c n d ra Ratansey M u l g i, 259 K a l b a d c vi

2 29

R o a d, B o m b a y. . . . ..

M5>092 1^4,607

1963-64 1964-65

B- O. Mody c/o M/s. B. Babulal& Co., 52—58

2 30

1964-65

)J

New Hanuman Lane, Bombay. .

1964-65

^19)103 1,04,527 2 31 B. K. Mehta, c/o Do.

B. P. Shah c/o M/s. Jayant Paper Box Factory,

2 32

1962-63

1,37,717"

Indl.

Sir P. M. Road, Bombay.

B. R. Tannan c/o M/s. Sharp & Tannan Bark

233

2,07)211

1963-64

of Baroda Bldg., Bombay..

B. K. Mchta c/o M/s. B- Mchta& Co., Appollo

234

2,04,520-

1963-64

J?

Street, Bombay

235

1963-64

ij

i.I73934 Bhagwandas Naraindas, Makhija, Madha^ Mahadev Galli, M.J.C. Market, Bombay. . Bhagwanji Morarji, 89 Princess Street,

2 36

1,40,028

1963-64

3*

Bombay. . . . • ••

¹

B. K. Sfiroff Prop. Shroff Company, 15c

237

1,40,147

1962-63

Colaba Road, Bombay

1964-65

4,02,319 B. P. Godrej, 10-D Ridge Road, Bombay. Chandabhaldas, Giri ^ u n j, Huhgcs Roac 1,

238 239

1,22,814

1962-63

Bombay. . . . ..

Chinubahi Kilachand, 43-47, Appollo Street

2 40

Bombay. . . , . -•

1956-57 1957-58 :95"-59 1964-65

3 , J 8 , 9 I O -' 2,37,804 1,09,122 1,06,627

Champabai Bhogilal, 9 Forbes Bombay.

Bombay City 11—contd.

2 42 C. R. Mehta c/o M/9- Jaya Paper Box Factory,

Sir P. M. Road, Bombay.

1962-63

1,29,830

Indl.

243 Chokscy & Co., Churchgatc Reclamation,

Bombay

2 44

.1*

1,61,369 I>73j8i2 1,72,023

1963-64 1964-65 1958-59

C. P. Wadia, 70 Forbes Street, Bombay. C M. Mehta c/o M/s. Gagret& Co. Alii Cham-

245

bers, Tamarind Lane, Bombay.

1963-64

ii63>5°3

C. R. Sharp c/o M/s. Sharp & Tannan, Bank

2 46

ofBaroda Building, Bombay. ,

3J

2 47 2 48

M r s. C. V. Merchant, 16 Appollo St., Bombay. C. B. Ghla, 28 Appollo Street, Bombay..

1962-63 1963-64 1963-64 1965-66

2,20,121 IJ34.O65 1,61,899 i322,733

249

31

C. C. Desai c/o M/s. Mody & Mody Co., Bombay. . . . . ..

1963-64 1964-65

1,32,529 1,69,035

Chimanlal Mohan Lai c/o M/s. N. Chimanlal

2 50

& Co., Pr. St., Bombay. . . ..

53

1964-65

1.51,671

D. A. Katrak, prop. M/s. Western Rubber &

2 51

Tyre Co., 2-B, Khaitwadi Main Road, Bombay. . . . . ..

1962-63

Indl.

IJ55,57O

D. A. Patel c/o M/s. Dhandas & Co., Mangcah

2 52

1962-63

33

1,41,4*3 Building, New Khct Wadi Road, Bombay . D. R. Ashar, Jaykar Bldg., New Khatwadi,

2 53

Bombay

33

1964-65

1,15*599

D. C. Master c/o M/a. Master Sathe&Kothari,

2 54

34-38 Hamam Street, Bombay, .

1963-64

33

3>

Do.

33

Dhirajlal Maganlal, Share Bazar, Bombay. D. A. Thakcrsey, 16 Appollo Street, Bombay.

255 256

1,12,097 1,18,301 2,32,038 2,86,801

1963-64 1964-65

Dhirendra Kantilal c/o M/s. Jamna Da8 &

257

Co., Old Share Bazar, Bombay.

1963-64

3>

1,08,339

Dhanrajmal Girdharlal c/o M/s. Dhirajlal

2 58

Tricumlal, Share Bazar Bombay.

1962-63

1,00,737

3i

2 59

1964-65

S3

Dwarkadas Gordhandas, M/s. Dwarkadag Gordhandas, Krishnaraj Galll, M J . C. Market, Bombay. . . . ..

1,96,593

Dwarkadas Amritlal, Sanch Gaily, M.J.C.

2 60

33

1963-64

1.50,309 Market, Bombay. . . . .. Dharnidhar Thakcrsey c/o M/s. Thakersey

2 61

1964-65

Chhagan Lai, Gopal Galli, Bombay. .

[1,12,086

2 62 Dhirajlal Morarji, 37-A Sarang Street, Bom-

33

Do.

1.24,035

263

33

D. N. M a r s h a ll c /o M / s. D .' N. M a r s h al & C o. G a ya B u i l d i n g, B o m b a y. . . ..

1,09,022 1,01,768 1,46,462

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65

33

33

1.38,099 I J 4I> 5 37

1959-60 1964-65

D. R. Mehta, 75 Warden Road, Bombay. D. K. Naroji, 40-D Ridge Road, Bombay. E. N. Kothari c/o M/s. Jayant Paper Box

264 265 2 66

1962-63

1,84,861

33

Factory, Sir P. M. Road, Bombay.

E. T. Kanthawalla, Maakatl House, Moham-

2 67

33

medali Road, Bombay-3

31

1964-65 1964-65

I.4I.597 i.27,543 2 68 269

F. S. Nariman, High Court,Bombay. Sir Fazal I. Rahirntool, Fair View Bridge Road,

1,09,343

1964-65

Bombay. . . . . ..

Shri G. M. Mehta, 8J Swadeshi Mills, Com-

2 70

35

1963-64

pound Charni Road, Bombay. .

i.54,537

2 71 G. D. Gokhale, c/o Bombay Chemicals Pvt.

33

Ltd., 129, M.G. Road, Bombay.

1,06,449

1964-652 72 G. P. Kapadia, Hamam House, Hamam Street, 1964-65 1.75.735 Bombay G. T. Kharc, c/o M/s. Sharp & Tannan, Bank 273 1,23,056 3? of Baroda Bldg., Bombay. 1963-64

Bombay City II—cotitd.

Indl.

1964-65

i,29>7¹⁸ G. A. Thakkur, Dalai Street, Bombay. . Ghulam Mohammed Hali Ali Mohammed,

274 275

223, Ghakla Street, Bombay.

1963-64

i 1,04)442

Smt. Gopikumar Birla, Birla House, M t.

276

})

Pleasant Road, Bombay

1,84,674

1963-64

277

}>

Harish Mahindru, c/o Mahindra & Mahitidra Ltd., Gateway Building, Appollo Street, Bombay-i

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65

2,30,854 2,34>5"3 1,91,114

Hirii Courjij Jahangir, Ready Money Mansion,

278

V; N. Road, Bombay. . . ..

1961-62

3,04,120

33

H. H. M. Vijaykaverba Sahcb of Morvi, Bai

279

Nivas, Warden Road, Bombay. .

1962-63 1963-64

1,02,690 1,02,451

H. R- M e h t a c /o M / s . J a y am Paper Box

2 80

Factory, Sir P . M. Road, Bombay.

33

JJ

1962-63 1964-65

1,27,142 i>38,33" H. M. Seervai, High Court, Bombay. H . D . D a ve c/o M / s. Mayashankar Thacker&

2 81 2 82

Co., 65 Appolo Street, Bombay.

31

1964-65

1,09,061

283 Executors of the estate of Sir Homi Merita, Mehta House, Appolo Street, Bombay.

3J

1963-64 1964-65

1,23,047 1,17,204

1964-65

1,03,095 Hemrai Dharamsey, B. C. Market, Bombay. . Harkisfiendas Thakarscy c/o M/s. Chhaganlal,

384 385

1963-64

Gopsl Galli, Bombay. . . ..

33

1,16,183

Executors of t he estate of H . H. T he late

286

Maharaja Harishinhji of Jammu & Kashmir, Hari N i r a s, Podar Road, Bombay.

J3

3,16,057 2,54,245 2,00,384

1954-55 1955-56 1956-57

Homi D. Jhaveri c/o M / s. Homi & Jhaveri,

287

Mehrabad, Warden Road, Bombay. .

1964-65

1,09,037

33

Hansraj V. Jain c/o Indo Europe Trading Co.,

388

1963-64

1,05,704

3J

9, Dalai Street, Bombay. . . ..

Mrs. Hanna S. Lifscheutz, Nepean Sea Road,

2 89

19^2-63

Bombay.

1,08,481

Indl.

Inderjeet Kapoor, ( H U R ), 8/2 Sham Nivfls,

2 90

Warden Road, Bombay. . . ..

HUF

19S2-63

1,02,250

J. R. Ashar, Jaykar Bhayan, New Khetwadi,

2 91

Bombay. . . .

196 1-65

1,15,600

Indl.

Jal Jamshedji c/o Noble Paints & Varnishes

2 92

1964-65

Co., Ltd., Ferguson Road, Bombay.

33

I539,529

J. D. Kothawalla, Grosevenor House Poddar

293

1964-65

ij

Road, Bombay. . . . ..

1,22,300

294

1964-65

JJ

i,76,773 Jagmohandas Gokuldas, Karta of the H . U . F. Gokuldas I-Iakamchand c/o M/s. Lallubhni Amichand Pvt. L t d ., 30 Kalbadcvi Road, Bombay. . . . . .. Jagmohandas Gokaldas, 30 Kansara Chawal,

2 95

Bombay.

33

2 96 J. D. Dubash, 6 Rampart Row, Bombay.

3,37,639 1,42,770 1,20,417

1963-64 1962-63 1963-64

Jehangir I I. C. Jehangif, Ready Money M a n-

sion, V. N. Road, Bombay.

1963-64

35

i,i7,643

2 93 J. A. Sahawalla, Ready Money Mansion, V. N.

Road, Bombay. . . . ..

31

2 99

SI

3J

1964-65 1964-65 1959-60

r,i5,i59 2,00,986 3,n.-.857

3 01

T. B ,Knnga Hifth Court, Bombay. "j. V. T m d, V. N. Road, Bombay. . J. H. Sahawulla, Ready Money Mansion, V. N.

1963-64

33

1,17,3073 02 Road, Bombay, . . . . Jogesh L, Vasu c/o M/s. J. L. Vas & Co. 105, Appollo Street, Bombay. . . .. 53 J. H. Cama, 24/26, Dalai St., Hombay. 303 1963-64 1063-64 1,33,084 1,52,168

Bombay City II—contd.

304 Jayantilal Dahayabhai c/o M/a. Chiman Lai

2,49,841 Prcmchand, Pr. St., Bombay.

1964-65

H.U.F.

305 J. F. Selwyn, Prop. Great Western Engineer- ing Co., 1 it Pasta Lane, Colaba, Bombay.

1960-61

7315.690

Indl.

J. P. Vazifdar, Corinthian Arthur, Bunder Road,

306

Bombay. . . . . ..

33

J3

307 J.E.E. Saasoon, 3, Patel Road, Bombay.

3 08 J. R. Mehta, 75, Warden Road, Bombay.

1964-65 1962-63 1964-65 1959-60

1,02,128 i,753ii3 I37I3779 lii5349S

?>

3-09 Keshub Miahindra, C/o M/a. Mahindra Ltd., Gitewiay Building, Appollo Bunder, Bombay, 51

3>

K. A. Dubash, 6 Rampart Row, Bombay.

2333>3²4 2,29,082 I3933763 1,50,277

3i

3 10

J3

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 1963-64 1964-65

K. M. Kapadia, C/o M/s. G. P. Kapadia, Hamarn

3 11

House, Hamam Street, Bombay.

3J

3J

i>

3)

13

K. T. Divecha, 24-26, Dalai Street, Bombay. K. H. Cama, Cama House, Dalai St., Bombay Kamala D. Ghia, 28 Appollo Street, Bombay. . K. O. Mody, C/o M/s. Mody & Mody Co.,

3 12 3*3 314 315

1964-65 1964-65 1963-64 1964-65 1963-64 1964-65

1,05,884 1,993893 1,07,968 1,513691 1399,203 235237I4

K. W. Wazir, C/o M/s. W. R. Nazir & Sons,

316

5, Hamam Street, Bombay.

1361,701

>5

1963-64

Krishnafeumar J. Kapadia, c/o M/s, Kumud

317

Agencies, 16 Appollo St., Bombay.

3t

1964-65

I3I53754

Kantilal Nanalal, Chandra Chowk, M. J. C.

3 i"

Market, Bombay

33

13

1963-64 1964-65

1,02,464 1,80,730 Kalyanji Haasraj, B. C. Market, Bombay. K. D. Kapadia, C/o \l/s. Ajit Industries,

319 3 20

Vithaldas Road, Bombay.

1963-64

33

1,62,537

3 21 K. H. Bhabha, 49, Cuffe Parade, Colaba, Bom-

bay, . . . . . ..

1963-64 1964-65

i339,532 1338,708

3 22 Kantilal Lalchand, 150, Narayan Dhru Street,

Bombay. . . . . ..

y

1962-63

i3°9i549

313

33

31

Kitanlal Lalchand, 150, Narayan Dhru Street, Bombay. . . . . . .. K. J. M-hta, 77-79, Nagdevi Street, Bombay. K. A. Shcth, French Bridge, Bombay. .

13

324 325

3

ii°9,539 1,65,211 1,00,690 1,03,228 1,13.817

i9'52-63 1964-65 1962-63 1964-65 1964-65

326 327

Mrs. K. F. Dabash, Nepean Sea Road, Bombay. Kashmiri Devi, 126, Narayan Dhru St., Bom- bay . . . . . ..

3

1,12,390 1,51,921

1962-63 1963-64

Kanta K. Vasa, C/o E-4, Mafatlal Park, Warden

328

Road, Bombay

1,17,560

33

1962-63

329 L. C. Mody, C/o M/s. Mody 8c Mody Co,,

1,38,467

f3

1963-64

1964-65

2,50,566

L. H. Athalya, Krishna Niwas, Charni Road,

330

Bombay.

33

1964-65

1,16,428

L. V. Saha, C/o M/s. Master Sathe & Kothari,

331

34-38, Hamam St., Bombay.

33

1963-64

1,03,145

332

3)

1962-63

2,33,772 L. V. A p t e, G o v i nd C h o w k, M . J . C. M k t ., B o m b a y. . . . . .. LiMas J a m m d a s, c/o M/s. Jamnadas Khusha¹.-

333

53

1962-63

1,17,838 das. Old Share Bazar, Dalai Street, Bombay Lalji Jetha (Deed) Krishan Chowk3 M. J. C.

334

Market, Bombay. . . . ..

33

11

1964-65 1959-60

1,04,889 1,10,270Lilawati M, Desai, Carmichael Road, Bombay. M. B. Mudgaonkar, Fort Chambers, Dean Lane, 335 336 Bombay. . . . . .. 1963-64 1* 1164,184 ii49,265 1964-65

Bombay City II—contd.

M. C. Setaiwad C/o M/s. Dalai & Shah

337

Appollo Street, Bombay

Indl. 1963-64 1964-65

7,08,346 5=59,349

M. D. Dave, C/o M/s. Maya Shankcr Thacker

338

33

1,21,926

1963-64

& Co., 65 Appollo Street, Bombay. M. D. Kapadia, C/o M/s. Ajit Industries,

339

Vithaldas Road, Bombay

1963-64

1,61,930

M. E. Seth, C/o Taxpin India Agency, n o,

34°

Medows Street, Bombay

1963-64

3>

1,23,915

M. J. Mody, C/o Steward Laboratory, 219/21,

341

1,46,960

35

N- N. Street, Bombay

1964-65

M. P. Poison, C/o Poison Ltd., 65-B, Dockyard

343

Road, Mazgaon, Bombay-10

1,14,804

1964-65

M. R. Tolia, C/o M/s. Mawani& Co., 87, Grant

343

1,10,624

33

1962-63

Road, Bombay

344

31

M. R. Romal, C/o Laxrai Motor Co., New Khctwadi, B o m b a y . . . . ..

1963-64 1964-65

2,27,894 2)35.407

M. R. Dubash, Ncpeatl Sea Road, Bombay. .

33

345

1,40,095 1,28,174

?3

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65

1,52,550 M. S. Kalbagh, Lamington Road, Bombay, . Mahadcv Singh, 159, Industry House, Church-

346 347

JJ

1964-65

gate, Bombay. . . . ..

i,4°=93°-

Manilal Kalayanji Seth, C/o M/s. Vinodrai &

348

51

Co., S. V. Lane, Bombay.

1,07,890 1,00,003

33

1964-65 1964-65

Manoramabai L. Apte, Poddar Road, Bombay. Manoharlal Mukundlal, Flat N o. 29, C. C. I.

349 350

1,27,748

1962-63

Chambers, Bombay. . . ..

HUF.

351

1,20,185 Mohammed A. Molubhal, C/o M/s. Ahmed S. Molubhai & Sons, 279, Nagdcvi Street, Bombay. . . . ..

Indl.

1963-64

Mohamedbhoy I. M. Rowji, 50-52, Hugecs

3J3

Road, Bombay

1961-62

1962-63

1,46,449 M9.929-

Mirza Famal Karin, Hacan Chambers P. B.

353

13

Street, Bombay

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65

1,28,275 2,07,272 2,43>8l2

354

J3

Motilal Gagadas, Chandra Chowk, M. J. C Mkt., Bombay. . . ..

1,29,038 1,35.807

11

4,15.135 1,20,577

35

1962-63 19(13-64 1964-65 1964-65

N. A. Paikiwala, High Court, Bambay N. D. Wadia, 70 Forbes St., Bombay . N. D. Marshall, c/o D. N. Marshall & Co.,

355 356 357

1,03,236-

Jl

1963-64

Gaya Bldg., Bombay.

N. K. Patcl, Mangesh Bldg., N ew Khetwadi

35S

1,07,183

1962-63

Jj

Road, Bombay. . . . ..

N. P. Sangani, Prop. T he Expire Trading Co.,

359

13

Ali Chambers, T. Lane, Bombay.

1,85.197 4,02,519

1963-64 1964-65

360 361

1J

N. P. Godrej, 40-D Ridge Road, Bombay. Sri Narayan Motilal, Prop, of M / s. Hatmibhai Tulsidas, 122, Kansara Chawal, Bombay. .

3,20,551 1,25,294

1963-64 1964-65

Nana Lai D. Shah c/o M/s. Kumud Agencies,

362

11

1,35,214-

1964-65

16 Appollo St., Bombay

Nariman Ardeshir, c/o Parasi Dairz Farm,

363

1,00,11*

*1

1964-65

Princess Street, Bombay.

364T 964-65 1,66,008 Bai Navajbai N. Gamadia (Deed.) c/o Shri Dadasorabji, Byramji Mansion, P. M. Road, Bombay. . . . . .. Nftndlal Makundlal, Flat N o. 29, C. C. I. 365 1,02,936 H UF 1962-63 Chambers, Bombay. . . ..

Bombay City II—contd.

Niranjan Chimanlal, c/o M / s. N. Chlmanlal &

366

1,23,042 Co., Pr. St., Bombay

Indl.

1964-65

P. B. Barthema, Amarchand Mansion, 10 Mayo

367

Road, Bombay. . . . ..

1964-65 1964-65

i,43>²78 I34 ° J 5 57 P. P. Mistry, 6 Rampart Row, Bombay P. T. Cama, Cosy Corner, 29-A Gongersy

368 369

3J

Road, Bombay. . . . ..

1961-62 1962-63 1963-64

1,38,262 1,56,262 1,46,566

370 Dr. (Mrs.) Padma J. Mehta, Bombay Mutual

Jj

Terrace, S. V. P. Road, Bombay.

T962-63

1,07,585

Pradeep Keval Chand, N ew ^Queen Rd., Bom-

371

1962-63

bay, . . . . . ..

ijii,7iS

Promodkumar Jain, Carmichacl Road, Bom-

372

bay-26. . . . . . ..

1,69,484

1964-65

Smt. Lady Prcmila V. Thakersey, Sir Vithaldas

373

1963-64

Chambers, 16 Appollo Street, Bombay.

1,65,941

Prataprai Premji, c/o Premji Bhimji & Co.,

374

1964-65

1,02,256 S. V. Lane, Bombay . . ..

Pravinchandra R. Shah, c/o M/s. P. Raman Lai

375

& Co., Princess Street,, Bombay

"

1963-64 1964-65

1,06,480 1)27:434

376

1,92,248

1964-65

Pratap Rai K. Mehta, 77-79 Nagdevi Street, Bombay, . . . . .. R. A. Gagrat, c/o M / s. Gagrat & Co., Alii

377

1,27,188 Chambers, Tamarind Lane, Bombay .

1963-64

R. B, Shah, Noble Chambers, P. B. Street,

378

JJ

Bombay.

6,17,184 2,69,162

IS

2,23,759

1962-63 1964-65 1962-63

379 3 80 3 81

R. J. Kohala, Advocate, High Court, Bombay. R. K. Sanglii, 39-A, Hughes Road, Bombny R. M. Vadhclwala c/o M / s. Kora & Bhatt 22

2,91,423

1963-64

Appollo Street, Bombay.

382 Ramdas Kilachand, 45-47 Appollo Street,

Bombay.

"

1956-57 1957-58

2,30,391 1,16,151

Ramcshchandra Gokuldas, 30 Kansara Chawal,

383

1.}

1963-64

3,03,500 Bombay. . . . . ..

Radhumal Nurumal c/o M / s. Narang Trading

384

1960-6J

1,34,560 Corporation, 184 K. D. Road, Bombay.

385 Rasiklal Mancklal fHUF) C/o M / s. Rasiklal Maneklal, Stock Exchange, Bldg., Bombay. H UF

1,79,012 I ^ . -¹16

1963-64 1964-65

386 Raman Lai N. Shah, c/o M / s. P. Ramanalal &

Indl.

Co., Pr. St., Bombay . . ..

1,00,371 l,r.z,574

1,22,597 1,10,414

3J

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 r962-63

Ratmnlal Manilal, 76 Nakhoda St., Bombay. . Ramdas B. Mawani, c/o M / s. Mawani & Co.,

387 388

196^-63

1,21,336 S7 Giant Road, Bombay.

'3

Riissi H. Patel, Industrial Assurance Building,

389

1,02,340

1963-64

3J

Opp. Churchjate Station, Bombay. .

1964-65

5,

i,3J,495 S. A. Fazilbhoy, 38 Queens Road, Bombay. . S. H. Commissariat, "Sylcmoyne" Carmichcal

3 90 3 91

1964-65

1,04,254

,,

Road, Bombay

S. H. Commissariat, "Sylemoyne" Carmicheal

3 92

1,00,908

3i

1963-64

393

5}

R >ad, Bombay. . . . .. S. H- T n a k e r s a y, 9-B Bomanji Petit Road, Bombay. . . . . ..

,,

3,

S. J, Patil, V. N. Rd., Bombay S. J. Mehta, L i m i n g t on Rd., Bombay .

394 3951964-65 1959-60 1963-64 1964-65 1^39:944 3,67:295 1,45,891 1:35:051 S. K, T o u b r o, c/o Larsen & Toubro Limited, 316 1,26,441 Ballard Estate, Bombay. . . .. 1964-65

Bombay City II—contd.

S. P. Mehta, Sncha Sadan opp. Ritz Hotel,

397

Churchgate, Bombay. . . .. I

1963-64

ndl.

2,14,985

1964-05

2,58,160

S. R. Shah, Noble Chambers, P.B. Street, "

398

Bombay

4,16,001

J.J

1962-63 1964-65

399 4 00

S. P. Godrcj, 40-D Ridge Road, Bombay. S. V. Gupta, Express Court, Queens Road,

Bombay. . . . . ..

196^-65

1,78,145

33

4 01 Smr. Satvawati Jain, 29-A Carmicheal Road,

Bombay-26 . . . . ..

JJ

1964^65

1,41,621

4 02 Subash R. Shah, Noble Chambers, P. B. Street,

Bombay. . . . . ..

1,15,638

Jj

1963-64

Sulian A. Molubhai c/o M/s Ahmed S, Molubhai

403

& Sons, 279 Nagdcvi St., Bombay.

3J

33

1963-64 1963-64

1,20,991 1,21,886 Sheriff A. Molubhai Do. Smt. Shirinbai A. Maskati House, Mohammed

404 405

Ali Road, Bombay-3. . . ..

Ji

1964-65

1,01,176

406

33

33

1964-65 1963-64

1,30,604 1,14,346 Suleman Cassam MiLha, 27 Kolsa Street, Bombay. . . . . .. Snrdar Jagjitsingh, 357 N. N. St., Bombay. Smt.Shardevi Birla, Birla House, M i. Pleasant

407 408

Road, Bombay. . . . ..

33

33

1963-64 1962-03

2,62,218 1=31.275 409 4 10

Mrs. S. Lifehoutz, Ncpean Sea Road, Bombay T. T. Lalwani, Prop. East & West Traders Co.,

33

Sir P. M. Road,Bombay. . . ..

1963-64 1964-65

8,77,702 7,81,750

Mrs. Tehmina H. Bharucha, 17 Cuffe Parade,

4 11

1960-61

1,02,940

J3

Colaba, Bombay. . . . ..

Thakarscy Chhagunlal, c/o M/s. Thakarsey

4 12

Chaganlal, Gopal Galli Bombay

33

413

IU62-63 1956-57 i957-5"

1,03,285 2;69>573 1,26,853 Tulsidas Kilachand, 45-47 Appollo Street, Bombay. V. N. Shirodkar, D - 9, Mafatlal Park,

414

Warden Road, Bombay

31

1963-64 1964-65

1,72,889 1,47,117

415

1960-61

3,37;2So V.L. Gokhale, (DECD) c/o. M/s. Gokhalc & Gn- khale Solicitors, Karim Chambers, Ila- mam Street, Bombay . . ..

416

1962-63 1963-64

1,08,590 l,2O,7tj6 Vandravan Parshottam c/o M / B. Raghavji Anandji & Co., Chikal Galli, M. J. C. Market, Bombay. Vithaldus Goculdas, c/o M/s. Morarji

417

11

1963-6.1

1,18,036 Vandrawan, Krishna Chowk M. J. C. Market Bombay

. . ..

Y. B. Rcge, Merchant, Manor, Sualdevi

4 18

1963-64

2,26,270 Temple Road, Mahin East, Bombay

J3

Y. K. Vasa, (H. U. F.) E-4 Mafatlal Park,

419

33

Warden, Road, Bombay

1960-61 1961-62

2,02,847 1,00,548

Zoki A. Mnskati, Maskati House Moham-

4 20

1964-65

1565,159

33

mcdali Road, Bombay

Ziya A, Maskati, Maskati House, Moham-

4 21

1,21,464

1964-65

medali Road, Bombay

33

Bombay City—III

A. N. Kotibhaskar, C/o M/s. Phoenix

4 221,07,021 31 Chemical Works, Dr. D. N. Road,. Bombay 1964-65 423 13 Abdul Majid Ahmed Bhoy, C/o ,M/s. Ahmed Umberbhoy, 170 Grant Road, Bombay . . . . .. 1963-64 1964-65 1,88,429 3=35,894

Bnmbay City HI—contd.

42, \ Abdul Rehman Mohammed Ismail Kasbekar, Mehboob Building, Musafir Khana Road, Bombay

Indl.

                                                                     1964-65          1,27,787
     ;  Abdul    Satar   Ahmedhboy,     C/o      M / s.
          Ahmed    Umarbhoy,  170,     Grant   Road,
          Bombay        .    .   .    .    ..          „             1963-64          1,66,969
                                                                     1964-65          2,48,340
  426 >  Abhay   L.  M.  Khatau,    Laxmi    Building,
          Ballard  Estate,  Bombay      .    ..       „              1964-65          2,02,537
  427 ' AmritlaJ  Anupchand    C/o      M / s. V.  Babu
          Bshi  &  Co.  141, K . S. St.,  Bombay          „          1964-65          1,11,57s
  428   Anjaliben  Pratap  Tobacco  Vileparle      .      „          t964-65          I,79"22t
  429 1  B. A.  Shah, C/o   M / s.  Collins &    Co.,
           99-C,  Tardeo  Road,  Bombay             ,.    „          1963-64          4,66,135
                                                                     1964-65          6,10,131
  4 30  B.  B.  Dubosh,   Darabshaw      House,  Bal-
          lard  Estate, Bombay     .   .    ..        „              1964-65          1,46,207
  4 3i  B.  C.  Patel,  Usha    Villa,  Bombay     .      „         1963-64           1,59,545
  4 32 B.  D.  Dubash,   Dartbshaw   House,   Ballaid
          Estate, Bombay          .    .    ..        „             1964-65           I,29,I2G
  433   B.  P.  Kapadia,  Construction  House,  Ballard
          Estate. Bombay          .    .    ..       „              1964-65           1,99,007
  434   B.  S.  Mahinder,  Prop, of  B. S.  Mohinder
         &  Co.,     45,   Govalia   Tank      Road,
          Bombav-26          .    .    .     ..       „              1963-64          1,00,189
 435   Babubhai"  Nanalal,   C/o    M/s..  B.  Babu-
         bhai  Ecmanji  Master   Street,  Bombay          „*'        1962-63         1,30,317
                                                                     1963-64          1,28,41*
                                                                     1964-65          1,24,201
 436   Bhagwandas     Ratanaey  C/o    M / s.  Charr.p-
         Sey  Kalyanji,       16-18,  Champa   Galls',
         Bombay        .    .    .   .    ..          „             1962-63          1,21,123
 437   Bishamberdas     Kapoor,   C/o   M/s.   Janki
         Das   &    Co.,  Mody    Street,  Bombay         „          1964-65          i>i9;739
 438   Bishandas   Kapoor    C/o   M/s.    Jankidas
         &    Co.,  Mody    Street,  Bombay        .     „          1964-65          2,46,916
 439   C.  D.  Dubash    C/o   Darabshaw     House,
         Ballard  Estate, Bombay            .     .      „         1964-65           1,56,041
 440   C.  M.   Khatau   Laxrni   Building,  Ballard
         Estate,  Bombay         .    .    ..       „              1964-65           2,63,484
 441   C.  M.  Khatau  & Others,  Trustees  of  M. M.
         Khgtau,   Trust  for  the  benefit  of D.  M.
         Khatau,  Laxmi    Building,  Ballard  Estate,
         Bombay       .    .    .    .   ..          IndL          1964-65          1,42,806
 442   C.  R.  Shah, C/o   M / s.  Collins &   Co.,
           99,  Tardeo,  Bombay                .         „          1963-64         2,55,47*
                                                                   1964-65          3,12,73*
 443   Charanjit   Ishardas   C/o  M / s.  Ishardas
         &   Sons,  277, Fere  Road,  Bombay      .      „          1963-64         1,11,226
 444   Chaturbhuj    Narsey,   156,  G.  B.   Road,
         Vile  Parle,  Bombay    .    .    ..    H UF              1963-64          1,23,089
 445  D.  B.  Dubash,  Darabshaw,   House,  Ballard
         Estate,  Bombay   .     .    .    ..     Indl.            1964-65          1,45,046
446   D.  M.  Khatau   Laxmi     Building,  Ballard
     Estate,  Bombay          .   ..               33              1964-65         1,39,985
447   D.  M.  Khatau    Laxmi   Building,  Ballard
        Estate,  Bombay          .    .   ..        „
448   D.R.   Baria,  73,  G . T.  Road,  Bombay .      „

Bombay City III—contd.

450 Miss Diana C. Wadia, Neville House,

Ballard Estate, Bombay

I n d l.

1964-65

146,760

451 Dilip D. Khatau, Laxmi Building, Ballard

Estate, Bombay . . ..

1964-65

1,56,078

452 Donald Marande, Mount Road, M a z-

gaon, Bombay

Ji

1964-65

1,00,148

E.A.K. Panju, 138/40, Samuel St.,

453

Bombay . . ..

2,10,211

1962-63

454 E. G. P. Shah, C/o M / s. Bentex " Sales Corpn. 28, Tulsiwadi, Tardco, Bom- bay . . . . . ..

U

1962-63 1963-64

1,26,359 i,3O5932 F. H. Mohabat, C/o. N ew Rly, Res-

455

taurant, Station Road, Andheri

It

1962-63

1,04,205

456 G. T. Bedaniya, (Deed) legal representative Mr. V. B. Bedaniya Tardeo Road, Bombay . . . . ..

1962-63

33

i)3l)J89 457 H. Holock, Larscn, C/o Larsen Toubro & Co. Pvt., L t d ., Ballard Estate, Bombay . . . . ..

33

1964-65

1,94,213

458 H. A. K. Panju, 138-40 Samuel Street,

1962-63

2,i3)i°7

459

Bombay . . . . .. H. N. Contractor, C/o. M / s. Bharat T im ber Industries, Sayeni Road, Bombay

JJ

1962-63

2,28,755

460 HanBraj Hariram, Hari Niwas, 19 Mathew Road, Bombay . . ..

H . U . F.

1962-63

1,78,670

461 Ishardas Maganlal C/o M / s. Ishardas &

Sons 277, Frere Road, Bombay

I n d l.

I O<*T^8

1962-63

Ishwardas Hardas, C/o M / s. Ishardas &

462

Sons, 277, Frcre Road, Bomaay.

JJ

1961-64

T . ^ 3 , 0 22¹ JJ J?

463 J. K. Parkar C/o Western India Engg. Co., Kasturchand Mils Compound, Dadar .

}3

1962-63

I,<^,841

J. P. Dubash, C/o Darabshaw House, Bal-

464

•> m 1 A T

TQ6j-fS<

t3

3,30,^41

lard Estate, Bombay . . .. Jagadish Kapoor, C/o M / s. Jankidas

465

& Co., Mody Street, Bombay

I964-65

1,62,511

Jamc Mirande, Mount Road, Mazagaon,

466

Bombay-10 . . . ..

JJ

I964-65

1,02,715

Mrs. Jasodabai Narottam, ' Vacant ' G. B.

467

Road, Vilcparle, Bombay

33

1963-64

1,03,858

Jtiywanii Jayantilal, Shanti Kunj Tejpal

468

JJ

Road, Vileparlc, Bombay

3,06,132

I962-63

K. J. Khandelwalla, Silverna, Worli Sea-

469

Face, Bombay-18 . . ..

33

I964-65

J,IO,45I

K. L. Bhargava, Prop. K, L. Bhargawa &

470

I963-64

1,07,823

471

Co., N . S. Road, Dadar Bom- bay . . . . . .. K. R. Gandhi, C/o M / s. Bharat Dyea & Chemicals Co- D'Souza Street, Bom- bay . . . . . ..

I962-63

I963-64

I,I2,86l 1,25,416

J3

I964-65

ij°3,379 Kamalnarain Hajaj, 51, M . G, Rd., Bombay Kamalabcn Chaturbhuj Tobacco House,

472 473

Vilcparlc . . . . ..

J3

I964-65

I = 7 7 J 9 99

Kasamalli Abdulla, 138/40, Samuel St.,

474

I962-63

33

Bombay . . . . .. Kesarbcn Chaturbhuj, Tobacco House,

475

G. B. Road, Vile Parle, Bombay

3}2,45,414 3,69,072 1,43,602 I962-63 I963-64 I964-65 476 JJ I963-64 1,37,664 477 K r i s h an G o p al M a h e a h w a ri Raj M a h al B h u l e s h w a r, B o m b ay . . .. L. M. K h a t a u, L a z mi B u i l d i n g, B a l l a r ds E s t a t e, B o m b ay . . .. I964-65 2,90,946

Bombay City III—contd.

Lalji Laxmidas, C/o M/s. Jamnadas Lalji

478

iy6i-63

16-18 Champagally, Bombay

1,26,339

Indl.

479

1962-63

Laxmidas Chamsey, C/o M/s. Chamscy Kallianji, 16-18 Champagally, Bombay

i3i53i97

M. A. Aga, Prop. Bhaktawar Ice Factory

480

1962-63

Gokhale Road, Bombay . . ..

I.I5.23S

M. A. Fazalbhoy, Glaim Ville, West Field

,481

1964-65

Estate, Warden Road, Bombay

1,05,928

482 M. G. Kolibhaekar, Gokhale Road, (N)

3}

1964-65

1,66,247

4S3

1962-63

33

Bombay . . . . .. M. M. Parckh, 321-323, Thakurdwar Bombay . . . . ..

1,53.878

4R4

Jj

1964-65

M. R. Patcl, (Deed), by legal heir 5c execu- tors, Patel Building Delialc Road, Bombay . . . . ..

248.535

M. S. Patel, Shani Sadan, Tilak Road, San-

485

1964-65

1,06,805 tacruz, Hombay . . . .. Madangopal Maheshwari, Raj Mahal,

4B6

3J

Bhuleshwar, Bombay

1963-64 1964-65

1,40,286 1.97,732

487

1962-63

2,49,708 Late Shri Madhukar Jayantia,] Shanti Kunj, G. B. Road, Vileparle Bombay Munoranjan Nandlal, 10 Graham Roud,

488

1964-65

HUF

1,01,575 Ballard Estate, Bombay

489

1963-64

Mathradas Narandas, C/o M / s. Chamscy Kalyangl, 16-18 Champa Galley Bom- bay

Indl.

1,01,571

4 90 Mohanlal K. Patel, Daya Mandir, Bom-

1963-64

bay . . . . . ..

1,09,722

Muljimal Naraindas, 38 Walkcshwar Road,

4 9i

1960-61

33

Bombay . . . . ..

1,44,257

4 92 N. M. Shah, C/o Atul Drug House, Worli

1963-64

33

1,20,256

493

1962-63

Naka, Bombay . . . .. N. N. Khandwalla, Satishniwas, Daftary Road, Malad . . . ..

1,17,402

N. N. Sood C/o Bombay Finance Corpn,,

494

7 Homji Streetj Bombay

1964-65

1,74,367

495 Scth Nandlal, Ilaridas 106, Bhuleshwar Road, Bombay . . . ..

1,00,911

1963-64

Narottam Dharamsey, C/o. D r. C. G. Ashcr

496

1962-63

M. G. Road, Ghatkopar, Bombay

1,02,525

Nusli N. Wadia, Navile House, Ballard

497

33

1964-65 -

i|i9,543

498

Estate, Bombay . . .. P. R. Gandhi, C/o M / B. Bharat Dyes & Chemicals Co., D'Souza Street, Bombay

1962-63 1963-64

1,08,022 1,18,395

P. S. Engineer, Imperial Chambers, Wilson

499

1964-65

1,00,829 Road, Ballard Estate, Bombay

5 00 Prakash Juyantilalj Tejpal Road, Vile

Parle

33

1962-63 1964-65

2,40,509 I,O7,594 5 01 5 02

R. D. Baria, 73 G . T. Rd., Bombay R. D. Dubash Darabihaw House, Kallard

1964-65

1,84,120 Estate^ Bombay . . . ..

1962-63

1,01,121

Indl.

R.H. Patel, 178, 8th Road, Khar R. N. Contractor, 125, Cumbella Hill

5°3 504

Bombay . . . . ..

1962-63

1963-64

1964-65

1,14,288

1,07,802

1.89,336

Rajkumar MenghraJ, C/o M/s. Pokardas

5°51963-64 Menghraj & Sonsj 331, Kalabadevi Rd., Bombay 1,77.242 Rambhai K. Patel, Daya Mandir, Bom- 506 1963-64 1,12,450 bay

Bombay City III—concld.

507 Rameah Jayantilal, Shanti Kunj, Tejpal

Road, Bombay

1962-63

Indl.

2,35,099

508

1*

1,50,000

1960-61

Ramchand T. Ramchandani, Prop. M/s. Miller & Miller, Barrack N o. 28 Roorrr No. 335> Chembur Colony, Chembui Rasiklal, R. Gandhi, C/o M/s. Bharat

509

J)

Dyes & Chemicals Co., D'Souza Street, Bombay

510

J)

S. M. Mistry, 84, Sion Road, Bombay .

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65

1,11,804

1,19,666

2,04,827

Sevantllal, Mansukhlal, 16-18 Champa,

5"

Gaily K. Lane, Bombay

JJ

1,47,304

1964-65

Shantikumar N. Morarji Sclndia House,

5 12

Ballard Estate, Bombay

J3

1,65,416

1964-65

Sumiti S. Morarji Scindia House, Ballard

513

1,61,107

1964-65

514

Estate, Bombay . . .. V. G. Raiadhyax, G-6 Sitladevt Temple Road, Bombay . . . ..

1964-65

i,33,777

V. T. Samani, C/o. M/s. Champion Corpn.,

515

Mody Street, Bombay

1963-64

1,28,724.

Vijay Kantilal, Kanila, G. B. Road,

516

1963-64

1,02,440

a

517

1964-65

1,34,017

7}

Vileparle, Bombay . . .. Vinod Lalchand Construction House, Bal- lard Estate, Bombay . . .. Vishindas Sobhraj, C/o M/s. J. Kimat

518

Mai & Co., Bomanji Master Road, Bombay

)i

1,23,461

1,10,182

1963-64 1964-65

Walter Rocek, Shreeji BhaTan, Lohar

519

J3

St., Bombay

1963-64

3^5,078

Y. C. Dadbhawalla C/o Hindustan Products

5 20

1,00,084

1963-64

C o r p n ., B o m b a y - 19 . . .. Y.N. Contractor, C/o M/s. Bharat Timber

521

1962-63

Industries, Sayani Road, Bombay

2,26,713

B ombay (Central)

Dalai H. G., C/o M/s. M. J. Mehta &

522

Indl.

Co., Bank of Baroda Buuilding, Apollo Street, Bombay

1962-63 1963-64

1,86,034 i,99,5!9-

523

ij

Gandhi G.M. * Others, L/R of late Manilal Chaturbhuj, Madhavrai Gaily, M. J. C. Market, Bombay . . ..

I,O5,33⁸ 1,02,555

1962-63 1963-64

524

i)

Mehta M. D., C/o M. J. Mehta & Co., Bank of Baroda Building Apollo Street, Bombay . . . . ..

13

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65

1,86,358- 1,90,572 1,01,530 Mansetha, I.B., 165, Lohar Chawl, Bombay Mehta Smt. Shantabai Z. Rosy Chamber,

525 526

J>

3J

1963-64 1963-64

1,01,209

1,29,207

New Queen's Road, Bombay-4. Patel C.P. 50, Princes, St., Bombay Mehta S.J., C/o M/s.M. J. Mehta &Co.,

527 • 528

MM

Bank of Baroda Building, Apollo Street, Bombay

2,16,527- 2,28,648

1962-63 1963-64Sheth K. M. 60, Mercantile Bank Building, 529 ! 1,16,100 3} 1963-64 Mahatma Gandhi Rd., Bombay Sheth S. M. Anand Bhavan, Narsi Natha 53° ; JJ St., Bombay I,49J555 1,10,731 1963-64 1964-65

Bombay

Central —contd. 1

531

Indl. 1964-65

1:11*713

532

Sheth V. J. 60, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Bombay . . . . .. Saraf J. K. Prop. Asian Advertising Agen- cies Commissariate Building D r. D. N. Road, Bombay

33

1961-63

1)49)795

533 Shah Haamukhlal Cursonda9) 16, Apollo St., Bombay . . . ..

HUF

33

Indl.

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 1964-65 Do. Do.

1,12,40+ 1,21,736 1,40,886 1,04,655 1,07,986 1,74,835 534 535 536 537

Shah Rajnikant Purshottamdaa do Shah Ramnikal Purahottamdas do Shah Hanamukhlal Cursondas, do Shah Vadilal Soorchand, Shop No. 5 Building No. 26A, Behind Mumbadevi Post Office, Bombay .

. ..

1962-63 1963-64

1,63)475 2>34.9&5

Delhi Smt. Abnaah Kaur, Golf Link,

538

Delhi

Ind. Ind. Ind.

62-63 62-63 64-65

1,04,466 i)38,75i 1,51,288 L. Bharat Ram G/o D.C.M. Delhi . Smt. Birmo Devi C/o. D.C.M., Delhi Bhai Mohan Singh 15, Aurangzcb Road,

539 540 54i

New Delhi

1,28,621

Ind.

63-64

C. V. Deasi, C/o Moti Talkies,

542

Delhi

Ind.

1,44,921

64-65

Shri Dawarka Dass P/o. M/a. Bhakwarmal

543

Laxmi Narain, Katra Tobacco Khari Baoli, Delhi . . . .'

Ind. Ind.

62-63 64-65

1,3^346 1,39)^95 Shri D.B. Vig, P/o. M/s. Vig. Bros. Shri Dwarka Dasa P/o. R. B. J. Fateh

544 545

Chand

Ind. 63-64

I,I7)79<5

546 Shri D. K. Sanghi, C/o. Supreme Motoia Pvt. Ltd., Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi

Ind.

i)O9,433 1,22,626

62-63 63-64

Shri Kirpa Ram Bajaj, Advocate, Goplnath

547

Ind. Ind.

64-65 64-65

1,67.825 i,39)⁶94 Building Con. Circus, New Delhi Shri K.G. Vig. P/o. M/s. Vig. Bros. Shri S. P. Schgal P/o. M/s.j Sehgal & Sons,

548 549

Asaf Ali Road, Delhi . . ..

62-63 64-65 6S-63 62-63

I,05,7¹³ 1,06,244 1,45,417 1,52,84?

Ind. Ind. Ind. Ind.

S.P. Sehgal Aaaf Ali Road, Delhi Tilak Kumar, C/o. D.C.M. Delhi Viney Bharat Ram C/o. D.C.M. Delhi Vivek Kumar, 25, Sardar Patcl Road,

550 55¹ 552 553

Delhi

62-63

1,46,061

Ind.

Delhi {Central)

Shri Arun Kumar Tewari, Fort Road, Jai-

554

pur . . . . . ..

Indl.

1,38.926 1,14,983 1,18,716

1960-61 1961-62 1962-63

B. D. Meattle, Dufferin Bridge, Moti Gate,

555

Delhi

a "

t,

1961-62 1962-63 1964-65 1955-56

9,98^07 1,05,614 1)35.138 1,92,64s

„

Smt. Gokul Kumari, Fort Rd., Jaipur Gopal Singh, Yamunanagar Govind Narain Fort Rd., Jaipur Harish Chandra Golcha Johari Bazar,

556 557 558 559Jaipur 1960-61 3)63)591 Smt. Jigna Bai, 14-B ShivMarg, Banl 360 Park, Jaipur M 1.57.767 1,25,707 1,16,611

1960-61 1961-62 1962-63

Delhi Central—contd.

Kamal Kumar Barjatiya, C/o. Raj Shri

56i

Pictures, Johri Bazar, Jaipur

562 Kanhaiyalal Tewari, Fort Rd., Jaipur

Indl. "

1963-64

1960-61

1961*62

1962-63

1,27,110

1,65,220

I,45J8O7

1,90,815

Kastoor Chand Bapna, Ghoron Ka

563

2,02,897

Chowk, Sojati Gate, Jodhpur

1955-56

„

M/s. KishanLal Sugan Chand, Marta

64

City, District, Nagore

HUF

2,12,641

3J43J73O

n

1962-63

1955-56

M/s. Munshi Ram Roshan Lai, Bhatinda . Pradyumna Kumar, 14-B Shiv Marg, Ban!

565 566

Park, Jaipur

Indl.

1)65,367

1,13,830

1,14,830

1960-61

1961-63

1962-63

Puran Kumar Kaushik, New Colony, Panch

567

1960-61

1,40,529

"

Batti, Jaipur . . . .. Raj Kumar Barjatiya, C/o Raj Shri

568

Picture, Johri Bazar, Jaipur

it

JJ

1963-64

1964-65

1960-61

1,49=253

1)34)905

2,34)960

569 570 571

J>

Ramcharan Partap, Yamunanagar Roshanlal Kuthiala, Yamunanagar S. Daljit Singh, C/o Oriental Building & Furnishing Co. Ltd., New Delta

S. Mohan Singh, C/o, Oriental Building

572

& Furnishing Co. Ltd., New Delhi.

1,92.079

3)43.412

1,28,090

2,05,893

3,08,738

1962-63

1963-64

1960-61

1961-62

1962-63

Seruplal Kanhaiyalal, Fort Road,

573

Jaipur

HUF 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 1958-59

3,43,611

2,09,139

2,79J475

5 01,782

Surinder Kumar, Kashmerc Gate,

574

1,38,830

1962-63

IndL

Delhi

Tewari Govind Narain, Fort ' Road,

575

1957-58

3)23)682

Jaipur

"•

V. K. Kohli, Connaught Place, New

576

1960-61

3,08,783

,j

Delhi

W . L. Kohli, Connaught Place, New

577

12,56,024

,"

Delhi

Do-

HUF Ind.

>J

Rqjasthan

578

579

580

Baldov Das Rameshwar, Bhilwara Dr. B, N. Sharma, Jaipur . H. H. Gajraj Smgh, Jodhpur.

1960-61

1960-61

1957-58

1958-59

1959-60

1960-61

1961-62

1962-63

1963-64

1,68,864

1,41)363

1,01,732

i)43)3i9

1,73,883

1.79.643

1,91,622

2,18,397

3,40.359

581 Jhabarmal Duggar, Prop . Sarapat Ram Budhamal, Sradashar . . ..

,, u

,j

1964-65

1960-61

1962-63

1,62,862

1,06,288

1,18,288

Kanhyalal Ghatiwala, Jaipur Khelshankar Durlabhji, Jaipur . K. L. Mathur, P/o, M/s. Bhaupal Mining

582 583 584

,,

Works, Bhilwara

, j

1960-61

1959-60

1960-61

1963-64

M. K. Smt. Prawp Kanwarji, Alwar Premraj Daulatram, Nawalgarh Purshottamdas Bangui, Didwana

585 586 587

HUF Ind.

, J

j,

Rashmi Kant, Jaipur . . .. Raghunath Bangur, Didwana

588 589

1964-6J

1963-63

1963-64

1964-65

1959-60

1,11,410

5.09.747

1,00,000

2,24,563

3,42,302

1,01,518

3)io,759

3.38,421

1,07,058

, t

Sutendra Kumar, Biianer

59O

Gujarat I

Ambalal J. Patel, Mahendra Bhtvan, Ellis-

5 9i

Indl.

1)

HUF Indl.

1963-64 1963-64 1964-65 1964-65

1,38,627 1,69,267 1,32,742 2,533514 bridge, Ahmedabad . . .. Basir Kasam Uplcta . . .. Chandulal Jayantilal of Sihor Devidaa Narottamdas, Junagadh Gautam Sudhakar, O p p. Doshiwada Pole,

592 593 594 595

Kalupur, Ahmedabad . . ..

3J

S>

1963-64 T964-65 1964-65

1,08,016 1,10,234 2,62,378 Gularchand Talakchand, Rajkot Harkishandaa Narottamdaj, Junagadh Hiralal H. Bhagwati, Maskati Market, Ah-

596 597 598

medabad . . . . ..

"

3*

599 600 6 01 6 02

1963-64 1964-65 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 1962-63

1,59-997 1,52,756 1,86,095 i,99'9i° 1,04,765 1,79,112 Husseinali Jaffaralli, Mahuva Iswarlal Narottamias, Junagadh . Jayantilal Kesarlal of Sihor Jaffarali Fazzalbhai, Mahuva Jayendra Nareshchandra, Kalupur, Ah-

603

medabad . . . ..

1962-63 1963-64

1,3^,483 1,633425

Kamalnuyan Chamanl&l, Laldarwaja, A h-

6 04

medabad . . . . ..

1,19,445 I3323243

1963-64 1964-65

HUV

Krishanlal Jayantilal of Sihor Laljibhai Jivraj Gajjar, Naroda Road,

6o"; 606

Ahmedabad

T962-63 tg63-64 T964-65

2,20,833 i,55,478 1,84,705

Indl.

M. K. S. Bakunverba of Gondal

6 07

33

6 08 M. K. S. Shivrajsinghji of Gondal

1963-64 1964-65 1963-64 1964-65

1,26,606 1,05,981 2,21,362 2,04,991

6 09

J3

1963-64

1,63,272 Manmnhan Chamanlal, Laldarwaja, Ahmedabad . . . . .. Manilal, Mulchand, Zampftdani Pole, Kalu-

6 10

pur, Ahmedabad . . ..

HUF 1963-64

4,61,841

Nareshchandra Mansukhram, O p p. Doshi-

6 11

wada Pole, Kalupur, Ahmedabad .

Indl.

6 12

6 13 6 14

1,43,074 1,23,096 1,26,503 1,30,907 2,01,772

1963-64 1964-65 1962-63 1964-65 1964-65

Navinchandra Jayantilal of Sihor P. B. Ganpulc P. A. Masurekar, Rajkot Prabhudaa Karsandas, Junagadh Ramanlal Amratlal, C/o Anant Mills Ltd.,

6 15 616

3)

Ahmedabad . . . ..

1962-63 T963-64 1964-65

2,29,701 1,54,846 1,39,320

Ramanlal Girdharlal, Kalupur, Zampadani

6 17

Pole, Ahmedabad . . ..

1963-64

3,

1,01,934

Rameshchandra Bakubhai, Zampadani Pole,

6 18

,,

Kalupur, Ahmedabad . . ..

1963-64

I3II3317

Ranchhodlal Ramjibhai, C/o Ramji Hirji

6 19

t96i-62

1,06,751

33

& Sons, Raipur, Ahmedabad

Rasiklal Narcshchandras, Kalupur, Ahmeda-

6 20

13

1963-64

1,60,875 bad

Sarabhai Ishingbhai, Maskati Market,

621

Ahmedabad .

1,01,401 1,34,809

1955-56 1956-57

Shantilal Dahyabhai, C/o M/s. Bombay

6 12

1964-65

1,02,547

„

Motor Storq, Kapasia Bazar, Ahmedabad Somabhai Chaturbhai, Clo M/s. Natwar L ai

6 23Chunilal, Maskati Market, Ahmedabad 1,00,350 1,32,828 1964-65 1964-65 U. P. Pandit, Rajkot . . .. Vinodchandra Himatlal, C/o Bharat Iron 624 625 1,06,530 1962-63 Works, Rovdi Bazar, Ahmedabad

>

6 26 Abdulrahim Umarbhal, C/o Mtiniar & Co. Outside Sarangpur Gate, Ahmedabad

Indl. 1964-65

i,2354T9

6 27 Achyut Chinubhai, M.R. Colony, Ahmeda-" •

bad

JJ

1961-62

2,95>I37

Ahmedhbhai E. Chandiwala, Station

628

Road, Surat

1,09,472

6 29 Ajaybhai Chimanbhai, Ahmedabad

6 30

)3

Arvind Narottam, Ahmedabad . Ashokbhai Chimanbhai, Ahmedabad

6 31

3J3O.,9I4 2,74^399 5,98,406 1,17^71

1961-62 1963-64 1964-65 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65

1,02,842

Atmaram V. Thakker, 2502, Kothari Sheri,

6 32

Dariapur, Ahmedabad

1964-65

?3

1,33^54

BaLkrishna Ilarivjllabhdas, Shahibag, Ah-

633

medabad . . . . ..

1964-65

ii

I3I O , 5 75

"34

Bharatkumar Chmubhai, C/o New Manek- chowk, Spg. & Wvg. Mill) Co. Ltd.,

Ahmedabad . . . ..

1962-63

JJ

1,51,986

Bhupendra Maganbhai IJatel, Gendigale

635

Road, Baroda . . . ..

1964-65

i3i3=558

636 Late Shri C. S. Amin, L.H. Shri Rush- mikant M. Amin, Alkapuri, Baroda Chimanlal Bilbhai, Ahmedabad ,

.637

IIUF

1951-52 1963-64 1964-65

1963-64

1,05,610 3i2S,934 2,73-367 1,61,421

Indl.

Chimanbhai Lalbhai, Ahmedabad Chiman Lil Umedramj Mahindarpura, Nagar-

638 639

sheri, Surat . . . ..

Chinubhai Chimanbhai, Ahmcdabad Chinubhai Chimanbhai, Ahmedabad

6 40 6 41

IIUF Indl.

1,18,772 I)2i,375 2,97-695

1964-65 1954-65 1962-63 1963-64

1,06,127

i,oq,4<5o

1962-63 1962-63

I , ? I , T 65 Chuni Lai Khushaldas, Ahmedabad D. M. Manasvi, 5(1, Alkapuri, Baroda Dashrathlal Chimanlal, Nr. Nehru

642 643 •644

Bridge, Ahmedabad

19^3-64

1,30,622

H. D. Vasa, Hanumanvali Pole, Ah-

645

medabad . . . . ..

Haridas Achratlal, Ahmedabad

, 646

H UF Indl.

1963-64 1962-^3 1963-64

1,13)4*3 1,15,487 1,07,671

647 Smt, Hiraben Jayantilal, Puranakunj, Ah- medabud . . . . ..

1953-6.1

JJ

i3o5,459

Dr. J-B. Hdribhukii, Lai Darawaja, Ahmeda-

64S

31

bad ^

196-I-65

1,03,877

Jayantilal Chimanlal, Nr. Nehru Bridge,

649

1963-64

Ahm;JibaJ . . . ..

JJ

i,2i,575

Jaykriahana Harivallabhdasj Shahibag,

650

Ahmedabad

1,20,519

1964-65

JJ

Smt. Kanchangauri B. Daruwala, C/o M/s.

651

B. Shah & Co., Kotsafll Road, Surat

1962-63

1,16,289

Kantilal Trikamlal, Manekchowk, Ahmeda-

652

HUF

bad

653 Karsondas Bechardas, Saraspur, Ahmedabad . Kasturbhai Lalbhai, Ahmedabad

6[

Indl.

1964-65 1964-65 1963-64 1964-65

1,76)131 1)45,517 2,41,841 2,20,994

HUF Indl.

1 „

1962-63 1964-65 T964-65 1961-62 1964-65

2,60,670 1,08,904 1,02,779 2,95,139 1,92,812 655 656 657 658 659 6 60T963-64 i)33)4O2 ^ad ,, Kasturbhai Lalbhai, Ahmedabad , Kaushik tCeshavlal, Maaekchowk, Ahmeda ad Ktwhavlal Premchand, Ahmedabad . Kirtidev Chinubhai, M.R. Colony, Ahmedabad Princess Lalitaraja P. Getwed, Baroda Lalitmohan Narottamdiis, Prop, of Narottam- das Chunllal & Co., Kapaaia(Bazar, Ahmedal Mudhuiudan Chhaganalal, Prop, of Madhusudan 651 Textile,'Rampura Main Road, Surat . . „ 1962-63 1963-64

1,34*361 1,09,017

SEC. 8(Ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 21, 1967/ASVINA 29,1889 3973 I 2 3 4 5

Gujarat 11—Contd.

662

S/Shrl .Mahendra Ambalal Nr. Rly. Crossing

Ind.

Navrflngpura, Ahmedabad

1963-64 1964-65

T-,01,363 1,20,244

Mujibhai Devjibhai Ranchhodji's Dholoa,

663

it

Bruach, . . . ..

55

3>

1962-63 1964-65 1964-65 1963-64

I,O73I7S 2,65,366 2,18,222 1,02,422 Nagardas Bcchardas, Naroda Rd., Ahmedabad Nanubhai B. Amin Alkapuii, Baroda . Nareshdiandra Jayantilal, Asarawa, Ahmedabad Narottam Chandulal Opp. Old Civil Hospital,

664 665 666 667

35

M

Gheekanta Rd., Ahmedabad . Narnttam Lalbhai, Ahmedabad .

668

369 6 70

Narottam Lalbhai, Ahmedabad , Niranjan Narottani) Ahmedabad .

HUF Indl.

Ninmjan Narottam, Ahmedabad ,

HUF

671

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 1962-63 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 1963-64 1964-65

1,07,533 1,86,367 1,79,864 2,87,536 1,82,207 1,79=259 I,3O,O3J 2,49,850 2,54,874

H H. Maharani P. Shantaderi Gaekwad,

672

Indl.

Baroda . . . . ..

1963-64 1964-G5 1963-64 1964-65

1,03,670 1,12,878 1,01,618 1)82,487 P.V. Rashamwala, Surat . . .. Popatlal Premchand Manekchowk, Ahmedabad Raj rvikant M. Asharwaia, Sayyedpura Lekhe-

'671 674 675

1964-65

IIUF

1,05,942 di:i Sheri, Surat . . .. Rarakrishana Harivallabhdas, Shahibag,

676

Ahmedabad ,

1964-65

1,10,317

Indl.

677

HUF

19C4-65

1,05,942

678

Kutanlal M . S. Ashamala, Saiycdpura Lck- dia Shcri, Surat . . .. Samhhulal Chhotal"l, Lai Darvraja, Gundi Sheri, Surat . . . ..

Indl.

33

679 6K0 6S1

SanketlulBechardas Naroda Road, Ahmedabad Shrenik Kasturbhai, Ahmcdabnd. Rhrcnlk Kasiurbhaij Ahmedabud.

1964-65 1964-6', 1 (.164-65 1963-64

HUF Ind.

„

HUF

l,35,8n 2,65,890 1,41,488 2,89,949 2,43,089 1,46,356 2,34,104

I9o4~o5 1964-651964-65

SHdarth Kasturbhai, Ahmedabad Siddarth Kasturbhai, Ahmedabad Lady Tanumati Chinubhai, M.R. Colony,

6 82 683 684

1961-62

2,95,200

Ind.

Alimedabad. . . . .. Joint Family of Udayan Chinubhai, M . R.

685

Colony, Ahmedabad.

Vijayastngh Chimanbhai, Ahmedabad .

•686

HUF Indl.

Vrandavandas Vallftbhdas, Ahmedabad

687

11,80,553 2,25,050 2,43,967 1,08,011

1961-62 1963-64 1964-65 1964-65

Kerala

Haji Abdul Khader, Rajah Manzil, Chow-

-688

ghat

33

1963-64 1964-65

1,60,273 1,29,906

Shri A. Abdul Rahiman, Rajah Manzil,

689

Chowghat . . . . ..

35

1963-64 1963-64

1,07,723 1,61,071 6 90 6 91

Shri A. Thang^lkunjuMudaliar,Quilon Shri C. Devadasan, C/o C.C. Roadways,

Calicut

1963-64

1,06^435

6 92 Shri C.K. Venkiteram Naidu, C/o Malabar

lashcrics Co., Chaliyam

ii

1963-64

1,86,265

Shri C.K. Sundcraraj Naidu, C/o Malabar

693

Fisheries Co., Chaliyam

33

1963-64

1,86,265

Shti C.K. Babu Naidu, C/o Malabar

694

Fisheries Co., Chaliyam

J3

1963-64

1,89,265

Shri C.K. Rajararn Naidu C/o Malabar ".

695F M i e n ts Co., Chaliyam 33 33 696 697 1963-64 1964-65 1963-64 1,86,265 1,08,064 3,59,709 Shri C.C, Mani, Contractor, Kolenchcrry . Shri Ismail Ibrahim Sait, Cochin

Kerala—contd.

698

1964-65

Indl.

1,24,057

699

Shri J.C. Strange, Trayancore T ea Estate Co. L t d ., Vandiperiyar . . .. Shri Joseph Mathais Phoenix Plywood,

Kottayam

1,17,347 1,60,883

1963-64 1964-65

M

7 00 7 01

Shri K . C. Chacfco, Ernakulam . H. H. Gouri Lakshmi Bai, Kowdiar Palace,

ii

Trivandrum J . . . ..

1,28,724 1,47,028

1963-64 1964-65

70a H . H. L a k s h mi B a i, 1st Princess of T r a v a n- coie, T r i v a n d r um . . ..

jy

1,43,016 1,37-026

1963-64 1964-65

7 03

S h ri M. N a r a y a n an N a i r, N. V. M o t o r s,

Calicut

1963-64

1,04,027

S h ri M i c h a el A, Kalluyayalil, P c r v a n t h a n a n,

704

1960-61

2,12,389

7 05

Kanjirapally . . . .. S h ri M . K. Vijaya R a g h a v a n, E n g r. C o n- t r a c t o r, S h o p a ur . . . ..

st

2,07,53* 3,78,007

1963-64 1963-64

S h ri M o h a m cd I b r a h im Sait, C o c h in S im M. Chacko Pillai, C o n t r a c t o r, K o l e n-

7 06 707

1964-65

c h c r ry . . . . . ..

J3

2,18,979'

708

1,08,195

n

Sim M . K. Kuriakosc, Contractor, Kolen- cherry . . . . . ..

1964-65

709 Shri M. Paul Mathew, Transporting Con-

j j

Uactor, Alwaye . . . ..

710

T,2O,O9& 1,08,065

?J

^64-65 1964-65

S h r i N . P. Poulose, Contractor, Kolencherry . Shri P . M. Paily Pillai, Contractor, Kolen-

7 11

1,57,627-

1964-65

cherry . .. . ..

u

712 Smt. P .M. Santhakumari/ Partner, Sadhu

1,30,683

1964-65

J5

Beedi Depot, Cannanorc

Stilt. P. Yesoda, Partner M/s- Sadhu Becdi

7 13

1964-65

Depot, Cannanore

2,69,503

Shri P . M. Kumaran, Partner M / s. Sadhu

714

1964-65

3J

2,09,373- Bcedi Depot, Cannanore

H.H. Ramavarma, 1st Prince of Travancore,

7 15

1,10,494

}t

1964-65

Trivndrum

H,H. Sir Ramavarma, Maharaj of Tra-

716

vancorc, Trivandrum

12,01,470 10,48,556

9.i4,39i 8,6o,86r

1961-62 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65

33

j,

1,51,942 3>89,O43

1964-65 1963-64

7 17 718 7 19

Shri R.M, Manakcji, Ernakulam Shri Salay Mohamed Ibrahim Salt, Cochin H.H. Sefhu Parvathia Bai, Maharani of

Travancore, Trivandrum

1962-63 1963-64 1964-65

2,58)676 3.27,431 1,54,091

7 20 Shri V. Madhava Baliga, Partner M/s. Bha-

1,12,846

53

31

721

gavan Ganesh Pai & Co., Cannanore S h ri Y . M. Alias, C o c h in . . ..

1964-65 1963-64

3)56,356-

Madhya Pradesh

7 23

13

A b d ul K a r im Haji H a s s a n b h a i, Siyaganj, l n d o re . . . ..

J3

S h ri B . K. Sethi, Ujjain Shri R . B. Scth L a l c h a nd B. S e t h, Ujjain

723 724

1,32,877 1,45,230 1,03,107 1,01,136

1955-56 1960-61 1961-62 1962-63

7251,24,417 13 Shri Krishna R. Nandcdkar, M . G. Road, Indorc . . . . .. 726 Shri V.G. Thakur Khategaon Shri Y.A. Khare 1964-65 1963-64 1964-65 1,21,325 1,19,09* 7 27

Madras I

A.D. Galloway C/o M/s. Gordon Woodroffe

728

Indl.

& Co. Madras Ltd. Madras

1963-64 1964-65

1,38.823 1,28,817

Amritlal Kamdar 23 Errabalu Chetty Street,

729

ji

Madias-i

1960-61

^67,796

Andrew Harvey C/o Madurai Mills Co. Ltd.

730

New Jail Road, Madurai

1962-63

Mt

1,15,060

A. Grahaduraij Railway Feeder Rd. Siva-

731

kasi . . . . . ..

1963-64

33

Do.

1,82,820 :,59,466 A. Vairaprakasam Do. . . , . A.R. Soundra Rajan, Soundaram Transports,

732 733

Hi

1962-63

Sivakasi

1,18,615

A.S.K. Chinnaswamy Naidu, Contractor 23,

734

1964-65

1,05,000

33

Chockalingapuram, Aruppuko ta : . Bhapwandas G-oenka, Express Estates,

735

i>

Madras-2

1960-61 1961-62 1964-65 Do.

1,20,878 2,07,816 1,29,022 M°,7°3 C.R. Ramaswamy India Co. (P) Ltd. Madras C.E. Reddy, 6, Kondi Chetty St. Madras. Chandulal Kamdar, 23, Errabau Chetty

736 7^7 738

Strec, Madras-1.

1960-61

1,71,987

3J

D.W. Law C/o M/s. Binny & Co. Ltd. Ar-

739

menian Street, Madras . . ..

JJ

it

1963-64 1964-65 1964-65

i)3i.772 1,33)974 1,34,046 D.B. Madan r64 Broadway Madras-l E.F.G. Hunter, 7, Armenian Street, Mad-

740 741

ras . . . . . ..

1963-64 19/54-65

1,38,823 1,18,475

E. Perumal Naidu 105 Barber Bridge Road,

743

Madras . . . . ..

"

1963-64 1964-65

H.V.R. Iyengar M/s. Parry & Co. Ltd- " Dare

743

House" Madras

1,71)375 2,02,750 1-43)035 1)19,623

1963-64 1964-65

H.F. Craig Harvey C/o. Madurai Mills Co.

744

Ltd., New Jail Road, Madurai

1964-65

1,65,218

Ida L. Chambers Chrome Leather Co. Ltd.

745

Chrompet

J>

Do.

Janakidas Baijnath Express Estates Madras-2 HUF

745

1960-61 1961-62

1,08,651 1,57,245 3,99,6bo

Sir James Doak C/o Madurai Mills Co. Ltd.

747

New Jail Road Madurai

1964-65

Indl.

Do. 1963-64

2,12,138

1,00,429

1,07,191

Indl.

K. Gopalakrishnan 29 Mount Rd. Madras-2 KanthaKaur 133 Mint Street Madras K. Rajah Iyer Advocate 14 Hanumantha

748 749 750

3J

Rao Road Madrs-14

1,09,016

1964-65

Shri K. Devadass Reddiar, Contractor, Ve-

751

dachalam Nagar, Chingleput .

it

33

1960-61 1964-65

1,02,659 1,81,885 K. Mahesh, C/o T.V.S. & Sons., Madurai K.R.M.T.T. Thiagarajan Chettiar, 38, Tir-

752 753

uparankunram Road, Madurai

JJ

33

1959-60 1964-65

1,16,883 2,05,364 754 755

K. Ranjesh, C/o T.V.S. & Sons., Madurai . K.R. Srirenga Raja, P/r Jayaram Motor Ser- vice, Rajapalayam . . ..

Do. Do. Do.

1,25,143 i,25,95⁸ 1,29,677

H UF Indl.

K.P. Jayarama Raja, Do. K.S. Rengaswami Raja, Do. K. Ganapathi Pillai, Sri Ganapathy Motor

756 757 758

a

Do.

Service, Nagercoil

1)36,317

Shri K.A. M.A. Kaliappa Nadar, South Raja

759Street, Tuticorin . . . .. 33 Do. 1,05,04* Smt. Moonghibai Goenka, Express Estates, 760 Madras-2 1961-62 1,89.330 M.V. Venkataraman, Amalgamations (P) Ltd., 76i Madras-2 1964-65 1,12,925

Madras I—oontd.

1964-65

Indl.

• 1,05,751 M.K. Raju, C/o India Pistons Ltd., Sembiam Late M. Nazir Hussain 11, Pcrambui High

762 763

Road, Madras . . . ..

1961-62

1962-63

1,18,999

1,18,139

M.S.P. Raja,' "Thangammahal Virudhu-

764

nftgar

33

1964-65

?}

Do.

1,28,873

1,20,976

M.S.P. Rajcs, Do. M.P.S.S. Soundara Nadar, Partner, Oriental

765 766

Do.

1,24,433

Lltho Press, Sivakasi . . .. Navinchandra II. Shah, 124, Mint,, St.,

767

Madras

33

1963-64 Do.

1,27,407

1,26,398

N. Bhagavathi Ammal, Madurai P.N. Menon, C/o M/s. Best & Co. (P) Ltd.,

768 769

1st Line Beach, Madras-i

3i

1964-65

1,11,076

P. Brahmayya, Andhra Chamber of Buildings,

770

Madras-i

J3

Do.

1,07,624

771 Pratap Hansraj, 212, Govindappa Naicken

St., Madras-i

It

Do.

1,25,079

772 Estate of late P.R. Varagaswami Iyergar by Guardian M. Ramachandran No. 4, Pattulose Road, Madras-2

J3

Do.

i,33>205

Prema Srinivasan, C/o T.V.S. & Sons, Ma-

773

ij

durai

1,01,475

1964-65

P.V. Mackay, C/o Madurai Mills Co., Ltd.,

774

New Jail Road, Madurai

D o.

JJ

1,97,437

P.R. Ramasubramania Raja, Ramamanthiram,

775

J3

Rajapalayam

Do.

IJ52J55I

P.P.C. Sondararajan, 209, East Masi St.,

776

Madurai

HUF

1963-64

1,09,050

777 P.M.A.P. Ayyapcrumal Nadar, U-11, Street, Virudhunagar . . . ..

JJ

1953-54 1962-63

1^7,972 i>95,737 P.A.C. Ramaswamy Raja, Rajapalayam, R.M. King, Beat & Co. (P) Ltd., 1st Line

778 779

1]

Beach, Madras-1 . . . ..

1964-65

1,87,812

780 R.M. Arunachalam L.R. to the estate of late A.R.R-M. Umayal Achi, No. 14, Nungam- bakkam High Road, Madras-6

Indf.

1960-61 1961-64 Do.

1,26,119

1,40,685

1,38,781

Rajnikant K. Shah, 124, Mint. St., Madras Rasiklal K. Shah, 124, Mint St., Madras R. Ramanathan Chcttiar, 14, Pachiappas

781 7 82 783

College Hostel Rd., Chctput, Madras HUF

1961-62 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65

2,13,746 2,08,238 1,82,526 2,37,635

784 Ramcshchandra K. Sutaria, 98, Mint Street,

Madras

Indl.

"

1964-65 1960-61

1,08,007 i,34>245 Late Ramaswami Doss, Koilpatti S.S.T. Chari, Director, Best & Co., 1st Line

785 786

3>

Beach, Madras-1

1964-65

i)23>5°7

S. Krisnnaswamy, Indian Chamber Build-

787

ings, Madras

1,68,524

30

Do.

788

n

1963-64

1,26,268

Stensficd, C/o M/s. Best & Co., Ltd., 1st Line Beach, Madras . . .. S. Anantharama Krishnan, (Late) C/o Amal-

789

gamations (P) Ltd., Madras-2. By L.R. Sri A. Sivasilam, 202, Mount Road, Mad- ras . . . . . ..

it

1964-65

30,06,844

790 S. Kamak&hamma, 7, Thambu Chetty Street,

Madras

it

Do.

1,35,588

S. Radhakrishnan, 7, Thambu Chetty Street,

7 91Madras-i " 13 Do. Do. 7 92 793 S. Nagcswara Rao Do. S. Gopal C/o T.V.S. & Sons, Madurai 1964-65 1,71,193 1,26,753 1,89,062

                                                                   1964-65
                                                                   1962-63
                                                                   1963-64
 1043  G. W. M. Whittle,  Sitapur                                  1964-65          1,62,^77
 1044  Ganeshilal C/o Lalji Mai, Tika Ram, Hathras                 1964-65          1,01,85^
 1045  H. Thomson, C/o Plywood Products, Sitapur  \               '  i964-65 2,17,468
 1046  Mrs. J. A. Thalmessenger      .    .   ..                   1964.65          1,11,910
 1047  Tai Prakash God, n-Anand  Chowk, Dehradun                   1962-63          2,12,002
 1048  Tai Ram & Sons, Sarai Kutub, Aligarh                         1964-65         1,46,242
 1049  Jugal Kishore Gocl, Anand Chowk, Dehradun                   1963-63          2,02,946
 1050  Seth Kundan Lai, jCurzon Road, New Delhi                    1962-63         ' 1,21,993
 1051  M. Miael, Gandhi Road,  Dehradun                             1964-65         2,60,000
1105a  Manni Lai, Shahajanpur        .   .    ..                   1964-65          1,26,958
 1053  Naresh Prasad Mittal, Bijnor                                1964-65         1,12,817
 1054  Om Prakash Goel, i-Ra)pur Road, Dehradun                    1963-64          I J 7 734 32
                                                                   1964-65          1,56,620
1055   P. N. Ghai, C/o M/s. Kwality Restaurant,  Rajpur
         Road, Dehradun                               Indl.        1964-65

1106   K.  V. KriJhanan,  C/o Guest  Keen  Williams
1        Ltd.,  Calcutta    .                                        1962-63
1107   Official  Trust West Bengal} on behalf of Trust
         of  Mahara)adhirftja  Sir Kamwhwar  Singh
         Bahadur  of Dharbhanga  for the benefit of
         Maharanl  Rameswar  Lattt  Saheba  (Annuity
         income), 1, Hastings Street,  Calcutta                      1964-65

          II,  R. N.  Mukherjee  Rd.,  Calcutta                       1964-65          1,44,844
1247   Tagannath  Roy,  53-D,  Sovabazar  St.,  Calcutta   J5         1963-64          3)32) 19"
1248   jamnadas  Agarwal,  75,  Cotton  St.,  Calcutta     „          1960-61          2)33)158
1249    Syed Javerafi Fatehflli, Prop, of  Suratee

                                                              1964-65           1)35.074
K. K. Rohatagi,  45, Armenian  St.,  Calcutta.                1961-62           i)°3)445
                                                              1962-63           I,i9)6i4
K.  L.  S.  Mehta,  18, Armenian  St.,  Calcutta              1964-65          1,02,115
Kanji  Lalji,  19/2,  Armenian  St.,  Calcutta.     „        1964-65            1,27,290
Mohini  Devi  Malpani,  P-4,  Kalakar      St.,

is         1960-61          i)53)745'
JJ         1963-64          1,31,3641

                                                 HUF           1963-64           1.59432
ShitalPd.  Jain  11,  Clivc  Row,  Calcutta      Ind.          1962-63           1,02,789
                                                               1963-64           1,12,584
Master  Samir  Kt.  Jain,  n,  Clive  Row,  Cal-